No doubt the panel probing the Chicago Fire Department’s performance in last year’s deadly Loop high-rise fire is stepping on some toes and making some enemies. Good.
The commission, chaired by former federal judge Abner Mikva, won’t accomplish its goals–figure out what happened and recommend ways to make sure it doesn’t happen again–unless it asks those tough questions and gets full cooperation from Chicago fire officials.
That cooperation has been in question, particularly since the panel elicited some potentially damaging testimony. Two weeks ago, for instance, a Chicago fire department battalion chief testified that he was ordered by his superior not to conduct a routine post-fire evaluation of how well the blaze was fought “because of the legalities involved.” Another firefighter said he encountered people in the same stairwell where six victims were later found dead, raising questions about earlier statements that firefighters were unaware people had been trapped behind locked doors.
Late last week, city lawyers backed out of a promise to provide the author of a much-debated Fire Department report that said the blaze was “incendiary,” or started by a person. The city canceled interviews of two Chicago firefighters.
City officials were apparently peeved at lead commission attorney George Ellison for what Chicago Corporation Counsel Mara Georges said was his “grandstanding” in front of the commission. She also said that because of the commission’s demands, some fire companies had to be pulled out of service for lack of manpower.
On Wednesday, the city and county called a truce. Officials announced an agreement in which the remaining firefighters to be called would be interviewed on their days off and the county would pay their overtime.
It’s good that they’ve settled their differences; the hope here is that the whole dispute was simply an ill-considered display of pique. But the city should be wary of creating an image that it is far more interested in controlling potential damage than in thoroughly investigating how well the blaze was fought and whether changes should be made. The city still has not released that controversial report or allowed its author to testify before the panel.
City officials contend the Mikva commission isn’t supposed to investigate the causes of the fire. But the commission’s wide-ranging probe is on target.
The commission must ask hard questions of county officials about what happened long before the blaze began. Those include: Did Cook County cut corners and imperil safety when it renovated the building in the 1990s? Did the political donors who were under contract to manage the structure have the necessary safety precautions in place? Only through a rigorous investigation can the families of the victims–and everyone else who relies on the city’s firefighters–be reassured that the lessons have been learned to prevent such a tragedy from happening again.
