In Nevada County, public employee compensation has roughly doubled to $160,000–$170,000 per worker while median household income stagnates near $79,000. Meanwhile, the county pension system’s funding has dropped sharply to 63%, ballooning unfunded liabilities and straining future budgets.

Is Nevada County’s budget truly structurally balanced? No. Using one-time surplus to fund ongoing costs while adding staff and growing pension debt is not fiscal discipline—it’s postponing the problem.

A longtime independent voter, frustrated by California's one-party dominance and local issues like housing costs and fiscal imbalance, registers as a Republican to restore political competition while continuing to run for Nevada County Supervisor.

Nevada County’s annual Board of Supervisors workshop remains a repetitive, executive-controlled exercise that perpetuates vague, unending objectives instead of delivering focused, measurable results, and until the Board adopts a few clear, countywide priorities with real accountability and shared responsibility, this process will stay disconnected from the community’s pressing needs.

“[The outcome] emerged from a sequence of decisions: early approvals without clear vesting analysis, an environmental review that struggled to build public confidence, internal reversals of staff recommendations, and final actions that shifted the dispute from regulation to litigation.”

The pattern emerging in Nevada County tells a different story.

Nevada County cares deeply—neighbors fix fences and roofs together. But the RV Dwelling Ordinance isn't housing; it's survival living. RVs aren't built for year-round use: thin insulation, flammable materials, weak roofs collapse under snow. It demands costly upgrades anyone could use for real homes. This risks health, fire, and displacement for vulnerable residents. Vote NO on ORD25-1. Build permanent, affordable homes instead.

On July 22, 2025, the Nevada County Board of Supervisors quietly pulled Agenda Item SR 25-1940 from its meeting agenda without explanation.

“Critics have accused county officials of misleading the public. County Counsel Kit Elliott claimed the resolution would not lead to property loss… However, Treasurer-Tax Collector Michelle Bodley corrected the record, confirming that unpaid special assessments on the tax roll could lead to a tax auction by 2031 if the resolution passes.”

Sal Albert asks the Board of Supervisors not to let Agenda Item 27 take away the public’s right to choose their Auditor-Controller.

Heidi decided the public comment period about our small-town budget was the perfect time to fire off X posts about the Supreme Court abortion decision.

Supervisor Robb Tucker cast the only dissenting vote on a $415.5 million county budget—a budget that exceeds projected revenues by approximately $24 million.

Heidi has lost all focus.

As the Nevada County Board of Supervisors considers a proposed $415.5 million budget for FY 2025–26, it is our civic duty to confront a troubling truth: this budget is not balanced, and pretending otherwise puts our county’s financial credibility at serious risk.

Nevada County Supervisors will decide next week whether to ask the Legislature to be able to add Nevada County to the list of counties authorized to appoint—rather than elect—a Registrar of Voters.

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.