Shasta election official Clint Curtis uses board presentation to praise his own leadership, critique predecessors

Shasta County Clerk and Registrar of Voters (ROV) Clint Curtis spoke to county supervisors again this week, asking the board to pass a resolution allowing him to buy small American flags and attend a variety of events to distribute them. He also asked for changes to fee structures associated with providing copies of the county’s voter files to community members.

After hearing his presentation, the board took no action, mostly because the bulk of what Curtis was requesting didn’t require the board’s approval. 

Chair Chris Kelstrom took the lead in the conversation. He advised Curtis that he already has the ability to attend events and use his budget as he sees fit, within county policy, and questioned why the ROV needed a new resolution approved. 

Lead county attorney Joseph Larmour added his thoughts, emphasizing that he could not support Curtis’ resolution on legal grounds, in part because the board doesn’t have any control over what events an election official does or doesn’t attend.

The presentation included praise for Curtis’ own leadership and critiques of his predecessors. Among other inflammatory statements, he claimed in both his written staff report and the associated oral presentation that he had been the subject of a “ban on Christmas” because he was not allowed to enter the Redding Christmas parade in his official capacity. 

“Previous administrations attended The Pride Festival and other left leaning events but never conducted outreach at either the 4th of July nor Christmas,” Curtis wrote in the presentation, adding his own partisan perspective on events that happened before his time. “They were not that successful at the Pride Festival as the people attending were more interested in carrying Palestinian flags instead of American flags.”

Larmour denied Curtis’ “ban on Christmas” claim, explaining to supervisors that his request to attend the holiday event was denied due to costs and the liability associated with using a vehicle in the parade. A review of social media shows Curtis attended the Christmas parade anyway, driving a vehicle advertising his campaign and filled with some of his most ardent supporters and new staffers, including Election Commissioner Patty Plumb, who dressed as the biblical virgin Mary.

Supervisor Allen Long expressed his concern about the line between Curtis’ attendance at local events being used to promote general engagement in elections, versus the possibility that he might opportunistically use these events as a means to promote his own campaign for ROV. Curtis, who was appointed to the ROV role last year, is running to keep the seat in June 2026. 

His opponent is Joanna Francescut, the county’s former assistant ROV who was fired by Curtis immediately after he was appointed to the position. Prior to her termination, Francescut had worked for the county’s election office for 17 years.

Since being appointed to the role, Curtis has used his official capacity to smear former election officials — which would include Francescut — at nearly every turn, including in his official communication about election procedures sent to California’s Secretary of State. 

His staff report this week was no exception, criticizing past administrations in an attempt to cast himself in a positive light. “This office is attempting to cleanse the reputation of an office that sees the public as a nuisance or vultures,” Curtis opined, “and instead embraces them and encourages observation and participation.

“We have gone to great lengths to correct for the way the public was treated under the previous administrations,” he continued. “In previous elections, even members of the Board of Supervisors were treated with disrespect. It takes more than one cycle to remove the hate that existed of the public.”

In an email after the meeting, Supervisor Matt Plummer characterized Curtis’ statements as “using the staff report to blast his candidate in the upcoming election.”

Reducing fees 

Supervisors also took issue with Curtis’ request to decrease the fee for providing digital voter file access to community members. Curtis wanted to drop those fees from $68 down to $5, saying doing so would increase trust in the election office. 

While the county would lose money by reducing the charges for the voter files, Curtis said, that money would be more than regained due to a hypothetical increase in trust which, he believes, would lead to a savings of $5,000 per election for security. He said an additional plan to attend community events like Pride with volunteers instead of paid election employees would save the county another $1,200 per event, racking up the allegedly possible county savings to $20,000 annually.

It was math that supervisors couldn’t get behind. Kelstrom questioned Curtis on the specifics of how he had come up with a cost of $5 for the digital voter files, asking how much staff time was actually required to provide the public with that information, to which Curtis claimed he had staff “just sitting around” anyway who could get it done in their free time.

Long asked why Curtis is employing staff who have nothing to do, saying maybe he should consider eliminating positions to save the county money. “Seriously,” he responded, when Curtis’ chuckled.

The board took no action on Curtis’ request, with Kelstrom saying he’d want to see a time audit of the process from the county auditor’s office before further considering whether to adjust the fee structure.

---

Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.