Volunteer dismissed from poll training after pushing back on political commentary by Shasta election official Clint Curtis
Two women say they were told to leave a poll worker training session Thursday after expressing discontent with political commentary made by Shasta’s chief election official. A third poll worker made it through her training earlier in the week but was left with significant concerns.
Clint Curtis was appointed to the role of registrar of voters last year. He was hired from Florida to take up the position in Shasta County despite a lack of experience with election management and ran his first election last fall, facing a steep learning curve to adjust to a new job in a new jurisdiction.
Now he’s facing another challenge, pushback from poll workers.
Curtis kicked off poll-worker training for the June primary this week, starting the process significantly earlier than usual, about six weeks before the election. He’s been leading the training himself so far, at a pace of four sessions per day, over two days this last week — according to a training schedule shared by a poll worker. The election office did not respond to a request for information about when poll training sessions would occur.
Curtis’ approach to the training is casual, according to a number of volunteers interviewed yesterday, peppered with jokes and opinionated commentary including references to his dislike of the state of California, his distaste for the practices of former election officials and his keen awareness that disability advocates keep a watchful eye on access in poll places.
During at least one training this week, Curtis also brought up a current political controversy, an alleged ballot discrepancy by election activists in Riverside County that has gained national attention. It’s a claim that’s been soundly rejected by Riverside’s election official Art Tinoco.
Shasta County community member Joyce Lively was present at a poll worker training on Thursday when Curtis brought the Riverside topic up about ten minutes into the session. She said he mentioned the matter in passing as he discussed poll worker positions, saying a particular position could be the one to prevent an event like the alleged 45,000 ballot discrepancy in Riverside County. Lively said it bothered her that Shasta’s election official was treating an unproven claim made by activists as fact, especially in a space that’s supposed to be nonpartisan.
“I put up my hand and I said I would appreciate it if you wouldn’t bring politics into the training situation,” Lively said afterwards.
Curtis responded by calling the ballot discrepancy a “statement of fact,” Lively said. She said she pushed back firmly but politely, telling him the allegation was a matter of opinion and something she felt didn’t belong in a poll worker training,
“He looked at me and smiled and said ‘you’re dismissed’,” Lively recounted. “I asked him if he was serious and he said yes he was.”
Lively said she got to her feet and walked out of the small room at the Market Street election office. As she passed fellow poll worker Janet Ugale, who’s worked the polls for three or four elections, Ugale told Lively that she’d probably be joining her soon. It was a form of solidarity, Ugale explained by phone in an interview yesterday, a way to express to Lively — who she’d never met before — that she felt sympathy for her.
Ugale’s comment drew attention from another election staffer, a woman later identified as Marjorie Andrews who was standing not far away towards the back of the room. She said Andrews turned toward her in response and said, “if you feel the same way you can leave now too.” Ugale said she took a moment, wondering if Andrews was serious, before the staffer spoke again.
“She said, ‘you need to leave now as well,’’” Ugale recounted. “I did. I wasn’t there to cause a problem.”
In separate interviews, both women recounted how they talked to other election staffers outside the room for the next few minutes, explaining what had just happened during the training. They said two of the three election staffers they spoke with took Curtis’ side, saying that the allegations in Riverside were factual and that Curtis had a right to discuss them. The third election worker, Lively said, remained neutral.
Ugale said she has always been taught to be cordial to all voters and not to engage in political conversations. That’s an approach she believes Curtis should be taking too, she said, leading by example to model the behavior that every voter should expect at the polls.
“The county clerk and registrar of voters holds a position that is supposed to be non-partisan,” Ugale explained. “Rumor mongering should be beneath the dignity of that position.”
Yesterday, the other dismissed volunteer, Lively, said she was still feeling “wired up” about what happened. She explained that she signed up to work the polls for the first time last fall after Curtis was appointed, citing a civic duty to participate in free and fair elections where she can.
“I’ve been following local politics in the last several years since this whole question of election integrity came up,” Lively explained. “I’ve spoken before the board in the past but I thought I needed to do something rather than just say something and I thought being a poll worker was the best way to be part of the system.”
She explained why she believes Curtis’ comment about Riverside was inherently political, saying she sees the allegation as an attempt to nullify votes that were already certified by Riverside’s election official. She’s also aware that Curtis had been involved with the Riverside election activists behind the allegation, saying his comment was “in furtherance of his political belief that elections have been fraudulent.”
Curtis did not respond to a request for comment yesterday but Assistant Registrar of Voters Brent Turner responded to questions by phone, first denying that any poll workers were asked to leave the poll training at all, then claiming that Lively needed to leave because she was “a little aggressive” and “disruptive.”
“I think he was being respectful to the other poll workers who didn’t want to hear conversations about whether his remarks were political,” Turner said of Curtis’ decision to dismiss Lively, noting that he didn’t witness the incident firsthand but had discussed it with his boss.
“Clint does a good job. I think he’s likeable as a professor, as a teacher, to a lot of these folks here, to the grand majority and I hope if he’s rubbing some folks wrong that they don’t leave, that they stick it out and do their duties.”
He added that he believed Lively and Ugale were angry about Curtis’ decision to use paper poll pads rather than electronic ones during this election — although neither community member mentioned such a concern during interviews for this story. Turner also called a preference for the use of electronic poll pads a political opinion, while simultaneously claiming that Curtis’ comment about Riverside was apolitical.
“I can’t say that I find that to be political,” Turner said of the Riverside ballot discrepancy comment. “I think that he has reached conclusions and stood by observations where there is controversy.”
Jennifer Waltman attended an earlier poll training this week. She’s a long-time poll worker who’s held the role of poll inspector at previous elections, and said she was dismayed by the approach Curtis took during poll training this week.
Waltman expressed concern with several of his statements about voting equipment that provides access for those with disabilities, saying he seemed more concerned about not getting caught by disability advocates than with ensuring access for all voters. She also mentioned what she referred to as “flippant” comments by Curtis about accessible voting, noting that he seemed comfortable with leaving voters standing in line if they forgot their ballots at home.
Asked about Waltman’s claims regarding disability access, Turner called the comments “mud slinging,” telling a reporter that repeating those claims was “frankly below your level of journalism,” and emphasizing his belief that accessible voting equipment is rarely used but should still be available.
On the topic of wait times, Turner said that Shasta voters need to get more comfortable with standing in line to vote, saying Shasta’s speed is “amazing” compared to other parts of California. He said the department’s intention this election is to reduce wait times to no more than five minutes, and noted that there are workarounds to a verification process that left some voters disenfranchised last fall after Curtis decided to eliminate the use of electronic poll books.
Waltman also had another, more significant complaint about a new process Curtis laid out during her training that she believes could lead to voter fraud if followed. Waltman said Curtis instructed those in her cohort that when a voter seeks to surrender a vote by mail ballot to vote in person instead, the poll worker should allow the voter to keep the ballot and surrender the associated envelope.
The seasoned poll worker said the approach would allow voters to cast ballots twice, once in person at their assigned polling place with an in-person ballot provided by staff and again at another polling place where they could ask for a new envelope and cast their ballot along with others in the precinct box used for vote by mail ballots.
