Legislation to Create a National Disaster Review Board

[John Farley]

Destructive (e.g., acreage) or expensive? Sincere question.

Dollar cost, I believe. Which is why I said there are a number of reasons. Actually, as there nearly always are.

What is wrong with the U.S. Climate Assessment handling any connection? So far, no one has explained that.

Probably nothing, as long as it is coordinated with a disaster review board and there is a mechanism to ensure that it is addressed to the extent that it is relevant.

 

[John Farley]

This article touches on a lot of the things that a Disaster Review Board might look into regarding the Los Angeles fires:

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/10/us/california-la-fires-emergency-prep-invs/index.html

 

[Matt Zumbrunn]

First off, I agree with you on the need for a disaster review board.

Everybody in the fire community knew LA is a ticking timebomb. Unbridled development, lack of or no adherence to codes, a fire starved environment, lots of people=more ignition sources. Look at some of the pictures of homes built midslope with vegetation touching it. Everybody wants to be one with nature until nature comes knocking. When I took fire science classes they said that fuel type saw a historical fire return interval of 5-7 years. Its been over 100 years since some of it has seen fire.

Mike had you ever tried to evacuate people in the short term with a fire bearing down on you? Doesn't matter what plans you had laid, it can't be compared to a hurricane evacuation. Smoke fills the air, embers are raining down, emergency vehicles are trying to get in as civlians are trying to leave. People are in such a panic they don't realize their garage door has a red pull handle to operate it with no power. Spot fires are popping up well ahead of the main fire cutting off evacuation routes and inciting even more panic. As Mike Tyson said "Everybody has a plan until you get punched in the mouth".

Its not a California problem. We have seen this play out in Colorado, Tennessee (remember Gaitlinburg), California, Kansas, Texas, Oklahoma, basically anywhere that sees alot of fire. Fast moving fires in extreme conditions are going to be a raging shitshow.


Pretty good article in Wildfire today Lessons from LA - what do we do now? - Wildfire Today
Evacuations

To have a large fire in such a heavily populated area with so few deaths or injuries is extraordinary. This suggests the evacuation process was largely successful – people were moved out of harms way. And yet we saw those abandoned vehicles on narrow mountainous roads that funnelled people onto Palisades Drive and Sunset Boulevard , panicked residents fleeing on foot, bulldozers shunting cars off the road to gain access for fire fighting vehicles – that’s not how an orderly evacuation is meant to work, that is last-minute, panicked fleeing. There are many international examples of disorderly evacuations going horribly wrong.

Is there are better way to get thousands of people out of the way of a fast moving wildfire? If evacuations occur well before the flames arrive that would help. But how early do you do early evacuations? When is it too late to leave? Where do 100,000 people evacuate to?

 

[Mike Smith]

Matt,

I realize that in a situation like the Palisadses fire formal contraflow is not possible. It is ironic that your note should be posted today because I heard on the radio official complaints about people wildly driving on sidewalks and in the opposing lanes. I guess my point is that if the officials don't sanction it, people fleeing for their lives will do their own version of contraflow.

Agree with the rest of your comments.

Mike

 

[John Farley]

Here is another article that I think captures the complexity of factors that contributed to the California wildfires A lot of things a Disaster Review Board would need to look into:

'A new wildfire paradigm': Why California fires are growing larger and more destructive

California wildfires like the Palisades and Eaton fires are growing larger and more destructive. Here's why.

www.usatoday.com

 

[Mike Smith]

Here is another article that I think captures the complexity of factors that contributed to the California wildfires A lot of things a Disaster Review Board would need to look into:

John, I hadn't seen that. Thank you for posting.

However, the researcher (who is not a climatologist or meteorologist) is incorrect that Los Angeles' climate is drier. NOAA data clearly shows it has become wetter. Please see nearby graph.

The problem with insurance in California is state regulation, not wildfires, per se. https://www.wsj.com/opinion/home-in...a-ron-desantis-eedc07f7?mod=opinion_lead_pos1 Since most of the story is behind a paywall, I quote part of it below.

However, both of the above are subject to interpretation so a NDRB would be a great resource to sift through all of this and make recommendations that can be used by everyone.

Mike



Democratic insurance commissioners in the Golden State have for years suppressed rates. Until recently, California was the only state that prohibited carriers from using catastrophe models to project disaster risk and pricing reinsurance costs into their premiums.

