Sam Lucas Told To Evacuate Before Home Caught Fire

JEFFERSON COUNTY, Colo. -- When firefighters with Inter-Canyon Fire/Rescue went door-to-door to warn Lower North Fork residents to evacuate a wildfire, the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office was not aware of those evacuation attempts, 7NEWS has confirmed
Investigators with the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office told 7NEWS that North Creek Fire command did not call for deputies to go door-to-door to try to evacuate homes until about 5 p.m. on March 26. That was the same time dispatchers were getting ready to put out the first reverse notification call, text and email announcing the evacuation.

On Monday, Inter-Canyon Fire/Rescue confirmed the department's volunteer firefighters started to go door-to-door between 4:20 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. on March 26.

Full Article

When firefighters with Inter-Canyon Fire/Rescue went door-to-door to warn Lower North Fork residents to evacuate a wildfire, the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office was not aware of those evacuation attempts, 7NEWS has confirmed

Normally, I would say that this was inappropriate. However, because the Incident Command at the beginning of this incident was so dysfunctional, it may have been necessary.

Thoughts?

jf1acai wrote:

When firefighters with Inter-Canyon Fire/Rescue went door-to-door to warn Lower North Fork residents to evacuate a wildfire, the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office was not aware of those evacuation attempts, 7NEWS has confirmed

Normally, I would say that this was inappropriate. However, because the Incident Command at the beginning of this incident was so dysfunctional, it may have been necessary.

Thoughts?

Wow! Too many thoughts. First of all, I am glad they did as they were closer to the situation. I also hope they let their command know what they were doing.

Since it wasn't authorized by the sheriff's dept it looks like they were acting on their own and if they are holding themselves out as fire dept personnel it becomes a problem. I am hoping they were acting as individuals letting others know there might be a problem.

Zhawke there is court case listed in my posting. If you don't think it is a fiduciary responsibility then I suggest you talk to an attorney, like my legal beagle dad who has defended both sides of the issue in the past. Just because it isn't on wiki's list doesn't mean it isn't. The fire department has a chain of command for a reason and if they aren't following it there is liability. There is a fiduciary responsibility.

mtntrekker wrote:

jf1acai wrote:

When firefighters with Inter-Canyon Fire/Rescue went door-to-door to warn Lower North Fork residents to evacuate a wildfire, the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office was not aware of those evacuation attempts, 7NEWS has confirmed

Normally, I would say that this was inappropriate. However, because the Incident Command at the beginning of this incident was so dysfunctional, it may have been necessary.

Thoughts?

Wow! Too many thoughts. First of all, I am glad they did as they were closer to the situation. I also hope they let their command know what they were doing.

Since it wasn't authorized by the sheriff's dept it looks like they were acting on their own and if they are holding themselves out as fire dept personnel it becomes a problem. I am hoping they were acting as individuals letting others know there might be a problem.

Zhawke there is court case listed in my posting. If you don't think it is a fiduciary responsibility then I suggest you talk to an attorney, like my legal beagle dad who has defended both sides of the issue in the past. Just because it isn't on wiki's list doesn't mean it isn't. The fire department has a chain of command for a reason and if they aren't following it there is liability. There is a fiduciary responsibility.

mtntrekker, please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying there is not a fiduciary responsibility. I'm just asking for citation of case law that would be applicable in this type of situation. Again, my understanding of fiduciary responsibility is that it is more from a "financial" perspective in a relationship of trust between a "trustee" and "beneficiary" where money is involved somehow. In my 29 years of experience in the field of emergency management, it has never been presented to me or anyone else that I am aware of that a duty to notify can be construed as a "fiduciary responsibility". That doesn't mean it hasn't been there. Rather, it's just that I've not been aware of it. That's all. I haven't seen an actual citation in any of your posts, unless I missed it somehow (I'd appreciate if you'd point it out because if it is in case law, I'd like to do more research on the issue), and that's why I asked for a citation. Also, I'm well aware of "chain-of-command" rules and regulations when it comes to Incident Command and NIMS. I also know there are liability issues associated with not following them (personally affected by the response at Columbine HS April 20, 1999). I'm just not aware (and I emphasize the word "aware") of any association it may have in being considered a liability from a "fiduciary" responsibility perspective.

OOOOPS! Not authorized. So what does that mean when Lucas was approached and told to leave or when anyone was told to leave?

And why did the Sheriff's office wait so long to inform residents?

Deep doo-doo. Soooooo many mistakes. But hey liability is limited. And they are going to spend their time telling you what a good job they did. Our government and special districts at work. Pitiful.

I have very mixed feelings on this.
The human side of me says Bravo to Inter Canyon.
My head says this could be a BIG problem.
There is a chain of command for a very good reason.
Chaos can result if we don't have clear rules and plans.......
but on the other hand.....chaos already existed.
I am going to have to have more information about this before I can decide.

akilina wrote: OOOOPS! Not authorized. So what does that mean when Lucas was approached and told to leave or when anyone was told to leave?

And why did the Sheriff's office wait so long to inform residents?

Deep doo-doo. Soooooo many mistakes. But hey liability is limited. And they are going to spend their time telling you what a good job they did. Our government and special districts at work. Pitiful.

From "Mandatory Evacuation Law and Evacuation Legal Definition": http://definitions.uslegal.com/m/mandatory-evacuation/

Mandatory evacuation is a situation where emergency management officials put maximum emphasis on encouraging evacuation and limiting ingress to potentially affected areas.

Bolded emphasis mine. There has always been, and probably always will be, confusion as to what the word "mandatory" in this context actually means. The legal definition is even somewhat vague in that regard. To me the legal definition specifies no legal authority to force anyone to leave when told to do so. Ultimately, it is the choice of the person being advised to leave whether or not to do so. A well-know example of this occurred when Mt. St. Helens erupted and a resident (I believe his name was Harry Truman) was told to evacuate but refused to do so.

With regard to the rest of your question on why the SO waited so long to inform residents is concerned, hopefully that will all be sorted out in the After Action Review of the incident. Hopefully, the PIO for this incident won't go posting any additional fluff prior to that happening.

Becky wrote: I have very mixed feelings on this.
The human side of me says Bravo to Inter Canyon.
My head says this could be a BIG problem.
There is a chain of command for a very good reason.
Chaos can result if we don't have clear rules and plans.......
but on the other hand.....chaos already existed.
I am going to have to have more information about this before I can decide.

A little more to add to the timeline.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/30 ... etail.html

Thanks Becky.

It is sickening to read now and to listen to the first time around. NFF chief knows his stuff. They should have listened.

We were on the phone with people we knew who lived in that area telling them what we heard on the scanner and they were in disbelief that it was that bad.

So I hope lots of valuable lessons learned not only by the f.d. but the residents as well. And that it extends to other f.d. and homeowners. High winds and low humidity should have been the first alerting clues to be aware.