State election code specifically addresses this issue, stating that ballots surrendered by voters at polling places must be returned to the election office later by poll workers. California’s Secretary of State emphasized that last fall, in a memo sent to all election offices. The poll worker manual provided to Waltman at the training Curtis ran this week outlines a similar process, documenting that surrendered vote by mail ballots should be marked and placed in a secure location for return to the election office.
Waltman said she spoke up in the meeting, calling Curtis’ attention to the reality of how the approach he had just explained could be used to commit fraud. She said he responded by claiming that anyone who voted twice as a result would be “caught later” as a result of checks and balances at the election office.
By phone yesterday, Turner gave a similar response, saying he wasn’t certain of all the details of the poll place process, but was sure whatever steps were in place would ensure voter access.
“We allow everybody to do pretty much everything,” Turner said. “We don’t disenfranchise anyone.”
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Author
Comments (123)
Leave a comment
Related Articles
In run up to June primary, election official Clint Curtis faces ‘substantiated findings of managerial misconduct’
With the primary just five weeks away, Shasta supervisors have called a special meeting to discuss whether or not to censure Curtis after a substantiated investigation by the county.
Redding Police Chief Brian Barner announces September retirement
Barner has been chief of police for about three years and an RPD employee for 34.
Emotions run high at tense candidate forum featuring ROV hopefuls Clint Curtis and Joanna Francescut
Candidates responded to questions as basic as their willingness to comply with state and federal law while each claimed they were the person to maintain the public’s trust in the election process.
SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, April 28, 2026
9:00 AM
Board of Supervisors
R1
Discuss the conduct of the Clerk and Registrar of Voters, Clint Curtis and consider adopting a resolution of censure against Clint Curtis for substantiated findings of managerial misconduct following an investigation.
Wow, at least by my account, I see 16 comments made by Mr. Turner. Some of them posted during working hours, by the way. I guess now we know why Mr. Curtis hired Mr. Turner. Unfortunately, we the taxpayers are paying for his troubling behavior.
He likes to talk about “open source”. Yet, he does not seem to have an “open mind”.
If I were Brent Turner, I would be working on updating my resume right now. Just saying.
ATTN: Anyone who is interested in signing a formal legal declaration about their own personal experiences and observations working within the Shasta County Elections Office since the appointment of Clint Curtis, please contact us!
This includes but is not limited to CLINT CURTIS, BRENT TURNER, LAURA HOBBS, RICHARD GALLARDO, PATTY PLUMB, RONALD PLUMB, LORI BRIDGEFORD, etc…
This information is crucial to bring back honesty, integrity, and transparency to the Office of Elections. 530-203-6009
I am currently scheduled to work the polls this year as I have for the last several elections. I too found the training to be unnecessarily political and struggled with whether to stay or just leave. Previous trainings, not conducted by Mr. Curtis, have gone out of their way to maintain a non partisan atmosphere and honestly were far more informational. We can thank our county supervisors for this.
Mr. Turner, neither you nor Mr. Curtis are “security experts.” He’s a defense attorney who dabbled in software decades ago (whatever expertise he had in that field has long passed him by), and you’re a real estate guy.
.
Curtis came into the office selling hand-counting as the solution to alleged hacking that has never been proved. He was quickly slapped down by the state legislature.
.
You arrived as an advocate of open-source coding in voting machines. Your theory is apparently that open-source software makes them less vulnerable to hacking. It doesn’t—they can be hacked just like proprietary software. Open source does make the workings of the software running the machines more transparent, but the coding would be impossible for the mouth-breathers you and Curtis have recruited to understand, and I seriously doubt *you* have the expertise to read it and understand vulnerabilities yourself, or detect hacking, even if you claim to be a security expert. You’re not.
.
Regardless, you can’t lawfully get around the State of California’s requirement for using voting machines in a county with our number of voters, and you have not (and will not) get around the State’s voting machine certification process. Both of you have utterly failed to achieve your primary agendas.
.
What’s left? Replacing much of the ROV office’s staff with MAGA fabulists who truly believe that any election they lose is fixed. Hell, Patrick Jones—ultimately responsible for both of you being here—previously stated that his close *wins* were fixed. His reasoning was typically MAGA-stupid: “Everyone I talk to voted for me.”
.
And now, on top of replacing an ROV staff of trained workers with a gang of hair-on-fire partisan lackeys and loons, your boss is throwing overboard volunteer poll workers who object to his politicizing training sessions at the expense of actual training, while you defend him by spinning an unsubstantiated claim of a conspiracy to disrupt the trainings. You two have significantly eroded trust in the ROV’s office and our election process while claiming the opposite. Instead, it looks like you’ve gone out of your way to create a situation that makes it easier for MAGA loyalists to cheat on behalf of their favored candidates. I am *not* claiming that making it easier for them to cheat is your goal. I’m merely saying that you and Curtis have engineered a staff and work environment that makes it seem far more likely.
.
I look forward to seeing you two carpetbaggers sent packing. And if any of the morons Curtis has hired get caught cheating, I look forward to them spending serious time in state prison, like Tina Peters. That former Mesa County, CO ROV has about 5 more years to serve on a 9-year sentence. Convicted of state crimes, she can’t be pardoned by Orange Jesus, M.D. Watch your ass, Mr. Turner…it could happen to you.
Well we now are clear that you prefer proprietary corporate owned software to open source publicly controlled software . I have faith in the Scout’s readership that you are now considered disqualified from further adult conversation. Your position is ridiculous. Study up and report back
If burglars were planning a heist, what would they prefer:
1. Robbing a place where the security and floor plan was public info?
or
2. Robbing a place and the security and floor plans are unknown to them?
.
You’re ridiculous claim about open software would actually make it easier for voting systems to be hacked.
.
Furthermore, for the record, you are the person that the readers are not taking seriously. You have yet to provide any concrete, detailed facts. As one other commenter said, so far you have provided nothing but word salad.
Oh. It’s good to hear you know more about software security than all the world leading experts including NASA / The Air Force etc Ha ha. I’ll just rest here .. study up.
Yet you have not provided a single reason why open source software is better than proprietary. Not one.
Your whole argument boils down to “Trust me bro! This is what the experts say.”
In fact, to play your little game I’ll say this as rebuttal:
“There are world experts that I know personally who say that proprietary software will be more secure than open source software. WORLD EXPERTS. Go read some books and educate yourself on this Mr Turner. Heh, Me. Me. Me.
…oh and of course: ME.”
.
.
.
. Lastly….
MEEEEE
We the voters can solve this chaotic ROV problem. Vote for Joanna Franciscut Vote no on Measure B.Clint Curtis dislikes California let’s show him the way out .Back to Florida Good riddance
Again , coaching poll workers to disrupt election training systems and encouraging folks to lose confidence in public election and officials to the point of disruption is ill conceived at best. Those true to our democracy should turn down the temptation to disrupt as well as the temperature of their remarks
Your claim that the protest against your boss politicizing the training was the product of someone “coaching” volunteer poll workers to be disruptive is a claim that you pulled out of your rectal orifice. Pure shit from a bull.
.
Prove me wrong. Cough up the evidence. Let’s see it. (I don’t think any of us are going to hold our breath.)
