Los Angeles Fire Chief Jaime Moore revealed Monday that language in the official after-action report following the devastating Palisades fire was deliberately softened before public release, as internal evaluations became accessible for the first time. The revelation raises questions about transparency and accountability in the wake of a blaze that reshaped a community.
Report Alterations Aimed to Protect Individuals
The fire chief stated revisions were made to shield certain personnel from criticism.
- Moore reviewed multiple drafts of the report and questioned why more direct language was removed.
- Earlier versions were more critical of staffing and command decisions.
- The chief believes the changes were intended to protect the reputations of individuals within the department.
- LAFD has updated protocols for wildfire response, including drone usage and pre-deployment strategies.
During an interview days after the city marked the one-year anniversary of the deadly blaze on January 7, 2026, Moore explained he began reviewing drafts of the report in November 2025, shortly after assuming the role of fire chief. He immediately noticed discrepancies between the initial assessments and the final published version. “I looked at the first draft, and I looked at the very final draft, and I really wanted to find out why did this happen,” Moore said. “Why would we try to mislead the public?”
Q: Why were changes made to the Palisades fire after-action report?
A: Chief Moore stated the revisions were made because after-action reports are typically internal documents not intended for public consumption, and he believes they were intended to protect the reputations of certain individuals.
Moore clarified that the earlier drafts contained more candid and critical assessments, but the language was revised prior to publication. He explained that after-action reports are generally internal documents and, as such, are often more blunt in their evaluations of personnel and decision-making. “I believe that those drafts occurred because they were trying to protect the reputation of certain individuals,” he said, “because when we do an after-action (report), since they don’t normally go out to the public, they’re very, very critical of our officers. They are very critical of the decisions that are made.”
Records obtained by the Los Angeles Times revealed that earlier drafts employed stronger language regarding staffing levels and command decisions. One draft specifically stated that the department’s decision not to fully staff and pre-deploy resources ahead of forecasted extreme winds violated LAFD policy during red flag conditions. This language was later altered in the final report to characterize pre-deployment efforts as exceeding standard practice.
The Times also reported that then-interim Fire Chief Ronnie Villanueva informed Fire Commission President Genethia Hudley Hayes that a draft of the report had been sent to Mayor Karen Bass’ office for “refinements.” Bass has publicly denied any involvement in altering the report or requesting edits.
Moore publicly acknowledged the edits last week during a Fire Commission meeting, stating that leadership missteps were identified during the department’s internal review. He emphasized that the changes occurred before his appointment and pledged that such alterations would not happen under his leadership.
While acknowledging the revisions softened the criticism, Moore maintained he did not believe the intent was to deceive the public. “Eventually it softened things up,” Moore said, “but I don’t believe that was their intent, because when you look at it, the facts are the facts…it doesn’t skirt the blame. It doesn’t skirt what we responded. It literally just uses a little different terminology.”
Moore also defended the command decisions made during the earlier Lachman fire, which investigators later determined ignited the Palisades blaze. He stood by the incident commanders’ decision to withdraw from the Lachman fire site days prior, asserting that conditions at the time did not suggest an ongoing threat.
According to Moore, crews believed the fire was fully extinguished after follow-up checks revealed no active flames, despite subsequent high winds reigniting embers buried in the root system. He characterized the eventual eruption as an unusual event driven by extreme weather rather than a failure to act. “I truly believe that they thought they had the fire out,” he said. “This was an anomaly, something that doesn’t happen on a normal occasion.”
The department has since implemented changes to both its tactics and decision-making protocols for wildland fires, particularly in areas prone to high fire severity. These include expanded use of drones for monitoring large brush fires, allowing crews to detect lingering heat or embers. While LAFD does not currently have a dedicated drone unit, Moore stated drones are now recommended for fires exceeding one acre and are being deployed more frequently when available.
Deployment decision-making during red flag conditions has also been revised, allowing for earlier and more substantial pre-deployment of resources when extreme winds, low humidity, and high temperatures converge. Recall procedures have been updated to enable faster staffing of additional engines and personnel ahead of forecasted fire weather.
Furthermore, LAFD has strengthened coordination with the Los Angeles Police Department and the city’s Emergency Management Department regarding evacuations, including expanded use of the Watch Duty and Genasys Protect alerts to notify residents of evacuation warnings and orders in real time.
Beyond internal changes, Moore stated the department has sought external reviews of both the Palisades fire and the preceding Lachman fire. He requested the Fire Safety Research Institute, currently conducting a state-commissioned review of last January’s fires, to incorporate the Lachman fire into its analysis. The city has also engaged Critical Preparedness and Response Solutions to conduct a separate review examining aspects of both fires, according to a report dated December 5, 2025.
Moore expressed confidence that the department is better prepared today than it was a year ago, citing changes in deployment protocols, recall procedures, and wildfire response tactics. He emphasized, however, that rebuilding trust—both within the community and among those affected by wildfire—remains a top priority.
