Plumas County Renews Search for CAO

QUINCY — The Plumas County Board of Supervisors took steps at their December 16 meeting to revive the search for a County Administrative Officer (CAO)—a position that has been vacant since April, when the county’s contract with the last CAO, Deborah Lucero, was terminated.

Human Resources Director Joshua Mizrahi said that “there is a critical need to replace the CAO” and presented a resolution to increase the base wage for the position to $100.15/hour. The proposed wage was aligned with the median pay rate in nine comparable counties, according to preliminary data from an ongoing salary study being conducted for the county, he said. The previous pay rate for Plumas County’s CAO was 25% below the average in comparable counties, according to the text of the resolution. Mr Mizrahi explained that the goal was for the CAO’s salary to be “just a little bit higher” than comparable counties to attract “top-level” applicants. The Board approved resolutions to increase the CAO’s pay rate and relaunch the search by unanimous vote.

The open CAO position has been advertised since the spring, and agendas for several meetings of the Board included items that suggested candidates were being interviewed in closed session. However, a special closed session with the topic “Public employee appointment or employment – County Administrative Officer,” which had been scheduled at the beginning of the September 9 Board meeting, was pulled from the agenda without explanation. When questioned at the December 16 meeting, members of the Board responded that a candidate had withdrawn and that the recruitment “fell apart.”

Debra Lucero was hired as CAO in November 2022 and placed on administrative leave in January 2025, before separating from the county on April 15. No explanation has been given for Ms Lucero’s termination. However, reports posted on social media over the weekend and subsequently on the Plumas Sun website indicated that the county had agreed in November to pay Ms Lucero $300,000 to settle claims she made against the county for breach of contract, defamation, lost wages, and other matters. The settlement only became known as a result of a public records request by a local attorney.