Well, Mr. Turner, again, like the true Trumpian – Cutis sycophant you are, you are gasslitine, spinning misinformation, unfounded allegations, and extremist propaganda for your boss, who has openly been sanctioned by the Shasta County Board of Supervisors for violating the U.S. Constitution, who has used his office for far-right-extreamist partisan electoral political events as covered in Newsmax, who, by the way, had to pay out $67 million to settle a lawsuit after for spreading lies about voting equipment and lies about Trump’s 2020 election loss.
.
In fact, perhaps there’s an argument that you, your boss, and your Hobbesian cronies are using public office as a pretense to claim unfounded allegations are “Facts” that have been resoundly judged as rubish by the courts and the Shasta County Grand Jury, and using your office to retaliate against people who will not submit and accept your BIG LIE opinions as state-sanctioned “facts.” Shame on you. The people of Shasta County deserve so much better.
So one just needs to check their First Amendment rights at the door and remain silent during Clint’s political conspiracy theory indoctrination? Really Brent?
If one has energy to spend for the sake of the union it should be put toward upgrading systems To pretend that the current generation of proprietary corporate owned software tabulators are acceptable is misleading and misguided. Clint’s band aids to the current flawed systems are necessary and applauded by the grand majority of both democrats and republicans. It is unfortunate that people focus on his going shirtless to move furniture rather than his astute remedies.
As a lifelong Democratic Party leader my work is supported by most ALL high ranking Democrats and surprisingly many Republicans as well I am confused by anyone not supporting open source software : paper ballot systems and hope the Shasta BOS demands them soon !
Open source. Where anyone can view and manipulate its code? I believe Mr Curtis has bragged endlessly about his ability to flip votes. Is that why he supports it? I can’t understand it. Controlling the vote outcomes to suit whomever anyone wants to. Who knows maybe good somewhere,, not ever in election software. Integrity must be maintained. It seemed rather shocking that any election official, or any government official supports it. Perhaps it and its risks are not understood. Here is a link. It may be too long and/or technical for some.
https://owasp.org/www-project-open-source-software-top-10/
Joyce- Now we are getting somewhere. Finally we come to the ” fork in the road ” where the Real Activists get separated from the rest. Please watch the Real Activist https://therealactivistmovie.com/
Per the CIA – those opposing open source elections are particularly dangerous in their blocking of it’s application for best voting practices. Microsoft and other Silicon Valley lobbyists have joined your team in the blocking of the technology but your team loses the security argument time and time again.
Even your pal Christian had to admit defeat regarding this issue as most all computer scientists agree the dissemination of the upgraded open source / paper ballot systems is a crucial upgrade to the current proprietary systems. Obviously you have no foundation in election security or you would know this. Please study up and let’s chat again. BTW- The CA Dem party – and Christine Pelosi – alobg with me put this in our state platform — Thoughts ?
I am unable to reply to the comment below to me about open software. I believe for full disclosure you might wanted to add that The Real Activist is a 2021 documentary about you and your fight for open software. I do believe it represents your views and activities about the subject as well as the inclusion of comments and opinions of people, including specialists in the applicable fields. I would expect no less from a story about of one’s own life when they believe passionately about something.
The point in your documentary and your concerns about computer safety is well placed and there is strong support for it. Your information about open source software as it is used globally and for computers appears to be accurate on many levels and it requires a lot of controls and maintenance and security on itself. That is important. I’m not even sure why it came up in this post.
However
I just went down a Google search, opening up each one as I went down the page, regardless of source and in 20 articles did not find one which called a ballot scanner a computer. This included several dictionary definitions. They nearly consistently call it a machine.
Any comparison where it is agreed upon that security might be improved by switching election processing from computer to hand ballots in Shasta is not relevant. We already do this.
As it relates to Shasta county, we do not vote by computer. We have a paper ballot which is filled out by individual humans directly on paper, selections read by a ballot scanner, i.e. tabulator, and hand counted in our election process in Shasta County at whatever level it is considered necessary be it a 3% test of accuracy or 100%. The hand count is reconciled to the machine count. The ballot scanner is not a computer and is not connected to the internet. We use a machine that counts dots on a piece of paper, like hand counting. Like using a calculator. Just faster. All votes remain in house on one system.
We do not use computers, like many countries do, where an individual makes their choice on a touch screen which is then sent through the internet to their central computer. This kind of computer election software needs a lot of tests to maintain integrity.
As relates to using ballot counters and their ability to be manipulated, I am not sure how anyone can “program” a tabulator to flip or not flip, count or not count a vote, or double count a vote. Even the Hoover Institute does not support the claims made about machine tallied/computer fraud:
https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/research/docs/Common%20Myths%20of%20American%20Elections.pdf
Mr. Turner you seem to be concerned with corporate designed computer software. I understand that, but a tabulator is not a computer and it would require a corporate designed and made tabulators for every jurisdiction across the country where they would have to know in advance what elections or measures are on the ballot and how they want them manipulated or not. There can be no universal tripping “lever” on all machines to allow this or that individual vote to be changed. Or perhaps the corporation would have to let the jurisdiction know how it can manipulate the tabulator. I am not sure how many corporations would do any of that knowing it was meant for election fraud.
In fact I suggest that a corporate designed ballot counter is actually harder to manipulate and is more neutral and less likely to be able to flip any direction. They count and are issue neutral. I believe the ability to read the ballot and to choose which race or measure to “fix” an election and then manipulate the “software” would have to be built in house where there is great risk of fraud. In house knowledge and access to the tabulators individual workings would be needed. Since hand count only ballots have unquestionably been proved to be considerably less accurate I am not sure why this issue is even brought up.
I can agree with the serious issue you bring up about open software, just not here.
Who the heck is “my pal Christian”.
You want to talk about credibility? Demonstrate that you have some.
.
Prove your claims.
.
Go on, now. Provide the slightest bit of proof for your claims.
Since I appear to be one of the “disrupters” you have repeatedly referred to, I am really sick of your disparaging me. You are blatantly lying about me and what occurred at the meeting that you were not party to. Your assertion that I was being coached or was in any way part of a planned disruption by myself or in collusion with others is disgusting. You are casting dispersions upon my character let alone based on something you know absolutely nothing about.
You need to stop this. If you want to lie about the election training you leave me and anything you think I did out of it.
You want to say anything? Speak to the real issue at heart which was Curtis’ involvement in a politically motivated election denier movement led by right wing organizations in Riverside County. Mr. Curtis insists that this big election fraud case is a fact inspite of its certification and audit. He insisted this “fact” at a nonpartisan event. If you want to see what your boss is actually doing at trainings read the replies attached to this article. He has made his involvement in Riverside Co and the support for those claims of election fraud and Riverside Sheriff Bianco’s seizure of 650,000 ballots very public. If you want to say anything discuss why this was OK.
Speak to the facts not your diversion from them.
the only political operative is you and clint who have done everything you can to interfere with a fair election backing a measure that is clearly illegal wasting money on a camera system that didn’t work we can’t trust you
Thank you
I am tired of this blaming right vs left. This is right vs wrong. There are many Republicans in Shasta County who are concerned with what is happening at the ROV office. We need to all use our critical thinking skills outside of our political stands and wonder, what is the best thing for the voters of Shasta County.
