To the editor: Whereas studying this insightful piece, I needed to pause, as my head neared implosion (“After Palisades failures, is LAFD ready for the subsequent main wildfire?,” Dec. 17). Tucked into all of the dialogue of underfunding and mismanagement was one sentence concerning the “determination to depart the scene of a New Yr’s Day hearth regardless of indicators it hadn’t been totally extinguished.”
Why is there any dialogue on funding points when there’s been no additional disclosure of how and why this particular determination was made? The Los Angeles Occasions beforehand reported there have been a number of texts from firefighters on the scene involved that they could possibly be leaving a scorching spot. The battalion chief ordered them to depart the realm regardless of being conscious of those texts, per the reporting.
How can it take this lengthy to get that query answered? Am I the one one in L.A. who’s barely curious? There’s no company that couldn’t be improved with more cash, but when that exact scorching spot hadn’t been deserted, would we be having this dialog?
Greg Hilfman, Topanga
