Board won’t censure Shasta election official Clint Curtis despite investigation findings of threats of violence against staff
Two investigations have resulted in substantiated findings that the registrar of voters engaged in abusive conduct against staff. That conduct included violent threats, a county staffer said today, noting that a restraining order may be needed. The three supervisors who voted to appoint him last May were the same three who voted against censuring him. Two are running for reelection, along with Curtis, in an election he’ll oversee in June.
Shasta Board of Supervisors Chair Chris Kelstrom and Supervisors Kevin Crye and Corkey Harmon said they wouldn’t issue a vote of censure — essentially a formal rebuke — against Registrar of Voter Clint Curtis today.
The decision came after an account of substantiated findings against Curtis, shared by County Support Services Director Monica Fugitt during a special board meeting this morning. She said Curtis’ violent statements towards staff have included a threat to pull a staffer out of their office by their hair, as well as threats to slap or “throat punch” staffers.
Fugitt cited a preponderance of evidence documenting that Curtis has engaged in abusive conduct and retaliation, both of which violate county policy. She indicated that the latest report examining Curtis’ misconduct was done internally to ensure a speedy process given the seriousness of the accusation.
In a statement to the board Curtis denied any wrongdoing, accusing election staffers of attempting to sabotage the election.
Some supervisors and members of the public questioned the timing of the county’s findings, which come just weeks before the June primary in which Curtis, Crye and Kelstrom are all running to maintain their seats.
Fugitt explained that while investigations have been ongoing since last year, the most recent substantiated findings came in response to the threat to pull a staffer out of their office by their hair, something that was reported on March 27.
Crye said he was aware that the staffer impacted in that situation had asked personnel to drop the matter, speculating publicly that they’d probably laughed it off as Curtis’ attempt at a joke.
“I could just imagine the person rolling their eyes saying, ‘Oh, that guy’s ridiculous. Don’t worry about it. He doesn’t mean it,’” Crye said.
Supervisor Matt Plummer responded by pointing out that a request to drop an investigation into abuse is a common victim response to harm, saying the report also indicated that the staffer was shaking when they asked personnel to drop the matter. Supervisor Allen Long agreed — referencing his experience with victims as a former law enforcement officer.
“I was an investigator, criminal investigator, homicide investigator, sexual assault investigator, burglary investigator, and I know that people don’t come forward — because they’re intimidated,” Long said, emphasized the importance of standing behind staff, and saying a decision to respond to real threats of harm isn’t political.
“We need to go where the facts lead us, and we need to go where the truth leads us,” Long said, “and it has nothing to do … with a political motivation or a timing issue to say that we would not step in and try to protect employees.”
Advising that Curtis has already been put through remedial one-on-one supervisory training, Fugitt recommended the board censure Curtis while taking additional steps to protect employees.
“Given the pervasive, abusive conduct Curtis has exhibited towards staff, it is recommended that the board request Curtis separate himself from staff by working at a different physical location or remotely during the weeks leading up to and following the elections,” Fugitt said.
“When Curtis is required to be present to monitor elections processing,” she continued, “it is further recommended the board request a staff member, personnel or the county administrative office be physically present to facilitate communications with staff.
“Should Mr. Curtis’ behaviors continue, it may be necessary for the county to pursue a workplace restraining order to protect employees from continued harassment,” she said.
The majority of the board did not vote to take action on any of the recommendations. They follow two investigations, one that was conducted by an external firm and the other internally, by Fugitt.
A redacted version of the external investigation will be made public in the next 10-12 days, after supervisors voted unanimously to release attorney client privilege on the document, which was produced by Oppenheimer Investigations Group. The internal investigation findings are already releasable under California public record law and will also be made available soon, CEO David Rickert indicated.
Curtis spoke to supervisors during the meeting denying the investigative findings, accusing his campaign opponent of hacking into county computer systems and thanking the board for releasing the investigative report — which he said he needs in order to sue staff members who’ve reported him for defamation. He also asked for those staff to be moved to another department, repeating unverified claims that those hired before his tenure are engaging in active sabotage of the upcoming June election.
While he’s claimed previously that long-term staff are the cause of problems at the elections office, Fugitt indicated that Curtis has not taken the formal steps required to document such claims of employee misconduct, something that would be required for the county to investigate their veracity.
As board members discussed how to proceed, Crye took issue with the investigation as a whole, referring to the process as a “witch hunt” against Curtis. Harmon took a different tack, saying he couldn’t be sure if the investigatory findings were true in a statement that seems to imply a he-said-she-said dilemma despite the county’s substantiated findings. Kelstrom took the matter more seriously, saying that if even 10% of what’s described in the reports is true, Curtis deserves a formal censure, something Harmon chimed in to support.