I contacted Shasta Scout because I left my poll worker training with major concerns about how things were being run. Multiple people have voiced similar concerns to me, including people who were new poll workers who left the training unsure if they can do the job on election day due to lack of clarity in the training. Even as a veteran poll worker I felt unprepared, as the instructions given by Mr Curtis didn’t always align with the manual they handed us.
I’m also concerned about the potential for fraud with the process as he explained it. He eliminated Poll Pads for security, then set up a process that can be bypassed.
Thank you
I would love to talk to you in order to get what you personally observed, and heard to get it on an official declaration. I have spoken to Joyce. Are you interested? Honesty, integrity, and transparency need to return to the elections office.
I am not sure who is asking to speak with me, but if you provide your name and contact information, I would be happy to talk.
My wife and I were also very dismayed over our poll worker training. He made several references about how previous elections were not run correctly in Shasta County. He also referenced the Riverside election as an example of how elections are not safe and accurate.
Curtis was so inept at being able to use the laptop and Word that our training ran long and the next class was waiting for us to come out. If this was an example of his planning and execution then we are in trouble. Needless to say we left very disappointed.
Joe, could you please contact me at +15303557308 or ThePRALady@gmail.com? I am working on a complaint to the State and would like to capture some of your experience.
I have seen multiple instances in public as well as in email exchanges which illustrate how limited Clint Curtis’ computer skills are, even in the most basic of programs, such as Word, Outlook, and more concerning, State Elections programs. This is so curious to me since one of the lynch pins which secured his appointment to this position was his claims of being a “computer programmer”.
Thank you
I was a volunteer poll worker for the first time in the November 2024 election. I refuse to work again as long as Clint Curtis (and his supporters) are in the ROV’s office. I don’t trust him nor some of the people he has selected to work in his office. It appears that I was right to be fearful that he would be training others to do something illegal – i.e. voting with mail-in ballots and envelopes. The audacity to make things inaccessible for disabled, or longer, more cumbersome for all voters is despicable. We voters all saw how long it took Curtis to deal with the last election, which was relatively simple – considering there was only 1 (maybe 2, if you were in City of Redding) item to vote on. This election will be complex. Curtis can not handle it (we’ve seen it!). We need the State of California to run our election to be fair, accessible, and accurate.
It surprises me that’s so many see the pursuit of fair and transparent elections as a partisan issue. To me that’s very telling of where the problem lies.
Clint Curtis has made this a partisan issue to a most toxic degree.
Sir, stop your gaslighting. Just because a citizen disagrees with your assessment of what constitutes “fair and transparent elections” and how to conduct them does not, for one second, mean we don’t! In fact, the Shasta County Courts have found you, sir, to be wrong. Multiple lawsuits filed by Hobbs and you have resulted in findings of NO wrongdoing by any of your perceived enemies of “fair and transparent elections” at all! NONE.
.
In fact, the Shasta County Grand Jury twice found no evidence of election fraud, no evidence of illegal ballot handling, and no evidence that the Registrar of Voters or the Assistant Registrars of Voters at the time manipulated vote counts… period, case closed. But, Sir, here’s what I have found:
.
Let alone the social division, the Hobbs/Ladd and the so-called “Shasta Election Task Force” have cost Shasta County TAXPAYERS and the county a ton of money and staff resources; all flushed down the Clint Curtis – L. Hobbs – D. Ladd – Trumpian BIG LIE Propaganda Toilet. Meanwhile, our county is going broke, and tomorrow the supervisors will start cutting the most basic payments to the most vulnerable and needy, the hungry and poor struggling citizens of this county. Very soon, the county will be facing a massive, unheard-of debt that could very well bankrupt us because of Trump’s Big Ugly Bill.
.
Sir, I implore you: stop the Trumpian Big Lies and the illegal activity called Measure B and start caring for the kids, working families, and older folks on fixed incomes.
Well said Christian! You will get nothing but crickets from Ladd. He knows we’re not buying what he is selling.
Thank you
Mr. Ladd… why are you ok with Curtis breaking the law?
He will lose this election . The guy is insane !
Thank you
I am a long time poll worker. Clint Curtis is ruining Shasta Co. elections. Vote JoAnna in!
Bill,please describe to me how Clint Curtis is ruining our elections.
Multiple compliance issues, poor training, deviation from best practices, not utilizing experienced staff, creating a toxic, partisan atmosphere, creating a hostile work environment in his office, the list goes on.
Well Nick, let’s start with the elimination of electronic poll pads which caused long waits for voters to vote in person. Then there is the elimination of most of the drop boxes which directly impacts voters in rural areas. Add in his infusing poll worker training with unsubstantiated claims of malfeasance by election office staff here and elsewhere. I could go on, but you know all about Clint’s clear desire to disenfranchise voters and reduce voter turnout.
Thank you
There are some who claim the issue in Riverside County does not represent a political activity. Here are a few descriptions of voting:
https://www.utc.edu/sites/default/files/2021-01/crcmloganappendix2%20%281%29.pdf. Abstract from university of Tennessee
“ Voting is the most prominent form of political participation, a method by which people interact with government”.
My addition: If it is a political process, activity surrounding it and including a challenge to its outcome and process is inherently political, a which everyone has a right to do. The outcome of such a challenge has a political aspect on our representation be it for an elected official, a law or public policy as it can effect the results of the vote. We call our elected officials politicians for a reason.
Actually I could go on and on with links but it is an easy question to google.
Thank you
Based on this article I have quit as a polling place Inspector- prior to being subject to Curtis’s electioneering. I would not have been as polite of retrained had I been in the room.
Thank you. It is sad we lost another poll worker. I wish I was not dismissed. I look forward to doing it in the future and I hope you do to.
Greg please rethink quitting as inspector. We need to keep all of the honest people we can in these positions. It may be frustrating but without your oversight things could get worse.
The State needs to step in and take over this election. Hopefully someone is keeping them abreast of what is happening in Shasta County.
Yes many people are watching and reporting their experiences.
If the description as reported by the three poll workers is correct, I would advise a quick consultation with an attorney to see if laws and civil rights were broken. But it would be consistent with the established extremist behaviors of the C. Curtis, P. Jones, K. Crye, and the Hobbs clan supporters, who use retribution, retaliation, ignorance, proven-in-local, district and national court lies, and propaganda as “facts” as tools to harm and force Shasta County into submission, at a great social and economic cost to all Shasta County taxpayers.
.
There is now lots of PRA documentation showing Cutris has held discussions about elections with the FBI in Roseville, CA (at Shasta County taxpayer expense), has sent Trump and DOJ Maureen S. Riordan (past Acting Voting Section Chief of Trump’s DOJ) a long list of unsubstantiated and proven in court to be lies and unsubstantiated allegations he claims are “facts” about so-called election fraud committed by his political opponent and about T. Toller, all to amplify and promote false claims that the election was stolen and rigged here in Shasta County. And now, Curtis smiles and demands that personnel at the Shasta County ROV office must accept his lies as facts, or you’re fired. Let’s go back to Riverside.
.
