Nevada County Grand Jury • 2025-2026

Spending Money it Didn’t Have:

Published: April 13, 2026 14 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 20 findings

F1
PVFD’s current and anticipated revenue stream will not support the Novem- ber 2024 promotions and hires for more than a few years.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The timing and funding issues with respect to PVFD’s November 2024 pro- motions and hires caused the collapse of the four-way reorganization discus- sions.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
The November 2024 personnel changes would have remained effective in the proposed four-way consolidation.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Because Penn Valley made the promotions and hires when it did, personnel at NCC, Rough and Ready, and Ophir Hill lost the opportunity to compete for those positions.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
In making those personnel changes, Penn Valley’s Board depended on the tax increases that would occur in the four-way consolidation.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
That assumption by the Penn Valley Board deprived its potential partners of any voice in how to allocate those additional tax revenues.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The Board has delegated authority for budget construction and decisions to the Chief and the Finance Manager.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
The responsibility for adopting and adhering to an appropriate budget remains with the Board.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
In this decade, PVFD’s Board has approved the budgets that the Chief and the Finance Manager created without change.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
PVFD’s Board should have a budget subcommittee that participates fully, with the Chief and the Finance Manager, in producing each year’s budget.
F10
PVFD’s Board does not maintain appropriate oversight of the district’s fi- nancial condition.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
The Board of Directors and each of its members has a fiduciary responsi- bility to the district and its residents.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
PVFD’s bylaws should clearly state the Board’s duties, making clear that each Board member has a fiduciary responsibility to the District and to the stakeholders, including all residents of the District.
F12
In approving promotions and hires without a sufficient revenue stream to support them for more than a limited period, the Board has not fulfilled its fidu- ciary responsibility to the district.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
PVFD expended district money for the promotions and hires before its Board had approved the expenditure, the promotions, or the hires.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
That expenditure violated § 601 of PVFD’s bylaws.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
If the Board had already approved the promotions, hires, and expendi- tures, then the approval was not done in an open Board meeting and there- fore violated the Brown Act.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
PVFD’s Board should have mandatory training about the Brown Act’s re- quirements.
F16
PVFD is moving forward with consolidation with R&R, but it is not com- pleted.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
Increased fire tax revenue from consolidation with R&R may help to offset the anticipated funds shortfall to which F1 refers.
No recommendations for this finding
F18
The increased fire tax revenue from consolidation with R&R will be close to $1 million per year.
No recommendations for this finding
F19
The increased fire tax revenue from consolidation with R&R is not suffi- cient to cover the cost of PVFD’s November 2024 personnel changes over the long-term.
No recommendations for this finding
F20
The public would have been better served by consolidation of PVFD, NCC, R&R, and OH, as originally planned.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
PVFD should pursue consolidation with NCC/OH in order to take ad- vantage of economies of scale.

Additional Recommendations 3

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.