Plummer pointed out that the board already rebuked Curtis for misconduct related to a violation of the press’ First Amendment rights last year, reminding his fellow supervisors that they had agreed to pursue censure against Curtis if he engaged in further misconduct. But rather than making a disciplinary decision one way or another, Crye, Kelstrom and Harmon voted instead to delay a discussion of censure until after the election, something both Plummer and Long firmly opposed.
Despite their decision not to censure him today, Kelstrom and Crye both admonished Curtis, with Crye repeatedly asking him to “stop with the jokes” and behave more professionally.
Forty-two public commenters spoke during the board meeting, including multiple members of election staff hired by Curtis since his appointment. Those who spoke in his support included Patty Plumb and Laura Hobbs, both election activists who have repeatedly spoken out against election staff over recent years.
Kelstrom struggled to retain control of the meeting during a number of vocal disruptions, directing two members of the public to leave the room. A third, Jenny O’Connell-Nowain, was arrested by a sheriff’s deputy for failing to leave the room after two instructions to do so by Kelstrom. This is her second arrest during a board meeting. She was convicted of meeting disruption earlier this year and served a short sentence on house arrest.
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Authors
Comments (80)
Leave a comment
Related Articles
County releases first investigation report documenting sustained findings against election official Clint Curtis
The document outlines a number of allegations, only some of which were sustained. Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis — who’s running to maintain his appointed position as county clerk — has denied the findings and says he’ll sue the county. A second investigative report with more serious findings is still pending release.
In a Soledad prison, a Shasta man facilitates discussion on the power of forgiveness
A Shasta County man currently incarcerated at a state prison in Soledad recently organized a speaking event in which survivors talked to inmates about how violence has impacted their lives. The event was held as part of National Crime Victims’ Rights Week.
New Redding city manager hopes to bring efficiency expertise to city’s bleak financial state
After an extensive hiring process, the city of Redding hired William Tarbox as the new city manager. He started about two months ago. But what are his intentions for the city? Shasta Scout sat down with him for an exclusive interview to answer this question.
Well Clint Curtis is a computer expert admitting he can write a code to flip elections https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7tjnuG-l6g
Is there a term for when people are SO into a political party that they start ignoring truth, morals, and right and wrong just so that their team will “win”?
.
The closest I can think of is “cult” or “brainwashing” because I just can’t fathom how a single soul trusts Clint Curtis or his good buddy.
I am a survivor and witness to the unlawful behavior and total dismissing of my rights by Joanna and Kathy. I am also a witness to the fact that they had basically thugs/bouncers watch me vote until I left the building. And all I wanted was to know that my mail and ballot was destroyed after handing me an in person ballot. They were very distraught about my request. I have personally been asked, and given a tour of Mr. Curtis’s transparent and highly efficient registrar of voter office! This is extremely political, regardless of what the socialist author has tried to provide otherwise. This county is a conservative red county and we’re not gonna put up with too much more of the bullshit from the left. Enough is enough already.
I’m sorry, did you say you were a survivor??
.
Like, really?
.
There were thugs who “watched” you vote until you left the building?… My God. The horror. The absolute horror.
.
Jon, you do realize that you have left comments on here several times that could be taken as yelling and screaming and generally not very peaceful? Is there not a possibility that if you were acting similarly to the way you post a comments, that they WOULD have security watching you?
.
Are you really hearing what you’re saying??
.
So was them watching you the violation of your rights?
.
I’m so confused. I’m not sure if this is satire or not.
Why am I not surprised. Proof of misconduct means nothing to these people.
Can we just ignore Brent Turner? He is dying for attention, so maybe leaving him in time out while he whines “heyyyy- pay attention to me!!!” would be better than taking the bait he keeps throwing out there.
Actually that’s probably some pretty good advice. He, and another commenter on here, remind me of children who didn’t receive enough attention I knew think negative attention is better than none at all.
Corkey Harmon is like the kid from the Checks cereal commercial Let’s get Corkey to vote for it, he votes for everything” Crye and Kelstrom approves! Total puppet who got on Board to approve his pet construction project in Palo Cedro!
That just tells me Crye, Kelstrom and Corkey need to go too. Isn’t it interesting that once again a woman being abused and threatened isn’t believed in our County maybe it’s time to have some women running for the supervisors jobs.
We now know that there has been substantiated misconduct toward employees in the ROV Office. By refusing to take the bull by the horns and to deal with it, the BOS is allowing that misconduct to continue. By their own neglect, they have become an obvious part of the problem.
It is understandable that a majority of the Board of Supervisors did not want to put a thumb on the scales of the upcoming election. On the other hand, the Board has served notice to all elected officials that they can safely misbehave any time an election is near at hand. And so, the band plays on.