Reported in the L.A. Times, far-right extremist/activist Curtis went to Riverside County to work with a citizen group of election conspiracists and promote claims about ballot fraud and discrepancies, publicly amplify those claims, and help plan an investigation, resulting in extreme far-right Sheriff Bianco seizing 650,000 ballots and election materials from the Registrar of Voters to “investigate.” It’s also in Riverside that Curtis publicly called Shasta County Supervisors “Idiots,” for not following his orders, and, being the grandstanding activist that he is, Curtis was one of the first to announce far and wide that the ballots had been sized, even before the Riverside sheriff! Of course, Curits had to go to Riverside, as he and Hobbs just can’t seem to get Sheriff Jhoneson to seize our ballots.
.
No, Hobbs and Curtis aren’t judges and have NO Standing at this time to represent truth or their lies in court, but they have the right to their opinions. The reality is that the California Supreme Court has halted the Riverside, Curtis / Sheriff Bianco ballot seizures. Unsealing the records shows no legally relevant evidence of fraud in the warrant materials, and, as Riverside election officials had said all along, the claim was false. The most likely outcome is that the seizure will be ruled unlawful, strengthening state control and California’s election law.
.
Next up? Awaiting in the wings is the Curtis / Hobbs Measure B. Talk about chaos and great social and economic cost to all Shasta County taxpayers!
Since I don’t believe any of us can afford an attorney I am hoping that the Board of Supervisors and our county attorney will be taking a look at this. They have had many oversight discussions with Mr Curtis and he has been the focus of many BOS meeting. He has also been extremely public with his views and opinions. These claims need to have an independent nonpartisan look into the facts. As I know my facts are true and substantiated it is only fair that they, as well as all such claims, be investigated.
Joyce Lively, the current Board will do nothing. Kevin Crye is the reason we have Clint Curtis. Until the balance of power changes on the board, all aspects of the County will continue to go downhill.
Christian, please stop with your anti-Trump. This is a local issue. Your attitude towards Republicans loses you an audience. Brent is a Democrat. Many Republicans are tired of the issues of this County. Instead of the continued name calling, bring in facts. The facts are, as a long time poll worker, I saw what happened last election. Based on the training I received last week, I have concerns about this upcoming election. I can do all that without bringing Right vs Left into the mix. Facts not emotions.
It appears there may be a political operation by those aligned with opponents of the current registrar to cause disruption of the poll worker training process. Sending folks predisposed toward disrupting classes is a gray area but the classes have been very well received by the grand majority of poll workers.
The training classes have been applauded by the students and even this particular incident was acknowledged and applauded by the rest of the class. If in fact people are implementing political strategy by planning disrupting tactics like this it may create a Shasta Scout story but will not impede the functionality of the election.
LMAO
.
A political operation, eh?
.
You give yourself too much credit, Mr t.
.
No one cares about you that much to sit up some weird political cooperation like you say.
.
Sounds like some more weird conspiracy nonsense. But why would we expect anything else?
.
Maybe there are more people that can see through your bullshit than you realize.
.
But again I fully encourage you to make more comments and just reveal yourself to the public at large. Keep going!
I applaud your reply to Mr. T. Hoping that you’re correct that more people than are apparent see through the conspiracy of the BOS majority, the ROV and their partners, who believe that only certain people should have the right to vote. Meaning, the rich, property owners and those wearing red hats, who are working to take control of the country, ignoring the electorate.
Brent brays: “ It appears there may be a political operation by those aligned with opponents of the current registrar to cause disruption of the poll worker training process.”
.
It’s always paranoid, delusional conspiracy theories with you MAGA twits. Didn’t anyone read “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” to you people when you were kids?
.
Your conspiracy theories are tiresome to anyone with half a brain. But that’s the thing, right? Your audience that you’re pandering to with this bullshit are a bunch of mouth-breathing half-wits.
Well, now, Brunt, that’s your side of the story. But no matter how you spin it, your boss tried to illegally bar Shasta Scout from receiving any official “press” information, claiming that Scout was part of the, as Kivin Crye and his far-right extremists say, “Fake News.” Clint’s example of belligerence was a clear violation of the United States Constitution, yet fully aligned with the belligerence of Trumpism.
.
But, like possibly censoring and possibly violating the rights of workers down in your office, violating the First Amendment is a Bridge Too Far, even for the conservative supervisors of Shasta County. Clint’s infraction of the U.S. Constitution is why the leader you have been disposed to cover for was publicly and officially sanctioned by the Shasta County Board of Supervisors; even the board understood that your boss (like he is trying to do with his adment advocation for Measure B.) put the county at great legal risk.
.
Brent, it seems your boss is openly and proudly a partisan far-right extremist who seems to think he’s KING OF THE ROV HILL here in Shasta County, and, Brent, just perhaps, we’re getting tired of all the public extremist and controversial hackery down at your office. Maybe it’s time to take all the contentious partisan politics out of the official doctrine of your office and put non-partisan, friendly, and, yes, most important, legal back service in?
Brent,
Poll Worker training is an observable activity under California law. It is the intention of some local citizens to do just that— observe.
And you know, providing transparency is the cornerstone of Clint’s campaign gobbledygook. There is an expectation from the public that your office will follow the law.
Bud, there’s a reason so many negative experiences involving your boss and friend have come out. Things he owns up to, but argues semantics. He’s the common denominator. That should tell you something. Either you’re delusional, foolish, or lying through your teeth. Regardless which of the three it is, I give you credit by saying I think you truly believe what you are saying. You hero-worship the guy. But maybe you should open your ears to both positive and negative feedback, and act without attitude in response. You know, like an unbiased public servant would.
And to further clarify, there are people in the community, irrespective of their political leanings, wish to observe the poll worker training process because with 1/3 to 1/2 of the trainings complete, there are a lot of questions, and a whole lot of concerns. No one is making this a partisan issue except you, Clint, and your acolytes.
Mr. Turner, It is extremely hard to be plant and planned disruptor when, as in this case, I had no clue Mr. Curtis would be the trainer. When I went into the meeting and he was at the front I assumed he was there to welcome us, thank us for participation and introduce the trainer. Instead he started to conduct the training himself. I am not aligned with any political organization and was a poll worker last year while Mr. Curtis was ROV. No political discussions happened at last year’s training.
It was he who brought up the issue of the 45,000 vote discrepancy in Riverside County as an example of some poll worker position being able to prevent it. It is a nationally reported issue and Mr Curtis has publically touted his involvement. Charges in the assertions have not yet been found to have any basis. The State Supreme Court has put a temporary halt to the seizure of some 650,000 ballots in the county and Mr. Curtis was involved in the discussions about what to do to investigate this situation. As I have said, he made no secret of it.
It so happens that I follow the news which is why I knew he was bringing up unsubstantiated claims about that election and that he called the claim as a fact. It was at that time I raised the objection to his inclusion of this subject in a nonpartisan poll worker trainer. It is a highly charged political issue and not an appropriate part of any election process. I am glad other poll workers were happy with the training but I think you can read these replies to gauge that not all were pleased and for different reasons.
As his assistant I am pleased to see your support for your boss, but you have no first hand information or other information about my desire to continue being a poll worker and to ensure a safe and free election separate from the political beliefs of any participant.
