After 911 and the tragic death of so many brave first responders (who rushed into the Twin Towers), some fully unionized, and highly paid, Fire Departments that fight very few fires, and have very little actual experience, secretly decided THEY were too valuable to risk going into buildings that were on fire. So they state they go into buildings, but they don’t or, at least, try not to! – This is a Leadership problem that negatively affects the entire community

Non-defensible equals burndown:

"Non-defensible structures" is a term SLO City FD leadership seems to love. If it’s a building that might require skill, expertise, and limited risk to fight the fire, it appears that they simply refuse to consider trying. Instead, they label it "non-defensible". They arrive quickly, delay taking action, then cut holes in roofs but do not do the interior attack that goes with the vertical ventilation that they promptly do.

No building/fire is non-defensible if you catch the fire quick!

No building/fire is non-defensible if you have prepared a plan in advance and have properly trained personnel enabling you to act quickly.

All buildings are lost if you refuse to try. No building is defensible if you won't go inside to fight the fire. SLO City FD appears to believe, "Look how big and quickly it all burned, proving our decision to fight a defensive fire was correct." A self-fulfilling prediction, considering that SLO City FD leadership is often intentionally making the fire burn hotter and more intensely.

When reviewing The Sub and Square Deal Recordings & Supplies fire, which SLO City FD leadership claims to have fought defensively, we feel they have redefined defensive from staying outside the building and stopping the fire by putting maximum water through doors and windows TO cutting draft holes in the roof (intensifying and enlarging the fire), then putting fire hoses through ventilation openings to add air to the fire - (No interior attack being considered). They do water for show on roofs and walls but they do nothing to slow the fire down or put it out. They protect nearby properties which are not on fire, but not the involved structure or one attached, even defensively. In our case, they totally refused to defend the adjoining structures.

After four requests with no meaningful response, we learned the correct term, "target hazard". When we asked for a list of target hazards, we were given a list of 88 buildings consisting of public facilities, large occupancies, and a few large firms. They were all sprinklered buildings!

There still is no list of actual target hazard buildings that are not sprinklered. All the real hazards will be in NON-sprinklered buildings.

If it’s a building that might require skill, expertise, and limited risk to fight the fire, it appears that they simply refuse to consider trying. Instead, they label it "non-defensible." They arrive quickly, delay taking action, then cut holes in roofs but do not do the interior attack that goes with the vertical ventilation that they promptly do.

SLO City FD leadership apparently maintains a secret unofficial list of properties that they will not fight fires on or where it would be difficult and they should have pre-prepared plans but have not! (We have asked through public record requests for any list of dangerous/high fire load/non-defensible/non-savable and target hazard buildings, and they only have a list of 88 buildings with sprinklers installed – not very hazardous!) The property owners deserve to know if SLO City FD leadership will not fight a fire in their buildings so they can attempt other firefighting arrangements. They are supposed to maintain a list of problem structures (target hazards) and have plans to deal with them – not a list consisting of only sprinklered buildings.

So far, with three different public records requests, SLO City FD leadership still has not produced any other list. Yet, during commercial inspections at Square Deal, firemen have commented to the property owners and managers that they will not fight a fire in their building anyway – This is not a comment they would have the confidence to make without having seen a list or know of a policy that SLO City FD leadership does not admit to. It could even be worse, i.e. perhaps only the 88 sprinklered structures on the target hazard list will get firefighting service?!!

The insurance companies would want to know!

The neighbors of buildings which are not eligible for actual firefighting would want to know.

Property owners would expect written notices of the problems that disqualify them from fire protection so they could try to fix the problems.

Square Deal Recordings & Supplies and The Sub passed all their fire inspections and deserved fire service and an honest attempt to save the buildings.

San Luis Obispo and all citizens deserve better.

What does it mean to be a corrupt Fire Department? – While none of these indicators singularly means corruption, a Fire Department guilty of most of these practices is certainly suspect, if not corrupt.

"Corrupt" for a Fire Department essentially means they serve themselves first and not the public or their community.

Corrupt means they no longer attempt to put out building fires and save property. It means they cut a hole in center of roof for a focused and accelerated fire, and a quick safe burndown. It sacrifices the victim but is safe for firemen and usually protects adjoining property.

Corrupt means they stop training to actually put out fires and save property.

Obvious signs of corruption:

1. A corrupt Fire Department has leadership that is not honest about what it does or how it does it.
2. A corrupt Fire Department is worried only about firefighter safety, pay, and benefits not citizens’ property, possessions, or valuables.
3. A corrupt Fire Department lives off the hard work, courage, and discipline justly earned by legitimate Fire Departments who do go inside buildings and fight fires.
4. A corrupt Fire Department has firemen who do not know that their first priority (after firefighter safety) is to put water on the fire as fast as possible – even ladder trucks, if they are first on scene at a fire can deploy a preconnect to fight the fire instead of just waiting.
5. A corrupt Fire Department will have meetings before the leadership writes their narratives to co-ordinate what is written to insure there are not "differences." They are supposed to write narrations independently as soon after the fire as possible then have meetings to go over the fire. (A super corrupt Fire Department will stop writing narratives entirely.)
6. A corrupt Fire Department will actually claim credit for firefighting it did not do!
7. A corrupt Fire Department does not prioritize putting water on a fire promptly. Often they delay putting water on the fire to have a better fire.
8. A corrupt Fire Department will generate lots of overtime without any firefighting emergencies. They will also deflect questions asking about unnecessary overtime incurred.
9. A corrupt Fire Department has leadership that serves itself and not its community, but always loudly and proudly proclaims the opposite.
10. A corrupt Fire Department will claim credit for cutting holes in roofs to let the smoke and hot gases out but will neglect to tell you they are not supposed to cut holes in roofs except as part of a coordinated interior attack. (The hole accelerates and focuses the fire – It increases the heat and gases!)
11. A corrupt Fire Department will allow existing firemen to become paramedics and train on-the-job rather than hiring experienced fully-trained EMTs or paramedics.
12. A corrupt Fire Department will use its job openings to buy false testimony or other favors from firefighters who want the job the corrupt Fire Department has to offer.
13. A corrupt Fire Department claims experience and knowledge they do not possess – Then when the knowledge is needed, they fake it at the expense of the fire victims and the community, afterwards lying about what they did to cover their lack of experience, relevant training, and actual expertise.
14. A corrupt Fire Department requires a Fire Marshal who will not expose misconduct and will participate in any cover-up or glossing over of inappropriate Fire Department practice and behavior.
15. A corrupt Fire Department follows underground policies that it will not put into print or admit to. Example: Refuse to go into structures that are on fire because "it’s dangerous" but claim the opposite.
16. A corrupt Fire Department does not follow its own published rules and procedures at fire scenes then afterwards claims to have done what they should have rather than what they actually did.
17. A corrupt Fire Department will try to generate as many useless activities as possible. This creates the illusion of useful activity when needlessly chasing ambulances only creates dangers, wastes time and money and substitutes for meanful activities that they should be doing.
18. A corrupt Fire Department thinks following ambulances replaces preparing plans to fight fires in our major public buildings and elsewhere in our community.
19. A corrupt Fire Department will use plastics and modern materials as an excuse for not rushing in and promptly dealing with a fire.
Plastics burn poorly and emit poisonous gases. With SCUBA equipment, it is no issue of firemen safety. Modern materials and plastics with fire retardant actually create a less dangerous fire scene than previous times and are not an excuse used by actual firefighting Fire Departments.
20. A corrupt Fire Department will always attack and disparage any person or group who tries to alert the public to the problem with the corrupt Fire Department!