INCIDENT REPORT: CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE IN FIRE MANAGEMENT

Date: January 12, 2025Location: Los Angeles, CAIncident Description:

This report outlines actions taken by Los Angeles city officials that may constitute criminal negligence under California law during a period of increased fire risk:

Mayor Karen Bass:
Action: Reduced the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) budget by $17.6 million, potentially impacting response capabilities, training, and resources allocation.

Legal Implication: This could fall under California Penal Code § 452, which criminalizes reckless actions that lead to fires. The budget cut might be viewed as reckless if it directly led to an inability to manage or contain fires effectively.

Action: Traveled to Africa during escalating fire conditions, potentially neglecting duties under California Government Code § 821.6, which outlines that public employees are not liable for discretionary acts unless they involve gross negligence or malice. Here, the absence might be argued as gross negligence if it directly affected emergency management.

Chief of LAFD Kristin Crowley:
Action: Directed resources towards systemic equity and inclusion initiatives, possibly at the expense of fire response readiness.
Legal Implication: While diversity and inclusion are important, if these initiatives led to a diversion of critical resources needed for fire management, this could be scrutinized under California Penal Code § 452 for recklessly allowing conditions to worsen by not prioritizing fire readiness.
Action: Donated surplus firefighting resources to Ukraine, potentially reducing local capabilities.
Legal Implication: This action could be seen as violating California Penal Code § 452 if the donated resources were necessary for local fire control, thereby contributing to a negligence scenario where fire management was compromised.

CEO of LADWP Janisse Quinones:
Action: Managed or failed to manage water resources effectively, resulting in dry fire hydrants during active fires in Pacific Palisades.

Legal Implication: This could be considered criminal negligence under California Penal Code § 192(b) for involuntary manslaughter if the lack of water led to fatalities or severe injuries due to an inability to fight fires. Furthermore, this might violate California Health and Safety Code § 13000 et seq., which mandates fire protection districts and agencies to ensure adequate water supply for firefighting.

Specific California State Laws Potentially Violated:
California Penal Code § 452 - Reckless Burning:
This law applies to any person who recklessly causes a fire, including through neglect or failure to act with reasonable care. The budget cuts, resource donation, and mismanagement of water resources could be seen as contributing factors to uncontrolled fires.

California Penal Code § 192(b) - Involuntary Manslaughter:
This statute covers scenarios where gross negligence leads to death. If the negligence in managing fire resources or preparation directly resulted in loss of life, charges might be considered.

California Civil Code § 1714 - General Negligence:
This establishes a broad duty of care, potentially breached by the actions or inactions of the officials in question, particularly if these actions directly led to harm or failure in emergency response.

California Government Code § 850.4 - Firefighter Immunity:
While this generally provides immunity for firefighters in the performance of their duties, the actions of the officials might not be covered if they are deemed to be outside the scope of employment or involving gross negligence.

California Health and Safety Code § 13000 et seq. - Fire Protection:
These laws ensure that fire protection services are maintained at an adequate level. The incident with the dry hydrants could be a direct violation if it's proven that there was a failure to ensure water availability for fire suppression.

Recommendations for Legal Action:
Conduct a thorough criminal investigation to ascertain if these actions meet the threshold for criminal negligence or manslaughter.
Civil actions might also be considered for negligence leading to property damage, injury, or loss of life.

Review of policy and procedure to ensure future prevention of such incidents by establishing clearer legal obligations for emergency preparedness.

Conclusion:
The legal specifics suggest that there is a basis for further legal inquiry into the actions of Mayor Bass, Chief Crowley, and CEO Quinones under various California statutes concerning negligence, reckless behavior, and the duty of public officials to manage public safety resources responsibly.