This is the time, after reading about Curtis basically politicizing his poll workers, undoubtedly by bringing up situations that are hot topics, that we need to write en masse to Shirley Weber. Plus she needs to know about this new wrinkle of the possibility of double voting. I do not trust him with a fair result. Why? Because he continually violates his oath of non partisanship. In California that is covered by these rules:
“Oath of Duty: The official oath requires them to “well and faithfully discharge” their duties. In the context of election administration, this means ensuring fair, accurate, and nonpartisan election processes.
Prohibition on Partisan Activities: While in their official capacity or on duty, ROVs and their staff are generally prohibited from using their authority to advocate for or against political candidates or issues.”
It could not be more clear. Mr. Curtis is clearly weeding out of his poll workers of those persons who are on to him, will question his dubious practices, and will not be intimidated. In other words, he only wants loyalists. Why is he doing this? That is the question that is the most bothersome. What is trying to achieve by getting rid of people who know the rules of running an election, and are challenging him?
The state needs to step in. Now. We need a movement. We need to march to Shirley Weber’s office and get her attention on this. We cannot let this man run this election when so much is at stake. He violates basic rules. He fudged the law on signatures to find a “loophole” to get that illegal Measure B on the ballot. This is not an ethical person, and quite frankly, I do not want him or his election deniers anywhere near my ballot!
FYI – We are in constant contact and communication with the SOS office and in lockstep with their directives. Dr Weber and crew have always been responsive and supportive
Brent,
Your office’s emails say otherwise. Also, there is an email thread where you yourself appear to have attempted to stonewall providing the memo explaining the county’s election procedure by involving Secretary of State staff, hoping they might tell you not to share it.
Yes, the SOS office has been very open about its communications with this office and its concerns that election procedures have been recommended that are in violation of state law as well as other issues. I am very sure, as Mr. Turner says, they have been in constant contact and communication with the SOS office and has had to be told what state election laws were and that the ROV office must comply with them. Again, this is public record.
Thank you
I have poll worker training coming up soon. I was already concerned when told Curtis is the trainer. Last November, he left the training to an experienced staff member. Why is he now doing the training instead? Is there an ulterior motive? Is it so that he can train workers wrong? And what are they supposed to do when what Curtis tells them conflicts with the manual provided by the Secretary of State? Like the discrepancy with with the surrendered ballots? If that happens at the polling place, one worker might say “Curtis said do x” and another worker say, “the Secretary of State says that’s not what you do”, how is that resolved? This is not ok. We need intervention from the state.
Thank you
I would love to hear how your experience goes, as I am compiling information about this process for the public and to forward to appropriate agencies. Feel free to email me at ThePRALady@gmail.com
Thank you and good luck in pursuing getting all public records on this as well as any other issue of concern.
I don’t trust that guy, since day one he has struck me as a little bit on the shady side.
I was not in that training session, but I was in another last week. Mr. Curtis also mentioned the purported Riverside discrepancy, along with a variety of other supposed problems with electronics. He gave a demonstration of his new video system, which seems like overkill but isn’t a problem. He did in passing through a few darts at past office administration.
After November’s election he blamed the poll-worker training and said he’d be fixing it. The new version honestly was just a lot less training. There was some, but it was about half the Clint Curtis show. He was friendly enough and I don’t mind him, but the actual training about what to do at polling places was much less thorough.
Don’t know why that came as a reply. Very sensitive phone or something.
I would be very interested in any feedback you would be willing to give, regarding how the training differed from the training manual, and any other things which may have caused you concern. Coinfidentiality ensured. ThePRALady@gmail.com
Thank you
Thank you
A few points deserve clarification
I did term the Riverside event non political ( although it has been politicized) as it is unfortunately a systems issue. The Riverside counts were likely off / loose and then it’s a matter of determining the extent of the discrepancy Btw – to acknowledge discrepancies does not make a person a “denier”or a particular party member. A discrepancy is simply noted and becomes part of the certification record.
Similarly I do not consider poll pads to be a political issue but rather a technological issue based in the security realm. People desiring poll pads exhibit a foundational misunderstanding of the election security equation. The United States can NOT afford to continue to degrade best security practices for clerk convenience at the direction of vendors and their software sales team’s tactics. We must all do the extra work necessary and not allow corporations to count our votes or control our poll management
This article is interesting as it shows an apparent predisposition against the current Registrar and toward his political opponents. It also might be viewed as biased and intended to undermine the county’s ability to obtain and retain poll workers.
Let’s all do better soon !!
.
.
Brent – “We must all do the extra work necessary…”
.
That’s funny, it’s not really a secret that you don’t even show up to work.
.
And why would anyone have a bias against the current ROV? Just because he has made partisan allegations and claims with NO proof whatsoever? Or maybe because he is actually making it easier for bad characters to actually vote twice?.
I can’t imagine why anyone wouldn’t want him as our ROV.
.
Btw, Mr T., I’m a dude who likes to speak truth to power. And that just so happens to be you right now. Truth can be painful sometimes.
That’s a laughable narrative about my work ethic as I not only work everyday without overtime but also work weekends for free and don’t bill the county for my allowed travel expense. During election season we all start working often unpaid extended hours. I realize some activists are attempting to track my physical whereabouts but as we have had death threats and car vandalism so this is a subject for another conversation. Obviously you are not aware of the inherent security risks in Shasta County. Previous election officials have been stalked etc
Regarding speaking truth to power – I have testified on numerous occasions in front of the California legislature and officials regarding taking corporate software out of public elections
You ?
The point is the Shasta voting system has gone from crappy to better than average. Toller and crew were deficient if you want upgraded security please come look at the new system !!
There’s always a drama queen. Mr Turner, your hubris is showing; your self-perceived “gotchas” are easily swatted away as laughable nothing-burgers. Curtis is a partisan political-hack and your defense of him lands you in the same category. Perhaps you could follow your own advice and do better; or maybe among your cohorts that’s “Be Best”.
Could you please provide the case numbers that correspond with any reports you made to authorities about death threats?
Brent bleats: “…(I) don’t bill the county for my allowed travel expense.”
.
So you admit you’re a carpetbagger, just like your boss. Looking forward to sending you two weasels packing.
.
And then he bleats this: “…we have had death threats and car vandalism so this is a subject for another conversation.”
.
Nah, Brent, let’s have the conversation now. Did you and your boss report the death threats to RPD and the CA DOJ and SOS? If not, why not? Are the death-threatening bad people in the room with us right now?
.
Dude, you are NOT a good liar.
LMAO, Mr t. is a terrible liar who doesn’t realize just how bad he is at it.
.
Great example of Dunning-Kruger effect happening in real life.
My travels referenced are to Sacramento and othe lr counties in election matters I don’t mind footing the bill ha ha To be clear – all death threats and vandalism has been reported to law enforcement. Thanks for your concern for your public officials and their safety – btw what is your real name ? Care to tell ??
Just a point of clarification. If a person is a salaried employee, fixed payment, there is no such thing as overtime and weekends. A salary position comes with the understanding that you are paid what you are paid to get the work done no matter what.
Where any company employs a person paid by the hour it is illegal for the company to not pay the employee at the legal rate for OT. Violating the labor laws and making the company (and the county) open to lawsuits by employees. It is imperative that any company, or employee, who observes any one not being paid for their time report it to the highest authority, usually HR.
