A proclamation designating June as Nevada County Pride Month sparked debate at Board of Supervisors meeting, exposing divisions over the role of symbolic gestures in local governance. The controversy is unlikely to fade quickly, as supervisors face ongoing pressure to define their priorities.

Nevada County stands at a critical fiscal crossroads. As labor costs continue to rise, state and federal funding declines, and essential services come under increasing pressure, it is time to face the uncomfortable truth: Nevada County residents are paying twice for leadership—and getting half the results.

Nevada County Board of Supervisors must correct past mistakes by burdening taxpayers with excessive compensation packages and delayed fiscal reforms. We have the opportunity—and the responsibility—to rebuild our county government that is leaner, more responsive, and focused squarely on delivering essential services with transparency and fiscally conservative prudence.

Two terms—eight years—is more than enough time for a supervisor to make a meaningful impact. If someone can’t accomplish their goals in that time, it may be time to let someone else try.

Nevada County governance thrives only when it operates on trust — trust that staff are forthright, that transparency is not feared but embraced, and that accountability is a tool for improvement, not a weapon to be avoided. Senior county officials must resist the easy temptation to rationalize dishonesty for the sake of short-term gains.

The County’s budget totals $388 million, with 45.8%—or $167 million—sourced from federal and state intergovernmental funds. This revenue supports 908 full-time equivalent positions delivering essential services, but recent federal actions threaten this pipeline, prompting urgent advocacy by the Board. Nevada County’s complete reliance on federal funding for these services amplifies the stakes. Discretionary revenues offer little buffer against cuts to the $167 million in federal and state aid while losing tax-exempt municipal bonds could cripple infrastructure funding tied to salaries.

In a move that has left taxpayers clutching their wallets and laughing through the tears, Nevada County Executive Alison Lehman and her trusty Board of Supervisors have greenlit a $75,000 contract with Bryce Consulting, Inc., to “survey” their compensation. Because apparently, the only thing more critical than affordable housing or higher wages for lower-level county staff is figuring out if Lehman’s nearly half million-dollar annual compensation package comes with enough gold stars.

There is no “internal audit position” within Nevada County despite its critical importance to a well-functioning decentralized governance system. The Board of Supervisors rejected the re-creation of an internal audit position during post-COVID budget cuts. Recent Grand Jury reports highlighted significant fraud risks, leaving taxpayer money vulnerable.

A 42% payroll expense in one year with big percentage raises each year is unsustainable, especially in light of the downturn in state funding. Given the outrageously high salaries of senior executive staff and elected officials, the tax-paying public is questioning the rationale of the Nevada County CEO Alison Lehman.

The Nevada County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved an ordinance (4-1) allowing tiny homes on wheels to be used as permanent residences.

“Gina Will should return the public’s money of $50,000 and resign.'“

The swearing-in ceremony for the Nevada County Board of Supervisors was held on January 6, 2025, formally initiating the start of their new term.

I was astonished to learn that our CEO, Alison Lehman, and County Counsel, Kit Elliot, took it upon themselves to transfer $50,000 of public resources to Gina Will’s Campaign Committee, thus circumventing public Board of Supervisor approval and public comment. Since I believe the transfer of funds was potentially illegal, I penned the following letter to our District Attorney’s office.

Local leftists say the quiet part out loud progressively requesting that our local Nevada County supervisors should create a position in the county for when speakers with whom the local organized mob disagree, the community can vote to determine whether such speaker will be permitted to speak. Calling for the creation of not-so-free speech panels in order to regulate who comes to town to speak.

According to public records received from Nevada County and publicly available mandatory campaign FPPC disclosures, Alison Lehman, county chief executive officer, and Kit Elliott, county counsel, authorized the payment of $50,000 from the county general fund to Gina Will’s campaign committee without approval of the board of supervisors.

We have sham elections occurring in Nevada County. Despite losing her election for auditor of Nevada County to Rob Tribble and after he was found by the Nevada County Superior Court to lack the statutory qualifications to serve as the auditor, the Nevada County Board of Supervisors appointed his challenger, Gina Will, despite the fact that she only garnered 45% of the County vote and was not chosen by the people of the County and without even considering an open appointment process.

Still no independent forensic audit of OES grant contracts and Fire Safe books

The Nevada County Board of Supervisors should be most interested in how the CliftonLarsonAllen contract was procured by County senior staff. The contract entered into without Board approval exceeded the $50,000 threshold which triggers Board action, yet County staff still contracted with CLA without Board approval.

Because the mob was completely ill-informed, they likely did not know the extent to which Conger went to obtain proper approval of the event permit in accordance with the County’s ordinance.

The Brown Act, which governs public meetings of local agencies, states in part: “The legislative body of a local agency shall not prohibit public criticism of the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the agency, or of the acts or omissions of the legislative body.”