Plumas County has taken final steps to end a controversial energy upgrade project after months of debate. On June 9, the Board of Supervisors approved partial repayment of $9.9 million in loans tied to the $10.8 million Engie project.
Chair Mimi Hall said the county plans to pay off the full loan to avoid interest payments over the next 20 years. The resolution settles financing agreements with KNN Public Finance and includes a $1.45 million partial prepayment and an $8.46 million payment from an escrow account.
The county also saved $6.7 million by canceling planned generator and HVAC replacements in county buildings.
The project started in January 2023 with discussions between Plumas officials and Engie, a French electric utility company now called Optera Energy Services. The plan aimed to cut electricity bills by over 25% and reduce carbon emissions comparable to removing 131 cars from roads annually.
County leaders approved the project in December 2024 with $1 million in county funds and loans for the rest. Former County Administrative Officer Debra Lucero championed the plan as a way to upgrade aging infrastructure the county could not afford otherwise.
The financing plan was complicated. It included a $9.8 million loan from Engie, with most funds held by Webster Bank at 4.6% interest over 20 years. Approval required two board meetings, with Supervisor Jeff Engel opposing the deal.
Concerns grew over the loan’s high interest rate and the financial risk to county assets, including a lien on the animal shelter. Hall said these worries motivated her to run for the District 4 supervisor seat.
Facilities Director Nick Collin, appointed in May 2024, questioned the need for many replacements and suggested county workers could do some tasks. His plan in June 2025 estimated $3 million in savings.
By October 2025, Plumas County scaled back the project, cutting $6.7 million from the contract and ending work beyond LED lighting and solar panels at the courthouse annex.
Hall and other supervisors expressed regret over the project. Hall said, “We got sold the bill of goods,” and urged the board to be more cautious with future agreements. She emphasized the need to listen to the public and department heads.
The project’s end offers a chance to reflect on decision-making and financial planning. How will the county ensure future investments avoid similar pitfalls? What role should public input play in large infrastructure projects? Your voice could help shape the