An hourly employee is not allowed to “volunteer” to do something that is within the definition of the job requirements. Therefore, if someone’s job is to oversee an election they must report and get paid for any addition time they work overseeing the election. It is the supervisors and management jobs to insist upon it. Management is bared from asking or recommend that any hourly employee work for time unpaid.
Me. Turner I hope you do not see, and not report, any hourly employees not being paid.
Thank you
Hi Brent – I’m curious how or if you can respond to the following information regarding your chronic absenteeism.
Dear Shasta County Board of Supervisors –
I hope this note finds you all well – happy and healthy – as Shasta County launches into another glorious spring.
With respect, every one of you have promoted yourselves as fiscally conservative and with with a heart for what is best for Shasta County – including the use of public, taxpayer funds. Therefore, I expect that you’ll find the following information quite disheartening.
The following facts outline a deeply troubling pattern of conduct regarding the use of public resources and employee accountability within Shasta County government. Taken together, they raise serious concerns about oversight, transparency, and the responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars. According to public records, including Mr. Turner’s key card records.
– Assistant Registrar of Voters (ROV) Brent Turner was hired on June 15, 2025.
– Mr. Turner did not have county VPN set up on his laptop until February 3, 2026. This is 233 days after his hiring date, almost 8 months.
– In a time span of his 178 paid work days, the total days which can or likely be accounted for Mr. Turner being to work in-person: 67 days total. This is according to his key card records and access at both the Market Street and Court Street office locations.
– To put it another way, Mr. Turner has been present in the office 37.6% of the work days since he took on the role of Shasta County Assistant ROV, in a position that is NOT considered a remote position.
– Again, according to public records, despite Mr. Turner’s unfortunate health condition, he has also taken no vacation leave, sick leave, nor management/administrative leave afforded his position.
– Further, none of the information in the Shasta County Personnel Manual (Section 15 – Management Benefits), seem to apply to the kind of chronic absenteeism comprising Mr. Turner’s tenure to date.
– The pay range for this position is $93,312 to $119,100 annually, plus benefits. The low end of this would be $7,750/month gross pay, plus benefits.
– In short, Mr. Turner was paid for a total of 189 days (work days and holidays) by the taxpayers of Shasta County, when, in fact, he was only in the office a total of approximately 67 days, and has only had his VPN access to the office server for roughly six weeks.
For his roughly 10 months of employment, Shasta County has paid Mr. Turner MINIMALLY $77,500, plus benefits, for 67 in-person work days.
This is an egregious and indefensible misuse of taxpayer funds. Paying a six-figure public salary and benefits to an employee who has been physically present barely over a third of the time—without documented leave and without functional remote access for most of that period—reflects a complete breakdown of accountability. Taxpayers are being asked to subsidize what amounts to chronic nonperformance, and that is unacceptable.
Thank you for you opinion.
Voting is defined as a political process where people have an opportunity to affect public policy through their votes for or against government officials and laws. Our representatives are call politicians for a reason. I believe that any action taken for or against the outcome of an election is political by nature as it intends to affect the outcome of such election. Questioning its process could end up supporting or negating the results of an election. It is our right to protest any election or process. In Riverside County the election investigation is being led by the public and publicized activities of the elected official, Sheriff Bianco of Riverside County and at the request of several people involved in questioning the results of an election and its process. He is running for governor of CA as a Republican, a political organization by definition. The position of governor of a state is the highest political office in a state.
In this situation a political activity was brought up while carrying out a what is supposed to be a nonpartisan activity by election law
84% of jurisdictions nationally use electronic poll pads. The HAVA encourages usage of them to reduce fraud and reduce wait times for voters. Clint is taking a step backwards in time by eliminating them. Combined with his decision to eliminate the majority of drop boxes, it is pretty clear Curtis couldn’t care less about maintaining or increasing voter turnout, instead doing what he can to reduce it. Curtis is a partisan hack, endorsed by partisan groups. If he keeps up his overt partisan antics during poll worker training, it could lead to a shortage of poll workers come June. No citizen volunteer should be thrown out because they call him out for injecting his personal politics into what should be an apolitical training course. Clearly Clint is disenfranchising voters with his voter suppression policies.
Thank you
Recruiting and retaining poll workers would go much better for the department if the entire training process was communicated to the public in a way that ensured confidence in the entire process. Neither you nor Clint posses the level of experience necessary to engender that kind of confidence, and you have sidelined all the employees in the department who do.
Posting your mad rants in the comment section of a local news outlet is also not helping the cause.
TURNING CONTROVERSY INTO A CASE FOR REFORM IN SHASTA COUNTY’S ELECTIONS OFFICE
Moments of controversy in public administration often create a clear choice: amplify division or elevate standards. The recent report involving a poll-worker training session—where questions about political commentary and the dismissal of a volunteer have drawn public concern—presents such a moment for Shasta County. For a candidate seeking to lead the elections office, the opportunity is not to assign blame, but to articulate a higher standard of neutrality, legality, and professionalism grounded in the California Elections Code and long-standing principles of administrative law.
FOR JOANNA FRANCESCUT, THE STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE LIES IN FRAMING THE ISSUE AS ONE OF INSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS RATHER THAN INDIVIDUAL FAULT. Election administration is a ministerial function, not a platform for advocacy. By emphasizing the statutory requirement that training, procedures, and communications remain non-partisan and compliant with the Political Reform Act, she can position her campaign around process integrity—a message that resonates across political lines and avoids the legal risks associated with personal accusations.
The incident also highlights the importance of procedural fairness. When a participant in a government-run training raises a concern and is removed, even if for legitimate reasons, the situation invites scrutiny under principles akin to viewpoint neutrality and due process. JOANNA CAN RESPONSIBLY ACKNOWLEDGE THIS SENSITIVITY AND ADVOCATE FOR CLEAR, WRITTEN PROTOCOLS GOVERNING TRAINING CONDUCT, DISPUTE RESOLUTION, AND PARTICIPANT RIGHTS—THEREBY DEMONSTRATING A COMMITMENT TO BOTH ORDER AND FAIRNESS WITHOUT PRESUMING ANY VIOLATION OCCURRED.
From a governance perspective, this is an opening to advance a broader reform agenda. MRS. FRANCESCUT COULD PROPOSE STANDARDIZED TRAINING CURRICULA, MANDATORY COMPLIANCE BRIEFINGS ON ELECTION LAW, AND INTERNAL AUDIT MECHANISMS TO ENSURE ADHERENCE TO NEUTRALITY REQUIREMENTS. Coordinating such reforms with the Shasta County Board of Supervisors would further reinforce transparency and separation of powers, ensuring that any improvements are institutionally anchored rather than personality-driven.
Politically, the advantage is subtle but powerful: by refusing to engage in rhetoric and instead offering specific, legally grounded solutions, FRANCESCUT DISTINGUISHES HERSELF AS A CANDIDATE FOCUSED ON COMPETENCE AND STABILITY. Voters concerned about election integrity are often less interested in conflict than in predictability, compliance, and trustworthiness. A platform centered on codified procedures, training standards, and accountability mechanisms speaks directly to those concerns.
