As a retired fire chief, former elected official, homeowner and Firewise community volunteer, I left the recent discussion on Carlsbad’s wildfire risk disappointed — not in the quality of the report, but in the entire City Council’s inability to make what should have been an easy, common-sense decision.
This was not a Republican issue. It was not a Democratic issue. It was a public safety issue.
The city’s Wildfire Hazard and Risk Assessment was detailed, professional, and clear. An outside fire consultant was reportedly paid approximately $300,000 for the report, and the findings confirmed what many residents already know: Carlsbad’s wildfire risk has increased.
Many neighborhoods sit directly next to open space, canyons, habitat preserves, slopes, and heavy vegetation. These areas are part of what makes Carlsbad beautiful, but when dead vegetation, unmanaged brush, and excessive fuel loads accumulate near homes, schools, roadways, evacuation routes, and critical infrastructure, they pose a serious threat.
The council did not need to resolve every environmental, legal, or regulatory issue in a single meeting. But it could have taken a clear first step by adopting one simple statement: “The City of Carlsbad requests that the State of California allow Fire Chief-directed removal or reduction of dead flammable vegetation and hazardous brush within habitat, preserve, open space, and wildland-urban interface areas when necessary to protect public safety, homes, evacuation routes, natural resources, and firefighter safety.”
That should not be controversial.
Instead, we saw something too common in government: paralysis by analysis. There is always a reason to delay. There is always another report to request, another agency to consult, another legal concern to study, another process to wait for. But at some point, taxpayers should not be asked to fund another consultant report just to tell us what the last report already made clear.
Wildfires do not wait for perfect government paperwork. Santa Ana winds do not wait for staff reports. Dead vegetation does not become safer because elected officials are uncomfortable making a decision.
To be clear, this is not about destroying habitat or weakening environmental protections. Carlsbad should continue to be a leader in open space preservation and environmental stewardship. But responsible environmental stewardship must include fire prevention. Past fires have repeatedly shown that dead, dry vegetation and unmanaged brush are major contributors to rapid fire spread, extended fire runs, and large conflagrations.
A carefully planned fuel reduction project does far less damage than a wind-driven wildfire that burns through neighborhoods, destroys habitat, threatens lives, and puts firefighters at unnecessary risk.
The common-sense solution is simple: get clear permission to remove dead, flammable vegetation and brush from open spaces and preserve areas when doing so will make our communities safer.
The city already has the information it needs. The report identifies insufficient fuel modification, increased fire risk, and limitations in vegetation management within preserve areas. The next logical step is not another round of hesitation or another taxpayer-funded study. The next step is leadership.
Residents do not expect City Council members to personally write fire codes or habitat agreements. But we do expect them to recognize a clear public safety threat and act with urgency. We expect them to back their Fire Department. We expect them to protect homes, evacuation routes, critical infrastructure, natural resources, and lives.
Carlsbad has studied the problem. The report is done. The risk is real.
Now the Council needs to stop hiding behind process and start showing leadership. When it comes to wildfire prevention, common sense should not be this hard.
Mark Muir is a former Encinitas fire chief and former City Council member.
