LAKE COUNTY, Calif. – A year after the Sulphur fire began, the impacted communities continue to recover, government officials are working to restore infrastructure and dozens of residents who lost homes are suing Pacific Gas and Electric, which was faulted by a state investigation for having been responsible for the fire.

In June, Cal Fire released the results of its investigations into the cause of a dozen wildland fires across Northern California – including the Sulphur fire in Lake County – and concluded that, in all of them, electric power and distribution lines were to blame, a finding that is expected to bolster lawsuits being filed by residents across the North Coast, as Lake County News has reported.

Cal Fire said its investigators reached those conclusions about the fires in Lake, Humboldt, Butte, Sonoma and Napa counties after “extensive and thorough investigations.”

Cal Fire’s June report gave findings on the Sulphur fire in Lake County; the Redwood fire in Mendocino County; the Cherokee fire in Butte County; the 37 and Pocket fires in Sonoma County; the Blue fire in Humboldt County; the Norrbom, Adobe, Partrick, Pythian and Nuns fires in Sonoma and Napa counties; and the Atlas fire in Napa County.

“This news is a somber reminder of all the losses sustained here over the past three seasons – totaling over 1,800 homes and approximately 22 percent of our land mass. This cycle of wildfire must end, with responsible parties held accountable,” Lake County Administrative Officer Carol Huchingson told Lake County News after the finding was announced.

That finding followed Cal Fire’s May announcement that its investigators also have concluded that PG&E power equipment was to blame for the La Porte and Honey fires in Butte County, and the McCourtney and Lobo fires in Nevada County.

So far, Cal Fire has not announced a finding regarding the Tubbs fire, also part of the October North Bay fires and the most destructive in California history.

“The loss of life, homes and businesses in these extraordinary wildfires is simply heartbreaking, and we remain focused on helping communities recover and rebuild,” PG&E spokeswoman Deanne Contreras told Lake County News. “We look forward to the opportunity to carefully review the Cal Fire reports to understand the agency’s perspectives.”

She also said that PG&E continues to believe that its overall programs “met our state’s high standards.”

The company said new solutions to wildfires and the need to enhance infrastructure resiliency must be sought, and the availability and affordability of insurance coverage must be addressed as “we believe it is imperative to reform California’s unsustainable policies regarding wildfire liability.”

PG&E said it has launched the Community Wildfire Safety Program in response to the growing threats posed by wildfires and extreme weather.

The company said that program’s components include a state-of-the-art wildlife safety operations center, a weather stations network throughout high fire risk area, fire defense zones near power lines in high fire threat areas and a public safety power shutoff, a program to be used as a last resort to shut off power for safety when extreme fire danger conditions occur and to provide – when and where possible – early warning notification.

PG&E said last month that about 100 of the weather stations in the new program have been installed so far, including stations in Clearlake, Kelseyville and Middletown, and in Mendocino County on Bald Mountain, Pine Mountain and Redwood Valley, according to PG&E spokeswoman Deanna Contreras.

PG&E also took another action after the Sulphur fire but ahead of Cal Fire’s release of its findings.

In April, PG&E filed a claim against the county of Lake. In the document, the company states, “PG&E believes it may have claims against Lake County for contribution and equitable indemnity of any claim that has been or will be asserted against PG&E.”

The claim goes on to state that California state law requires individuals and companies with potential claims against public entities to present notice of those claims within a specified time, which was the reason for its action.

“Upon information and belief, these claims may stem from Lake County’s actions and inactions both before and during the Lake County Fires,” the document states, going on to name a host of possible reasons, including inadequacy of urban planning and property development approvals; water, emergency preparedness and infrastructure for which Lake County is responsible; enforcement of laws and ordinances regarding vegetation, defensible space and other ordinances designed to mitigate the effects of drought and fuel load; fire and emergency response during the fires; and other failures of Lake County to perform its duties.

