Marshall Fire investigation is a complex ‘ responsibility’
The recently released results of the 18- month investigation into the origin of the Marshall Fire are unlikely to bring anyone relief.
The investigation, of course, was imperative. Gathering the facts and uncovering the truth is, as always, vital. As is learning everything we can to better safeguard ourselves and our communities from future disasters.
But for those who lost a home or a business or a loved one, the results of the investigation are not going to provide any comfort — no matter what had been turned up.
For some, though, it is especially frustrating that, at the end of this protracted effort, no one will be held responsible.
According to the investigation, no crimes were committed, and no charges will be filed.
Investigators found that the Marshall Fire originated from two separate fires — one a scrap- wood burn on the property of the Twelve Tribes religious cult and the other caused by a broken Xcel power line.
The first fire — the burning of scrap wood and tree branches — was started by residents on Dec. 24, a day Boulder County Sheriff Curtis Johnson described as a “damp day with no wind.” Mountain View firefighters who responded to a report of the burn noted that the residents intended to let the fire burn out and bury it, which firefighters deemed “responsible and reasonable.” But, six days later, high winds exposed the buried embers, blowing them into the unseasonably dry vegetation.
The second fire was determined to be sparked by a broken Xcel power line 2,000 feet southwest of the first fire. The unmoored line, in wind that gusted as high as 115 mph, had come into contact with a cross- brace, which an investigator said showed evidence of arcing.
According to District Attorney Michael Dougherty, the residents at Twelve Tribes are not criminally responsible because there was no indication the residents were disregarding substantial and justified risk.
Similarly, Dougherty explained, there was no evidence of criminal negligence or reckless system design or maintenance of the equipment or wiring in the area where the Xcel power pole was located.
A year and a half later, it is still hard to comprehend the scale of the destruction wrought by the resulting fire: more than a thousand homes burned, dozens of businesses destroyed and two dead.
Just as hard to understand is how our community’s efforts to rebuild have been stalled by painful underinsurance, prohibitive taxes and the general strain of rebuilding from ash and ember.
Progress has been made in fits and starts ( localities have waived or offered rebates on some use taxes), and people have come together to raise funds and lend a hand. But to date, only a handful of houses have been rebuilt. For hundreds of our neighbors, relief is nowhere in sight.
It makes some sense to want to see someone or some entity held responsible. In the wake of the investigation, many residents are now considering entering civil litigation against Xcel to help cover losses. ( Generally speaking, in civil litigation, the standard to prove a party liable is lower than for criminal cases.)
Though we hate to say it, the truth is that responsibility, considering the findings of the investigation, is likely more complicated and far more vast than criminal or civil liability.
This is not to suggest fire- impacted residents should not explore whatever form of recourse they see fit, but rather to simply highlight the painfully uncomfortable truth: As our climate continues to change, disasters on the scale of the Marshall Fire are going to become impossible to prevent. And if something is impossible to prevent, can any one person or entity be responsible?