Why Fire Chiefs Should Oppose Police Encryption
The Interoperability Crisis They're Creating
When police encrypt their radios, fire and EMS lose crucial situational awareness. This isn't a transparency issue—it's an operational issue that affects firefighter safety and incident coordination.
Toms River: When Fire Departments Go Dark
Toms River Fire District 1 is now New Jersey's only fully encrypted fire department. Fire chiefs across Ocean County formally opposed the decision. Officials did it anyway—then issued gag orders and required neighboring departments to sign NDAs.
This is the future if we don't speak out.
Read the full investigation →The Interoperability Problem
At every multi-agency incident—structure fires, active shooters, vehicle accidents, mass casualty events—fire crews depend on knowing what police are doing. When police encrypt their radios, that coordination disappears.
Active Shooter Response
Fire/EMS stages outside until police secure the scene. Without access to police radio, you don't know when it's safe to enter or where the threat is moving.
Structure Fire Response
Police often arrive first for crowd control, witness information, and traffic management. When you can't hear their updates, coordination suffers.
Major Incidents
Unified command requires shared situational awareness. Encryption creates information silos that slow response and increase risk.
Case Study: Washington DC Fire
When encryption was reversed after coordination failures
The Subway Incident
When DC Fire responded to a major subway incident, fire crews couldn't coordinate with police units operating on encrypted channels. The communication breakdown hampered response and created dangerous coordination gaps.
The Reversal
After the incident, fire leadership and firefighter unions publicly opposed continued encryption. The interoperability argument—framed as an operational necessity, not a transparency debate—was persuasive. DC reversed its fire radio encryption.
Key Lesson
When fire leadership speaks out against police encryption on interoperability grounds, it reframes the debate from "transparency vs. security" to "operational effectiveness." This framing is harder for police to dismiss.
The Toms River Warning
What happens when fire departments encrypt too
Toms River Fire District 1 in New Jersey is the only fully encrypted fire department in the state. Their 700 MHz system operates on encrypted channels, creating the same interoperability concerns they face when police encrypt.
When a fire department encrypts:
- Mutual aid departments lose situational awareness on joint calls
- Volunteer firefighters may lack proper encryption access
- Community emergency awareness disappears
- Journalism coverage of fire incidents suffers
If fire departments argue against police encryption on interoperability grounds, they should maintain open communications themselves to preserve credibility.
Read the full Toms River case study →Talking Points for Fire Leaders
Use these when speaking to city officials or at public meetings
Interoperability Framing
"Police encryption breaks multi-agency coordination. At every major incident, fire and EMS depend on knowing what police are seeing and doing. Encryption creates dangerous information silos."
Safety Framing
"This is a firefighter safety issue. At active shooter scenes, hostage situations, and violent incidents, our crews stage until police secure the scene. If we can't hear police radio, we don't know when it's safe."
Operational Framing
"Unified command requires shared situational awareness. When police encrypt, we lose that shared picture. Response times increase and coordination suffers."
Alternative Solution
"We're not saying police can never encrypt anything. Hybrid systems exist that protect tactical operations while keeping routine dispatch open. That preserves interoperability."
Fire Department Practice
"Fire departments handle sensitive medical information without encryption. We protect privacy through training and policy. Police can do the same for most communications."
Professional Standards
"NFPA standards emphasize interoperability. Accreditation expects coordinated emergency response. Police encryption undermines both."
How to Speak Out
Practical steps for fire leadership to engage
Internal Assessment
Document how your department currently uses police radio access. What incidents require coordination? What would change with encryption?
Connect with Union
Firefighter unions often take positions on safety issues. Discuss with your local to understand member concerns and potential union support.
Written Statement
Prepare a formal written statement from the fire department opposing encryption. Submit to city manager, council, and media.
Council Testimony
Testify at city council meetings where encryption is discussed. Fire chief testimony carries significant weight.
Coalition Partnership
Join broader coalition opposing encryption. Your credibility strengthens the entire effort.
Media Availability
Be available to media covering the issue. "Fire chief opposes police encryption" is a compelling headline.
Sample Statement Template
Adapt for your department's use
STATEMENT FROM [CITY] FIRE DEPARTMENT REGARDING POLICE RADIO ENCRYPTION
The [City] Fire Department has significant operational concerns about the proposed encryption of [City] Police Department radio communications.
At multi-agency incidents—structure fires, vehicle accidents, mass casualty events, and active threat situations—fire and EMS crews depend on situational awareness of police operations. When fire crews can monitor police radio, we know:
- When scenes are secured and safe to enter
- Where threats may be moving during active incidents
- What resources police are deploying that may affect our operations
- Traffic conditions and access routes
Encryption would eliminate this coordination capability. We would be forced to rely entirely on dispatch relays and direct phone contact—slower methods that create dangerous delays during fast-moving incidents.
We understand that police have legitimate concerns about certain tactical operations. However, alternatives exist—such as hybrid systems that encrypt tactical channels while keeping routine dispatch open—that would address those concerns without breaking multi-agency interoperability.
The [City] Fire Department respectfully requests that the City Council require a full assessment of interoperability impacts before any encryption decision, and consider hybrid alternatives that preserve coordination while addressing police concerns.
[Fire Chief Name]
Fire Chief, [City] Fire Department
Partnering with Community Coalitions
How fire leadership strengthens broader opposition
Why Your Voice Matters
When journalists and civil liberties groups oppose encryption, officials can dismiss them as having ulterior motives. When fire leadership opposes encryption on operational grounds, it reframes the debate and adds credibility that's hard to dismiss.
What Coalitions Need from You
- Written statement they can reference
- Willingness to testify at public meetings
- Availability for media interviews
- Technical expertise on interoperability
Maintaining Independence
You can support a coalition's goals without becoming a spokesperson for broader agenda. Focus on interoperability—your area of expertise and legitimate concern.
Take Action for Transparency
Your voice matters. Here are concrete ways to advocate for open police communications in your community.
Contact Your Representatives
Use our templates to email your local officials about police radio encryption policies.
Get StartedRead Case Studies
See how encryption has affected real communities - from Highland Park to Chicago.
View CasesSpread Awareness
Share evidence about police radio encryption with your network and community.
Public Testimony
Learn how to speak effectively at city council and public safety meetings.
Prepare to Speak