The tort claim document also states, “It is clear that weather conditions are becoming more extreme and that our solutions to wildfires must evolve, too. This challenge requires us all to work together in order to be more successful. Years of drought, extreme heat and 129 million dead trees have created a ‘new normal’ for our state, and we must continue to adapt to meet these challenges. Extreme weather is increasing the number of large wildfires and the length of the wildfire season in California. We are committed to working with California communities and legislative leaders, as we collectively seek to meet the challenge of climate change and position the California economy for success.”

Cal Fire’s investigations have been referred to the appropriate county district attorney’s offices for review in eight of the 12 fires – Sulphur, Blue, Norrbom, Patrick, Pythian, Adobe, Pocket and Atlas – due to evidence of alleged violations of state law.

Tracking the Sulphur fire to its source

Cal Fire’s investigation found that the 2,207-acre Sulphur fire, which destroyed 162 structures, was caused by the failure of a PG&E owned power pole, resulting in the power lines and equipment coming in contact with the ground. It took nearly three weeks to fully contain it.

An incident report from Oct. 11 that originally was released by PG&E in redacted form and late last year released unredacted by the California Public Utilities Commission described an issue with power equipment on the night of Oct. 8.

At 11:55 p.m. Oct. 8 two power poles broke near Pomo and Sulphur Bank roads in Clearlake Oaks, according to the report.

On the evening of Oct. 10, PG&E staff reported identifying the two broken poles on the 12 kilovolt Redbud 1102 Circuit near Pomo and Sulphur Bank roads.

The report said the top section of one pole, identified as fuse cutout pole No. 1447, had broken and fallen to the ground, along with a second pole one span to the west, which had burned and also fell. No identifying number was given for the second pole in that initial report.

Cal Fire took possession of pole No. 1447 as well as the bottom portion where the break occurred above the communication conductors, the incident reports stated.

In its response to the Cal Fire conclusion about the Sulphur fire being caused by a PG&E-owned power pole, PG&E said it meets or exceeds regulatory requirements for pole integrity management, and uses a comprehensive database to manage multiple patrol and inspection schedules of our more than two million poles.

Beyond that, the company said that there was an “unprecedented confluence of weather-related conditions,” included years of drought resulting in 129 million dead trees, a record-setting wet winter that spurred the growth of vegetation that then became abundant fuel after record-setting heat during the summer months, very low humidity and very high winds.

Cal Fire’s original public statement in June did not confirm if the site named in the PG&E incident report was where the agency’s investigators concluded the Sulphur fire had begun.

However, District Attorney Don Anderson, who received a copy of Cal Fire’s investigative report, said that the report gave the location where the fire started as power pole No. 1447, located at 1350 Sulphur Bank Drive in Clearlake Oaks, the same pole named in the PG&E report.

Anderson said the Cal Fire investigative report stated that woodpeckers had gutted the center of the PG&E power pole, putting acorns inside of it and making it weak. The pole then went down and started the fire.

About three weeks before Cal Fire released its findings in June, agency officials came to Lake County and dropped off a nearly 2-inch report on the fire, along with photos, at the District Attorney’s Office, Anderson said.

“From my reading of it, there’s enough there to file,” he said. “Then it gets down to provability.”

Anderson said part of the issue in the report is the finding that PG&E wasn’t maintaining its power poles.

He said PG&E is required by state code to have a 10-foot clearing around that type of power pole. He said they normally have a hired company come out and spray around the poles. “In this case they never did,” he said, and when the pole came down, it came down straight into the vegetation and grass underneath it.

In Lake County’s case, Anderson said there may be some criminal and civil liability for PG&E. If he elects to file either criminal or civil action, Anderson said he anticipates handling the case against PG&E to require at least one full-time staffer. “They’re going to fight it with everything they’ve got, and they have an endless amount of money.”

After giving the report an initial read through, on June 1, about a week before Cal Fire’s report went public, Anderson met with districts attorney from Napa and Sonoma counties to discuss working together and reaching out to the California Attorney General’s Office for assistance due to the size of the matter.