Ultimately, the lesson of this incident is not about a single training session, but about the expectations placed on an office that safeguards democratic processes. BY ADDRESSING THE ISSUE THROUGH THE LENS OF LAW, POLICY, AND INSTITUTIONAL REFORM, JOANNA FRANCESCUT CAN CONVERT CONTROVERSY INTO CREDIBILITY. In doing so, she would not only strengthen her candidacy but also advance the broader goal that should guide any elections official: an administration that is demonstrably neutral, legally sound, and worthy of public trust.
Please, Brent. Stop.
.
You aren’t nearly as clever as you think. You give yourself away in your effort to be incognito.
Yo Jolly –
I do, however, use my real name and stand by my words
Ah… confession. How sweet.
.
And is that the best you got? You don’t think I’m using my real name so therefore I must not have valid points? Lol, what a great rebuttal sir!!!
.
Newsflash: My name is Jolly Roger, and that is what I post under.
.
Now my middle name is a different matter, I don’t care for it and I will not be sharing what that is. So yep, I guess I’ll just keep hiding my middle name.
Thank you
Also note in the next to last paragraph Mr Turner acknowledge he did not know details of the poll place processes. Isn’t he the man who is supposed to step up if Mr. Curtis is not able to fulfill his functions running the election?
Mary, mother of God, please STFU.
.
You’re as big a grifter as Curtis….maybe bigger, since he apparently shows up for work. This is the least transparent, least coherent, and least lawful ROV’s office in the history of the institution. It’s a travesty built on a foundation of paranoid fabulism and hallucinations.
.
It’s clear from the reports of the training sessions that Curtis is dropping the ball once again—recycling political conspiracies in favor of providing actual training. If the state has to step in to clean up the mess, it’ll be just another Shastanistan humiliation fomented by you MAGA mental midgets.
So according to this, anyone who votes in person at one polling location only has to turn in their vote by mail envelope as Curtis has instructed in trainings and verified by news interview response and they can then go to a different polling location, ask for an envelope and submit the mail-in ballot, thus submitting two ballots for one election. 🗳️ If this scenario occurs, both incompetentCurtis and his bumbling assistant Liam thus will be “caught later” as a result of the checks and balances. How are these checks and balances any different now than before with regard to the unsubstantiated and ridiculous concerns about sending mail-in@ ballots and allowing voters the option of using the mail in ballot or going to a poll center to cast their votes? His “new” approach allowing voters to keep their mail-in ballot seems ridiculous.
In the past I voted directly at the office with my ballot mailed to my house but did not bring the envelope When I checked in my signature was immediately compared to my signature on the computerized voting screen (pad?) which was in use at the time. At that time I was immediately recognized as having not voted yet. I mismarked my ballot and needed a new one all in view of the clerk checking me in as well as other poll volunteers in the room. I got a new one.
It was very simple, easy and fast.
Thank you
This is outrageous. He doesn’t have enough poll workers as it is. Alienating people at this point puts our entire election in jeopardy in Shasta County. Clint Curtis’ actions are not those of an experienced elections official who knows what he’s doing.
Thank you
Further, as a government official, it is a blatant violation of the 1st Amendment for Curtis to terminate a citizen’s voluntary participation in the election for the offence of voicing her opinion in a meeting.
.
These MAGA goons have zero respect for the U.S. Constitution. I wouldn’t trust them to bag groceries properly, let alone run an election.
Thank you. It is why both Janet and I were stunned. For Janet, it was an employee in the room who told her to leave if she agreed with me. It did feel like opponents were being culled from that meeting, at least those who spoke up.
It appears that folks supporting the current registrars opponent continue to attempt to disrupt the coming elections. This is inconsistent with their stated agenda of better elections. Thus they have rendered themselves possibly counter to the state of California and the United States. We must analyze further and take great action to stabilize Shasta county elections. This is a non-partisan issue. I am a lifelong democratic civil rights leader working my best to assist the current Registrar to administer a free and fair election. All folks interested should come down to the headquarters see the system and hopefully appreciate the upgrades.
Brent,
Your language reminds me of your “music”-bunch of screeching and drama but no substance. Sound and fury signifying nothing as it were. Your public posting is NOT helping your cause.
Leroy – thanks for your concern but I will take that risk of speaking out . From my work with the Southern Poverty Law Center – the Democratic Party – The National Organization of Women etc I’m sure you recognize my efforts behind the scenes. I know the politics and local cronyism of Shasta makes old friendships hard to break but you at least should now study next gen open source election systems as well as the current almost as secure proprietary Shasta system as an A/ B comparison
Again – this is non partisan work and real security experts meet in the middle regardless of politics
“It appears that folks supporting the current registrars (sic) opponent continue to attempt to disrupt the coming elections.”
.
Let’s see the goods for this malicious claim, Brent. Your just-so accusations aimed at your political opponent levied with zero evidence aren’t credible, but they do come off as paranoid, weak, and flaccid.
.
By the way, the only local people who have disrupted our elections in the past now work for you and Clint. They’re MAGA loons, and their direct participation has reduced confidence in the ROV’s office to hold fair and impartial elections.
Word salad. Means nothing.
.
This has actually worked for you before in the past?
“I’m sure you recognize my efforts behind the scenes”
No- I recognize nothing except your preternatural talent for running your yap.
” but you at least should now study next gen open source election systems as well as the current almost as secure proprietary Shasta system as an A/ B comparison”
I have- “next gen open source election systems ” is just a grift- a completely unnecessary solution to a non-existent problem and your ” almost as secure proprietary Shasta system” is just more of the same
Leroy. /. I have to call you on that one as it is the heart of our democracy. Your saying open source is a grift and we don’t need system upgrades is childlike. Please revise and educate up on the science here And keep it respectful
Please note the better systems are already deployed in other states and getting rave reviews. My real work has already succeeded !! Yours ?
“Your saying open source is a grift and we don’t need system upgrades is childlike. Please revise and educate up on the science here”
Please point to the problem that open source is solving. Please Identify where our voting system failed. please identify the “science” involved in open source voting systems- what are we talking here? Statistics? computer science? How is counting now a “Science”?
“Please note the better systems are already deployed in other states and getting rave reviews” Please identify how these systems are “Better”
“And keep it respectful”- A. respect is earned not given and you have certainly not earned it B. Your version of “Respect” in practice seems to be anything less than a hagiography of you and your so called “Accomplishments” is tarred as less than respectful
“My real work has already succeeded !! Yours ?” Ima have to give you this one you and your ilk have succeeded in jamming the ol blood funnel into multiple municipalities money trough while my work in keeping dimwits like you and clint out of government has failed
Former poll worker, I WILL NOT work with that man.
Thank you
Let us be reminded the previous election- the one conducted by Mr Curtis – went very well . There were no reportable issues as there were before his arrival
Case closed
There were only two items on the ballot…
You newbies were thrown into just about the easiest election possible.
.
And if there were no reportable issues when you guys ran it, how come there is so much reporting about it? 🤣
You sir, are an idiot.
Thank you
Just to clarify. BT is the idiot in this equation.
🤣
I swear BT is like the Energizer Bunny, he keeps going and going and going….
.
It’s like a train wreck happening in slow motion. You can watch in awestruck horror as it happens, but it can’t be stopped.
.
And the best part of all of this is that all of us “peasants” are being schooled by the gloriousness of BT and how he is the best thing since always, and how everything sucked before he happened along.
.
You can’t make this stuff up! 😂