Old wounds in New Cuyama resurfaced with Cal Fire’s recent lawsuit to recoup the costs of fighting a 2023 wildfire from those allegedly responsible.
The state agency sued local landowner Wayne Goldwyn and “Does 1-50” on Aug. 14 for $3.3 million for effectively setting the 5,400-acre fire “through negligence and violations of law.”
“[Goldwyn’s] failure to properly and safely maintain the property, electric lines and equipment, and vegetation caused or contributed to the Plaint Fire,” State Attorney General Rob Bonta wrote in court documents. “That failure was a substantial factor in proximately causing Cal Fire’s damages.”
While Bonta’s 10-page complaint refers to the incident 60 times as “the Plaint Fire,” plaintiff Cal Fire dubbed it the Plant Fire in 2023.
Reported as starting on Aug. 19, 2023, near where Aliso Park and Foothill roads intersect near New Cuyama, the Plant Fire lasted 11 days, according to Cal Fire’s website. It burned through more than 60 properties and destroyed eight uninhabited structures.
Bonta’s lawsuit is more specific about the fire’s origin, pinpointing its starting point “approximately 5 feet north of the property line shared with 2001 Aliso Park [Road] … adjacent to four aerial electrical conductors.”
The suit names Goldwyn as the parcel’s property owner, while describing “Does 1-50” as either employees of or individuals “engaged in a joint venture” with Goldwyn “and in doing the acts alleged.”
“Fire investigators observed sycamore tree branches from trees located on defendants’ property overhanging, intruding into, and/or contacting the electrical conductors southwest and southeast of [the fire’s origin point],” Bonta explained. “Electric arcing due to electrical equipment failures on and around power lines and nearby vegetation is a known cause of fires.”
Bonta alleges that Goldwyn and other defendants failed to “mitigate or remove the reasonably foreseeable fire hazards that electrical lines, equipment, and vegetation presented” at Goldwyn’s property on Aliso Park Road.
“When electric arcing occurs near a receptive fuel bed such as vegetation, it is foreseeable that the electrical discharge may eject sparks, molten metal, and/or hot material into the adjacent vegetation and cause a fire,” Bonta stated. “Fire investigators observed multiple areas of damage, … consistent with arc events due to conductor-to-conductor contact.
“The arcing event(s) generated heat, sparks, and/or molten metal,” Bonta continued, “and ignited the Plaint Fire.”
The Sun reached out to Cal Fire’s media line, as well as Attorney General’s Office attorneys Michael Zarro and Ross Hirsch for comment on the recent litigation but did not receive responses before press time.
“As a direct, foreseeable, and proximate consequence of the Plaint Fire, [Cal Fire] incurred reasonable costs,” Bonta stated, “in the approximate amount of $3,343,866.43 to respond to and suppress the Plaint Fire. … Defendants are liable to Cal Fire for those costs.”
This article appears in September 3 – September 10, 2026.