The group followed up by sending a letter to the Attorney General’s Office requesting assistance. Anderson said the group of districts attorney working together includes Butte, Calaveras, Lake, Mendocino, Napa and Sonoma counties.

“We don’t have the manpower or the resources to do it properly,” he said. “So we’re waiting for an answer.”

While the Attorney General’s Office has acknowledged receiving the letter, as of the one-year anniversary, Anderson said the group of districts attorney are still waiting for the Attorney General’s Office to make a decision.

He said Lake County also has an agreement – which he just signed – with PG&E to prolong the statute of limitations in a filing until next April.

Anderson said of the case, “We don’t know where it’s going to take us.”



Governments take action

Government at all levels has been active in the recovery, from focusing on survivors, to pursuing litigation, working to get cleanup costs covered and overseeing the rebuild.

Concern for the people who lost their homes is a chief concern for Congressman Mike Thompson, whose district – which includes portions of Lake and Sonoma counties, as well as Napa and Solano counties – was hit hard by the fires.

“I’m going to be pretty insistent that the folks who lost their property and homes in this terrible fire are the ones that we're looking out for,” he said, adding, “They’re my No. 1 priority.”

He continued, “There's a lot of speculation that this is going to end up just pushing everybody's rates up and I want to make absolutely, positively certain that that doesn't happen that way.”

Thompson said that those who work in public policy need to ensure that the people they represent are taken care of in the matter.

People are going to feel the pains from the fires for a long time, Thompson said. “It's not even close to being over.”

Meantime, a number of counties and jurisdictions have been considering or already have filed lawsuits against PG&E over the fires.

Napa, Sonoma and Mendocino counties have filed separate lawsuits against PG&E for the 2017 wildfires.

The county of Lake has signaled its intention to follow suit. The Board of Supervisors held a number of closed session discussions over the course of several months earlier this year about the possibility of initiating litigation against the utility company.

On June 12, four days after Cal Fire released its findings of the cause of the Sulphur fire, the Board of Supervisors voted to initiate litigation against PG&E.

“When terrible and preventable events happen, like the Sulphur Fire, we have to hold the parties at fault accountable for their actions. That doesn’t change, whether the party is an individual citizen or a large utility company,” District 2 Supervisor Jeff Smith, who lost his own home in the Sulphur fire, said in a statement issued following the vote.

At the same meeting, the board chose to initiate litigation and join in the Northern California consortium’s legal action against opioid manufacturers and distributors in California.

In both cases, the county hired the law firm Baron & Budd to represent it.

John Fiske of Baron & Budd said that by the time the county of Lake hired his firm, it already was representing the counties of Mendocino, Napa and Sonoma, and the city of Santa Rosa in legal action against PG&E in response to the North Bay fires, and is representing entities in the Thomas and Butte fires.

Lake County joined what Fiske called a kind of consolidated working group, where cases will be filed locally before being transferred into a Judicial Council Coordinated Proceeding, which will be handled in the San Francisco County Superior Court.

“That leaves open the door to the possibility for having the case eventually tried in that jurisdiction,” he said of Lake County.

He said the proceedings involve 18 fires, dozens of insurance companies, many public entities and thousands of victims, thus the effort to try to coordinate them. He said it gives the California court system a way to handle the related cases in an efficient and effective way.

“In terms of wildfire cases, I think this is the most complex,” he said.

Fiske said the firm has its own investigators working on the cases, and that so far Cal Fire has confirmed what they already know, that PG&E is to blame for the fires.

Pointing out that PG&E is in a big fight in both the court system and in the legislature to avoid liability, Fiske said that when you see that so many of the fires are being referred for criminal investigation, he said that’s “pretty telling” of a systemic failure at an administrative and corporate level.

“We just hope that PG&E aligns its policies with reality,” he said, and focuses on prevention, helps victims focus on rebuilding lives and communities going forward.