Wildfires—exacerbated by the state’s poor land mismanagement—have swelled insurer claims and liabilities. Insurers are paying out $1.09 in expenses and claims for every $1 they collect in premiums. They’ve curbed their exposure in part by dropping policy holders in high-risk areas and leaving the market.

The liabilities of the state’s insurer of last resort, FAIR, have exploded to $458 billion from $153 billion in 2020, with $5.9 billion in exposure in the Pacific Palisades. Yet Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara rejected FAIR’s proposed rate increases while requiring it to cover homes worth up to $3 million.

FAIR President Victoria Roach told the state Assembly last year that the insurer in 2021 requested a 48.8% rate increase—less than the 70% it needed—but was approved for 15.7%. FAIR is under-capitalized and had only $700 million in cash on hand as of last year to pay claims.

To prevent more insurers from leaving the state, Mr. Lara last month finally let carriers price in their reinsurance costs and use catastrophe models. But he also capped the reinsurance costs that carriers can pass along. Rates are set to rise 20% to 40% this year, though this still may not be enough to cover insurer liabilities.

Unable to raise rates, many insurers have increased deductibles and capped maximum payments. That means insurers might not cover all of the fire damage, and some homeowners will face hefty rebuilding costs. Lucky for them the Federal Emergency Management Agency covers losses if homeowners are “under-insured.”

 

[Warren Faidley]

Having been at the fire, I can say it was a typical disaster in many ways. The initial "flee for your life" panic was one thing, but after some time, the political issues were more of a factor, like the lack of water and poor back-up infrastructure. I'm not a firefighter, but I could have saved at least one, maybe two homes if there was pressure in garden hoses. Small fence fires eventually took out homes. This still eats at me daily.

The initial dispatch (which I posted in the fire discussion thread) included a full brush response of about 40 units and aircraft. The aircraft were cancelled because of high winds. I cannot express the importance of aircraft in the initial stages of a brush fire.

The following day (8th), I watched giant, 4 story condominiums burn to the ground from start to finish because there was not enough water and fire crews. Due to the lack of water in reservoirs, aircraft were forced to use seawater, which is not good for several reasons. I've been arguing for years that California has been wasting money on political projects instead of public safety. Just wait until the big earthquake hits. The problem with any "board reviews" are politics. No one wants to admit funds have been squandered in the name of politics. Now I'm seeing the blame shift to firefighters. Give me a fricking break.

 

[Matt Zumbrunn]

Having been at the fire, I can say it was a typical disaster in many ways. The initial "flee for your life" panic was one thing, but after some time, the political issues were more of a factor, like the lack of water and poor back-up infrastructure. I'm not a firefighter, but I could have saved at least one, maybe two homes if there was pressure in garden hoses. Small fence fires eventually took out homes. This still eats at me daily. The initial dispatch (which I posted in the fire discussion thread) included a full brush response of about 40 units and aircraft. The aircraft were cancelled because of high winds. I cannot express the importance of aircraft in the initial stages of a brush fire. The following day (8th), I watched giant, 4 story condominiums burn to the ground from start to finish because there was not enough water and fire crews. Due to the lack of water in reservoirs, aircraft were forced to use seawater, which is not good for several reasons. I've been arguing for years that California has been wasting money on political projects instead of public safety. Just wait until the big earthquake hits. The problem with any "board reviews" are politics. No one wants to admit funds have been squandered in the name of politics. Now I'm seeing the blame shift to firefighters. Give me a fricking break.

Its been my experience working with aircraft (note its been a few years as we don't use them much here) that you get so much drift with winds that high they are largely ineffective. They do help you win the PR battle though.
We drained a town's water system fighting a single house fire Nov 30 and we were hauling it out to the home. I can't imagine what its like with a bunch of trucks trying to hook to as system.
I have a $472k grant out to FEMA as we speak trying to get a 3000 gal pumper tender in our fire district. I also realize it has a ~2% chance of being awarded. We aren't typically thought of when it comes to wildfires, but we are a top 5 state with 5000 wildfires annually and they estimate another 30% aren't even being reported to NFIRS. I played up the WUI we experience and they scenario I laid out in the grant application happened to us April 9th. Luckily we lost no homes.

 

[John Farley]

One can always debate the politics and I am sure we will, but in response to Mike's post above, the insurance problem is not just in California, but also in Florida where the political and regulatory environments are pretty much the opposite of California. Increased frequency of large-scale disasters plays a role in both states, that goes beyond the politics.

