Lake County supervisors allow staff to continue exploring EGX Energy geothermal proposal amid water, seismicity and process concerns

Ben Rickleman, deputy county administrative officer, asked the Lake County Board of Supervisors for authorization to allow county special districts and staff time to work with EGX Energy on a possible geothermal power proposal that could use a small portion of land near the Southeast Water Treatment Facility.

Rickelman told the board the item was strictly an authorization for staff time and ‘‘all we’re asking at the moment is staff time,’’ and that any formal agreement would return to the board. He said county property is attractive for siting because prior disturbance may reduce CEQA burdens, the site has road access and preliminary subsurface information shows relatively solid rock that could suit enhanced geothermal systems (EGS).

The proposal’s principal, Damien Gerard of EGX Energy, told supervisors the company is considering using roughly 30 acres of about 400 acres around the wastewater plant for above-ground equipment and well paths while the production target is ‘‘above 50 megawatt, probably around a 100 megawatt.’’ Gerard said the option to use county land was added after initial private‑land plans on the Pluth Ranch and that the county site was only one option being explored.

Why it matters: supervisors and residents raised immediate questions about water supply, seismic risk, cultural‑resource review and process. Several speakers urged the board not to commit county land or let projects advance before the county completes its ad hoc Energy Policy Development work and before the ongoing Robin Lane sewage spill investigation and remediation are resolved.

Board counsel cited county policy (Chapter 1, Rule 2, Section 5) under which board referrals that are anticipated to require eight or more cumulative staff hours ordinarily require board approval. Counsel said the board has discretion to allow staff to continue if the expected hours do not exceed that threshold.

Several supervisors urged a pragmatic approach. Supervisor Sabatier said staff are hired to work with developers and recommended that developers be invoiced for staff time when appropriate rather than seeking repeated board approval for exploratory work. Supervisor Owen said the technology ‘‘is really exciting’’ and that Lake County needs lower energy costs, but he stressed the county should develop energy policy and better understand the county’s existing water commitments before making land commitments.

Public commenters pressed for caution. Tom Lasek urged the board to ‘‘deny’’ the request for eight hours of board‑authorized staff time until the ad hoc energy committee defines county direction. Cassandra Hulbert, a Robin Lane resident, asked the board to ‘‘pause any authorization until the spill response is fully resolved’’ and called for independent environmental review and meaningful consultation with impacted residents. Diana Mann, general manager of the Clear Lake Oaks County Water District, said she learned of the proposal on short notice and warned the board the project could affect a 3.5‑mile pipeline and aged water infrastructure.

Operational details: special districts staff said they have already spent preparatory time reviewing the proposal but do not have the same permit‑fee authority as community development and therefore cannot generally bill developers for pre‑application time except when a sewer application exists; staff indicated a right‑of‑entry per‑hour rate and limited escorted‑site access fees can be charged and that EGX could pay for a consultant to assemble a formal proposal. Director Turner said community development had logged roughly two staff hours in January and that staff routinely supports economic development but would bill when appropriate.

Outcome and next steps: the board did not approve a project, lease or lease terms. Instead, after discussion the board concluded there was no immediate formal action and allowed staff to continue preliminary work under existing billing options and procedures; supervisors emphasized the need for more public outreach, tribal consultation, technical analysis (seismic, groundwater, transmission) and policy guidance. The county indicated it will return to the board with any substantive proposal or if staff time is expected to exceed thresholds requiring board authorization.