Lake County News was unable to confirm with either Baron & Budd or Lake County officials this past week if litigation has yet been filed.

However, a Judicial Council of California civil case coordination proceeding log did not show a Lake County case filed as of Oct. 2.

For the city of Clearlake, where most of the fire’s damage to homes and other structures occurred, City Manager Greg Folsom said they received a lot of grant-funded labor to work on fire mitigation projects throughout the city.

“These workers have really cleaned up the brush on the side of the road in many parts of the city, including within the burn areas. We also received some money from FEMA to repair some of the residential roads in the burn area, but it is not a lot of money,” he said. “That will be a project for next year.”

Folsom said they’ve had eight or nine applications for rebuilding, with one of them, on Calaveras Drive, already completed, another one off Lakeshore and Monterey drives is nearly complete, and still one more off San Joaquin Avenue that appears nearly completed also. “Others are working on plans. I have heard that some want to rebuild but that insurance was not sufficient,” he said.

He said one of the most significant efforts regarding the fires was that put forth by Sen. Mike McGuire – as well as Assemblywoman Aguiar-Curry, Sen. Bill Dodd, and Assemblyman Jim Wood – was working with Clearlake other municipalities and the Governor’s Office to get the “local share” of the disaster clean up costs waived.

Folsom said that was a $300,000 to $400,000 savings to the city.

“Had Sen. McGuire not led the charge to work with us all to get that waived, the impact on the local budgets would have been another disaster for Clearlake and Santa Rosa and the surrounding counties,” Folsom said.

The Sulphur fire, along with several other local fires and the floods of last year, also is the focus of a continuing proclamation of local emergency that the Board of Supervisors has continued to renew every two weeks.

Sulphur fire survivors seek remedies

Lake County attorney Jesse Chrisp, whose firm represents 60 Sulphur fire survivors who lost homes and other structures in the fire, told Lake County News that the experts he has hired to study the incident concluded the location on Pomo and Sulphur Bank roads mentioned in the Cal Fire investigative report is where the fire did, in fact, begin.

He said those experts had determined that the cause of the fire was breaking of power lines at that site.

Chrisp said his firm is only representing Sulphur fire claimants, with other firms working on behalf of other fire survivors around the region.

“We’re taking interest only in that fire because it’s in our backyard,” he said.

Chrisp said he knew Cal Fire was going to be handing down this decision. His firm began filing the claims after Cal Fire released its findings in June and has continued adding plaintiffs in the months since.

One of the hold ups in the cases, Chrisp said, has been that Cal Fire has not yet released its findings for the Tubbs fire, the most destructive of the North Bay fires, and the worst in California, with 22 dead, and more than 5,600 structures and 36,800 acres burned.

However, “It looks like it’s a very solid cause for negligence against PG&E just for the Sulphur fire,” said Chrisp, noting that Cal Fire found there were numerous safety protocols and maintenance that hadn’t been followed. “Our claims in the Sulphur fire are very strong.”

Now, Chrisp’s experts – contractors, builders, engineers and arborists – are working on followup reports for the litigation.

He noted that the filing fees for the case are $1,400 per case, when filing fees are normally about $495. “Civil litigation nowadays is very expensive.”

Chrisp said he thought it was safe to say that it’s at least a year out before anyone starts talking about settlements or dollar amounts. “It’s possible it’s quicker and it’s possible it’s longer,” he said, noting that a lot of it depends on the findings for the Tubbs fire.

He said PG&E has been trying to get strict liability in the form of inverse condemnation taken away. “For our community, that would be devastating,” he said, adding he’s written to his member of Congress and a trial lawyers association to fight against it.

While Chrisp said they knew they are on very solid ground with their cases, “We wanted to make sure that Cal Fire’s decision was made.”

Once suits are filed, however, the process is far from over, he cautioned.

“These are long fights,” he said, adding, “This is not a thing that will be resolved in the next year. It will take years in my estimation.”

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.