Wednesday, March 4, 2026

Supervisors reorganize, face challenging year

Colusa County Board of Supervisor Chairman for 2023, Kent Boes, center left, recognizes outgoing 2022 Chairman Merced Corona, as Supervisors Janice Bell, Daurice Smith, and Gary Evans look on.

The Colusa County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday unanimously selected District 3 Supervisor Kent Boes to take the lead in 2023.

Boes, who represents the Williams area, served as chairman in 2020 and was vice chairman under Merced Corona in 2022.

District 4 Supervisor Gary Evans was selected to serve as vice chairman, after Supervisor Daurice Smith voted against her nomination for the seat.

Evans has served multiple stints as chairman and vice chairman since first elected in 2002.

Boes thanked the board for their confidence in him.

“We have an exciting year ahead of us – a challenging budget – but we also have some large projects that I’m very excited to get off the ground and get moving on. It’s going to be a wonderful year and a productive and prosperous one.”

Prior to taking the lead, Boes presented Corona with a plaque and thanked him for his service, marked primarily by the end of a pandemic and the beginning of a challenging budget.

The board discussed and voted on two items of business Tuesday related to the budget challenges that could affect operations for years to come, after learning last spring the county would need to function with nearly $2 million less per year in revenue, despite increasing salaries, pension liabilities, and the cost of providing services to the public.

The board reluctantly approved a short-term transfer of $9.5 million from the Road and District Funds to cover immediate needs in the general fund.

Colusa County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said that while borrowing from these funds was not a preferred option, it was needed to cover immediate appropriations.

“It comes as a result of several things,” Tyler said. “It’s a rough year. We have operational and capital needs that we have pledged money for that we do not have within the general fund – and will not have within the general fund – for some time.

The board anticipates paying the money back no later than July 1.

Should annual payments be required, Tyler said they will be determined through the budget development process for Fiscal Year 2023-2024. By then, the board will have a clearer picture of the state 2023-2024 budget, which will be proposed in January and revised in May.

However, unlike the current and previous budget year, the state is facing a deficit rather than a surplus, so the impact on the county budget is unknown, Tyler said.

Officials said they anticipate repaying the $5.5 million to the Road Fund and $4 million to the District Fund back at the same interest rate the money would have earned had it remained within the county treasury.

Public Works Director Mike Azevedo, while not thrilled with the idea, agreed to the short-term transfer, much as one would loan money to a family member in need of help.

Azevedo said the transfer should not impact his department because they would continue to design capital improvement projects that will need to move forward.

“It’s a short-term loan,” he said.

Although he too agreed to the transfer, Evans said this was not the first time the county borrowed from the road fund, and he believes that money (acquired more than a decade ago) was absorbed and never paid back.

Meanwhile, the board also on Tuesday contracted with Capital Public Finance Group to provide financial advice on debt-related service to primarily help the county move forward with

capital improvements, such as the new jail, the creation of a west-side health and human services campus, and Sites Reservoir, as well as looking at opportunities to restructure the county’s unfunded pension liabilities.

The board, at its Dec. 20 meeting, adopted a debt management policy that calls for the employment of a financial advisor as the need arises, Tyler said.

“We really need someone on board to help guide us through some of the challenges and opportunities that are going to lie ahead in the next year or so,” she said.

The contract is fee for service, billed at $250 an hour, and is not to exceed $8,750, unless additional work is done, such as security issuance services, which would be billed at a flat fee.

The county can cancel the contract with 30 days notice, according to the agreement.

More News