Updated at 12:39 p.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 24, 2025.
Xcel Energy and two telecom companies have reached a settlement agreement in the Marshall Fire trial.
The state’s largest utility said it expects to pay around $640 million to plaintiffs in the case, which includes insurers, Boulder County and residents. The company expects around $350 million of those payments to be covered by its insurance policies.
The agreement is not yet final and must still be agreed to by the individual plaintiffs in the trial.
Xcel maintains that its equipment did not cause the Marshall Fire and does not admit to any fault, wrongdoing or negligence as a part of the settlement.
This is a developing story.
Original story below:
The Marshall Fire trial starts this week. Here’s what you need to know
Nearly four years after the state’s costliest and most destructive wildfire, Xcel Energy and Marshall Fire survivors will finally have their day in court.
Jury selection in a trial to determine whether Xcel is partly responsible for causing the 2021 Marshall Fire begins Thursday in Boulder.
The civil trial is the culmination of three years of legal wrangling and is slated to conclude in late November. The outcome could have major financial and legal consequences for Xcel, the state’s largest utility and a key partner in Colorado’s ambitious climate goals.
Jurors will determine whether Xcel and two telecom companies are liable for sparking one of the fires that eventually grew into the Marshall Fire. If a jury finds Xcel liable, it could expose the company to hundreds of millions, if not more than a billion dollars, in damages.
Determining those damages, however, will be decided in future trials and could take years.
What happened during the Marshall Fire?
On Dec. 30, 2021, two separate fires merged into the rapidly growing Marshall Fire, driven by hurricane-force winds up to 100 miles per hour, according to a 2023 joint investigative report from the Boulder County Sheriff’s Office and the Boulder County District Attorney’s Office. Federal and state officials also worked on the investigation.
The fire raced through Louisville, Superior and unincorporated Boulder County — destroying more than 1,000 homes, seven commercial buildings, and killing two people.
The fire was unusual. It occurred outside of peak summer wildfire season, and a snowstorm later helped extinguish it. It started as a wildfire, but quickly became an urban blaze, igniting entire subdivisions.
What did the official report find?
The 2023 investigative report focused on what started the two original fires.
On Dec. 24, members of the Twelve Tribes Christian sect burned scrap metal, branches and other junk on their property, before covering the pile with dirt. Firefighters responded to the property, but were “unconcerned with the fire,” according to the report, because of the rainy weather and low winds. There were no red-flag warnings in effect for high fire risk at the time.
But less than a week later, a windstorm uncovered part of the pile and spread hot embers, causing a fast-moving grass fire. That, investigators say, was the Marshall Fire’s first ignition.
The second ignition, known as the Trailhead Fire, occurred around the Marshall Mesa trailhead in South Boulder, near Xcel Energy’s power lines and a few thousand feet away from the first ignition.
Investigators and experts concluded that the fire’s source was likely a disconnected Xcel powerline that sprayed hot sparks nearby.
“Ultimately, investigators and experts concluded that the most probable cause of this ignition was hot particles discharged from Xcel Energy powerlines,” the report said.
But, the report could not rule out other causes, which Xcel is using to bolster its case. The Trailhead Fire was near an underground smoldering coal fire, which had ignited a small grass fire in 2005.
Were there criminal charges?
The investigative report concluded that there was no evidence that the Twelve Tribes knew their controlled burn would eventually re-ignite and morph into a massive blaze, or that they acted recklessly when starting or extinguishing their controlled burn.
Experts and investigators also concluded that there was no evidence Xcel committed a crime when designing and maintaining its power line.
“Though the fire devastated thousands of people, there was insufficient evidence that a crime was committed that could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt,” a spokesperson for the Boulder County DA’s Office said in an email to CPR News.
But the investigation did not close the door on a civil case against Xcel and other groups.
So who’s suing who?
Plaintiffs — which include hundreds of residents, businesses, Boulder County, and insurance companies — claim that power and telecom equipment caused the Trailhead Fire, which eventually ballooned into the Marshall Fire.
They claim that Xcel, as well as two other telecom companies, acted negligently in causing that ignition, which eventually led to the loss of their homes and other damages, according to a draft of the jury instructions filed by the Boulder County District Court.
Xcel and the telecom companies — Teleport Communications America and Qwest Corporation — claim that their equipment had no role in sparking the Trailhead fire.
Xcel also contends that the Twelve Tribes, and other groups, caused the plaintiffs’ damages and should be liable.
“In short, the evidence at trial will establish that any losses suffered by Plaintiffs were suffered at the hands of the Twelve Tribes, not Xcel,” according to a brief filed by Xcel’s lawyers last week.
The plaintiffs are represented by a constellation of lawyers and firms from around the country. Xcel is being represented by a Denver firm and the white-shoe New York firm Cravath, Swaine & Moore.
Xcel and several plaintiffs' lawyers did not return a request for comment.
What’s at stake for Xcel Energy?
Xcel is owned by investors, and generates enormous revenue from its nationwide operations. But based on previous trials against utility companies, Xcel could be facing a massive bill if it’s found liable.
In 2023, an Oregon jury found the utility company PacifiCorp liable for sparking several fires in 2020. Subsequent trials for damages have ordered the company to pay nearly $500 million to survivors, with more trials scheduled.
In a July 2025 earnings document, Xcel said that if it’s found liable, court-ordered damages could exceed its insurance coverage for such claims, which is around $500 million.
It’s already burned through around $100 million of that coverage in legal costs through June 2025, according to the document.
Xcel also estimates it will pay around $290 million in claims and settlements for its role in the 2024 Smokehouse Creek Fire, Texas’ largest wildfire. While the company settled several lawsuits related to that fire, it denies it acted negligently.
But the company did acknowledge “that its facilities appear to have been involved in an ignition” of that fire. Some of those payments will be covered by the company’s insurance.
Could Coloradans see higher bills if Xcel is found liable?
It’s unclear whether Colorado’s Public Utilities Commission, which regulates statewide utilities, would let the company bill its damages back to customers.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the PUC said its commissioners have not decided or deliberated whether Xcel may bill back its damages to ratepayers if it’s found liable.
Coloradans already pay for expenses that help Xcel reduce wildfire risk, like clearing vegetation around power lines. Coloradans have historically also paid for some of the company's “excess liability insurance” premiums.
In 2024, Xcel’s insurers hiked the company’s liability insurance costs by around 300 percent, partly because of wildfire risk.
Last year, a PUC employee recommended that if juries do find Xcel Energy responsible for starting Colorado fires, the company should not be able to bill customers for any insurance costs related to those fires.
Could both the plaintiffs and defendants settle instead of going to trial?
Yes. A court-ordered mediation deadline came and went in the summer, with no settlement. But it’s possible that a settlement is reached during the trial.
How has Colorado changed its approach to wildfires since the Marshall Fire?
When the Marshall Fire broke out, Xcel already had a “Wildfire Mitigation Plan” in place to help reduce its wildfire risk. But this year, state regulators approved a larger, much more expensive plan to help the utility deal with wildfires.
The plan — which will likely raise customer bills — is an acknowledgement that both the state and Xcel must take a proactive approach to addressing wildfires. It includes using AI cameras and placing some powerlines underground, a costly endeavor.
Colorado communities, many of whom are dealing with insurers dropping their coverage because of wildfire risk, are also adapting. For example, in December 2024, new building codes went into effect in Louisville, which require new construction and renovations to be hardened against wildfires.