As to whether LA is getting drier, as I posted some pages back, the issue may not be whether it is getting drier, but rather the extreme swings between very wet years (the previous two years) and very dry ones (this year, only .03" of rain since Oct 1). This causes a surge in vegetation in the wet years, which then dries out in the dry years, providing fuel for wildfires. One of the things mentioned in the article I linked, along with many others. A lot for a Disaster Review Board to sort out.

 

[Matt Zumbrunn]

They are dropping people in the heartland too. State Farm dropped my brother. He had 3 hailstorms in 5 years take out his roof. The 3rd one also got his siding. As soon as he filed the third claim they axed him. I agree it is an increased frequency of events coupled with a high cost to repair/replace,

We act like these fires are unprecedented. They are not. It has happened before and we new it could happen again. The only thing new about it is the unimpeded growth in the area. 4 homes on a 1 acre lot, and all it takes is one to go and they will all go.

 

[Mike Smith]

We act like these fires are unprecedented.

Matt: Great observation. I highly recommend today's Cover Story from Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson. You'll find it here: LA Fires

Sharyl points out that the lessons from the "Camp Fire" (Paradise, CA which killed 85) were not learned. The similarities between Maui and the Paradise Fires is uncanny -- yet the same mistakes are made over and over and over.

Really sorry to hear about State Farm. People more expert than I believe the California fire costs are going to be so high that you and I, 1,000+ miles away, are going to see our rates raised. Usually, that is not the case because states regulate homeowners' insurance.

If we want rates to go down, our only hope is to create a NDRB and insure their recommendations are taken seriously. If that occurs, it will save many billions in damages and, over time, lead to lower rates.

 

[Matt Zumbrunn]

Kansas tornado siren failures prompt bipartisan bill to improve emergency alerts

The WARN Act is coming up ahead of the next severe weather season, prompted by emergency alert siren failures last year in several Kansas counties, including Sedgwick County and the Wichita area.

www.kwch.com

 

[Boris Konon]

One thing that sticks out as a huge problem is that in recent years it is absolutely clear that there is a glaring problem concerning the lack of time, $$, and resources spent on basic maintenance and preventive measures that, if done right and given proper attention, would significantly mitigate the extent, and in some case advert completely, disasters, weather/climate-related or otherwise.

Does it have to be said once again about the egregious neglect in California that even basic infrastructure can't be maintained to properly combat wildfires? We saw the problem with water supplies and hydrants from the recent wildfires. How about the fire department budgets and policies themselves? How about decades of poor land and water management? How about the fact that we keep expanding into high fire risk areas, making ignition more likely and giving plain "targets" for wildfires? All of these have *zero* to with weather and climate, yet wildfires keep exclusively getting blamed on climate change from the most of the MSM and politicians every time one occurs. This is disingenuous at best, and criminal at worst, and reeks of agenda-driven policy and towing a line.

All the $$ thrown at climate to "fix" it, how about some of that $$ used to address the non-weather/climate issues I mentioned above? This is main problem I have with the entire climate change issue. Too many act like it the only problem out there and everything else is trivial or unworthy of attention. This is direct result of excess hype, fear-mongering, and plain lying about the actual risk/threat of climate change that has conditioned much of public that the “end is nigh.” Also, IMHO this enormous amount of $$ spent on climate change breeds many opportunities for massive grift and corruption.

 

[Mike Smith]

Each year, the NTSB publishes their most urgent recommendations from past reports that haven't been acted on. Many newspapers and almost all aviation trade pubs print them. It is a way of putting pressure to get these types of things (in the case of the NDRB, fire hydrants) types of issues repaired before it is too late.

W/r/t Flight 5342, the NTSB had pointed out -- multiple times -- the dangers of helicopters in that airspace. Unfortunately, that recommendation was not acted upon. It will be now.

A NDRB is absolutely essential.

Climate change had nothing to do with the LA Fires. Why the LA Wildfires Have Little to do With Long-Term Drought or Climate Change and The Origin of The Los Angeles Wildfires

 

[William Monfredo]

...time, $$, and resources spent on basic maintenance and preventive measures that, if done right and given proper attention, would significantly mitigate the extent, and in some case advert completely, disasters, weather/climate-related or otherwise.

The above makes good economic sense, and in many respects can save a lot of money.
What local or regional problems could places have? Get ready for it, regardless.
If it doesn't happen, great. If it does...be out in front of it to soften the blow.