The Plumas County Board of Supervisors is poised to back a plan to encourage growth and homebuilding after the Dixie Fire. Discussed at their Jan. 21 meeting, it would put $500,000 of the county’s Pacific Gas and Electric Co. settlement fund toward a Down Payment Assistance program aimed at addressing the county’s housing crisis, particularly in the Greenville burn scar.
The supervisors stopped short of full support. Before approving a major expenditure from the PG&E settlement, they agreed they need to address two issues. First, the county should adopt a policy that outlines priorities for using settlement money, said Supervisor Mimi Hall.
“I think this is a great program. We definitely need housing. But…we simply haven’t taken the action that we needed to allocate these funds,” she said.
The second hurdle involves approval by the nonprofit Dixie Fire Collaborative of a $500,000 match to the county’s proposed $500,000 allocation to the down payment program. The proposal County Administrative Officer Debra Lucero recommended would create a $1 million fund for housing assistance in Plumas County. The DFC, which has facilitated Dixie Fire recovery efforts, has not approved that funding, said Patrick Joseph, the organization’s coordinator. The DFC’s steering committee is scheduled to discuss it when it meets Feb. 3.
“We don’t know if that would be a matching $500,000 or if it would be $100,000 or $300,000. I’m in no position to assume what that dollar amount is at this point because the steering committee still needs to hear more information,” Joseph said.
How the program would work
The purpose of a Plumas County down payment program is to help solve the county’s acute housing crisis, particularly in the burn scar target areas of Indian Valley, Lucero said. Programs elsewhere include assistance for first-time buyers; they offer help with down payments through loans, grants and vouchers. Plumas County Community Development Corporation would administer the program as the non-profit arm of the Plumas County Community Development Commission.
PCDC would issue grants in amounts of approximately $50,000 to each eligible applicant. The money would be put toward the purchase of an existing home or construction of a newly built home, Lucero explained. PCDC, led by Executive Director Roger Diefendorf, would follow the requirements established by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Paradise, Truckee and other northern California communities have successfully used comparable down payment programs, said Lucero, who is currently on paid administrative leave.
If approved, Plumas County’s program would result in $800,000, to be allotted in grants of $50,000 to 16 families. Some would be newcomers drawn to the area as a place to work and live, Lucero said. Housing is the first of a three-legged stool of economic development. It is typically followed by jobs and strong businesses, then infrastructure that enhances the quality of life. Plumas County needs to start with housing in the wake of the 2021 Dixie Fire, which completely destroyed homes and businesses in Greenville and three other communities, she said.
Lucero listed other benefits from the down-payment program she recommended:
- Approximately 50 new people.
- Approximately 25 new students, each bringing $10,500 to the school district from the state of California, or approximately $262,500 per year to the school district and / or charter school.
- Approximately $65,000+ in new property taxes to Plumas County annually.
- Over $1 million in disposable income annually based on the current annual median household income in Plumas County.
Having a $1 million fund would increase the potential of additional funds from housing assistance programs, said Lucero. PCDC would also apply for other mortgage assistance with the hope of building up down payment program reserves from $3 million to $5 million, said Lucero.
Only $800,000 of the $1 million Lucero recommended would go toward direct housing grants. The other $200,000 would be allocated toward the costs of launching and administering the program. It would continue for two years while the program draws in additional funding for the actual down-payment assistance, said Diefendorf, the county development corporation director. Some of the $200,00 would be used for consultants, including credit counselors, he said.
Hall suggested a more complete breakdown of the administrative budget when the program comes back to the supervisors for a vote.
Setting priorities for Dixie Fire funds
Plumas County has received funds from several different sources to compensate for public losses caused by the 2021 Dixie Fire. The county’s insurance settlement totals $4.4 million. That covers the loss of three county buildings and some equipment. In December, the supervisors allocated $1.5 million from that fund toward a public safety center in Greenville, which will include a sheriff’s substation.
The county received $10.9 million in its settlement with PG&E, whose faulty equipment caused the Dixie Fire. Around $3 million is restricted to payments to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and California Office of Emergency Services, Lucero said. She has recommended transferring $26,811 to various county departments to compensate for their fire expenses.
That leaves $7.9 million in the PG&E settlement fund. The supervisors have spent just $10,000 of that on a program spaying and neutering the hundreds of feral cats left in burn scar areas.
Lucero has repeatedly recommended investing $2 million of the PG&E settlement. It’s rare for a public entity to have that opportunity, she said. She has also suggested setting aside $2 million as a match for other grants and funding opportunities. The $500,000 she recommended for down-payment assistance would come out of that $2 million fund.
“We haven’t met our responsibility as a county organization to make the county whole from its losses.”
Mimi Hall, Plumas County supervisor
Although Lucero has come to the board several times with these recommendations, the board has never accepted them, Hall noted. It has never adopted a policy to guide spending of either the insurance reimbursement or the PG&E settlement, she said. The supervisors should do that before allocating the dollars to programs such as down payment assistance, she said.
“We haven’t done step one. We haven’t met our responsibility as a county organization to make the county whole from its losses, and to make sure that our settlement dollars go towards that,” said Hall. Once the supervisors have done that, “then I think that we can talk about worthy causes like this,” she added.
Supervisor Tom McGowan was ready to approve funding the down-payment program Jan. 21 despite Hall’s cautions. He moved to approve $500,000 “as presented,” adding that the supervisors could later consider a policy to prioritize spending the remaining the fire funds.
“So we, in a sense, have prioritized what we would like to do with the PG&E and the insurance settlement funds.”
Tom McGowan, Plumas County supervisor
“We may not have officially numbered <anything> one through 10, but we have designated housing and attracting people to Plumas County as, if not the number one, the second priority. So we, in a sense, have prioritized what we would like to do with the PG&E and the insurance settlement funds,” McGowan said.
When Supervisor Kevin Goss pointed out that the DFC had not approved any matching fund, McGowan amended his motion. He made approval of the county’s $500,000 share contingent upon the Dixie fire collaborative approving “a likewise amount.” That would mean matching whatever funds the DFC approved.
Joseph, the DFC coordinator, noted that he could not predict a specific dollar amount the steering committee might approve. He was open to “a simple one-for-one match… if that’s what the board here wants to do.”
Goss pointed out that the down payment program would need a certain amount to “get off the ground.” “I’m not sure $200,000 would do it,” Goss said.
At that point, after 40 minutes of discussion, Supervisor Jeff Engel recommended postponing any decision to Feb. 4, the board’s next meeting. Goss provided a second to his motion, which passed unanimously.