In a good world, your concern about tipping the scales would be understandable. But we don’t live in a real world here in Shasta County, and the three Shasta County Board of Supervisors – supporters of Clint Cutris – simply threw the scales out the window to cover their candidates’ asses.
.
In fact, Crye, Kelstorm, and Corky just proved they care more about keeping Mr. Willful Misconduct Clint Curtis in office than they do about the law, county codes, protecting Shasta County employees, or Shasta County voters. As chair, Kelstorm turned the discussion listed as R-1, “substantiated evidence of willful misconduct,” which included abusive conduct toward employees, harassment, retaliation, retribution, workplace intimidation, threats of violence, and the use of the ROV office as a politically partisan MAGA (Trumpian) platform by Clint Curtis, into a 35-speaker Clint Curtis for ROV campaign commercial! How?
.
Kelstorm facilitated an orchestrated attack on the person their candidate, Clint Curtis, is running against, conducted and led by liars like P. Jones and L. Hobbs, who used unsubstantiated allegations that were proven to be lies by 2 Grand Juries and 2 Shasta County Superior Court cases! Again, they all claim the real reason for R-1 was not Clint Curtis but, in reality, his opponent! Funny, but I didn’t see anyone’s name other than Clint Curtis listed in the R-1 indictment. Did you?
.
Also, and this is important, as Crye and Kelstrom are up for reelection, they need to reinforce their MAGA credentials by supporting Clint Curtis’ willful lawlessness and chaos to keep the P. Jones, L. Hobbs Klan from going full Richard Gallardo.
Jenny O’Connell-Nowain is turning into a habitual offender. She just might have time to write her story.
Jenny needs help with her mental state. Her obvious hunger for the warmth of the spotlight is weird and off-putting. The disruptions are counter-productive, unless the only desired product is attention. I find comparison of her disruptions to civil rights-era protests as mildly repugnant. But mostly I just feel bad for her.
.
Feel free to tell me you all feel energized and inspired by her repeated interruptions of public meetings. I’m willing to be wrong.
Mr. Trump, a court-adjacent rapist and convicted 34-count felon, needs help with his mental state. His obvious hunger for the warmth of the spotlight is weird and off-putting. The disruptions are counterproductive unless the only desired product is attention. I find the comparison of his disruptions to civil rights-era protests mildly repugnant. But mostly I just feel bad for him.
I see what you did there.
.
Here’s the thing, though…there’s an argument to be made that Trump is extremely mentally ill. You could extend that argument to say that we should have compassion for him, owing to that. Hell, you could extend it further to say that free will is an illusion and that nobody on the planet is responsible for their behavior.
.
But I can’t go there. That’s in large part because I find Trump’s narcissism, paranoia, cruelty, selfishness, and stupidity to be repugnant. Maybe I should excuse all that because he’s damaged. But I have my own mental preconditions influencing my opinions, and I just can’t. I will rejoice if he dies in prison.
.
I don’t feel that way about Jenny. I don’t think she’s purposefully done anything horrible or highly contemptable. I just think she has delusions about the virtues and effectiveness of her methods. If she believes she’s accomplishing anything with these acts, she’s sadly mistaken. And if she knows that these stunts are counter-productive but does them anyway because she needs the attention, that’s all the sadder.
Trump, a convicted criminal may be clinically mentally ill but I don’t think he can use the insanity defense.
.
I know Jenny well. Jenny is not mentally ill and not an attention seeker like trump the pig is. Jenny is a bit overwhelmed by the 3 trumpian supervisors and our of a view that she simply needs to do something and with eyes wide open commits nonviolent civil disobedience that hurts no one and in fact could simply be ignored. In some ways Jenny is stronger in standing up to the local trump authoritarian want to be fascists then most.
.
But the far-right extremist chair, a compadre of Crye’s, friend of the white nationalist militia and of P. Jones has to prove he’s a big brave man and has her arrested. Pathetic.
Her disruptions are extremely mild when compared to the foul language, slander, defamation, fictional claims of crime being represented as actual fact. Her “protests” do nothing to influence critical thinking of what is being said. The other publicly harms individuals who do not share the same ideology and substitutes self-belief or conspiracy theory as critical fact to save Shasta from being taken over by immoral commies and pagans.
No counter-argument from me. The MAGA loons like Crye and Curtis who have infected our local government are orders-of-magnitude more delusional, offensive, and off-putting than Jenny. (On the other hand, I suspect Supervisor Kelstrom was expressing genuine concern when he reportedly asked, “Are you sure you want to do this, Jenny?”)
.
I look at Jenny’s behavior through this lens: Is it helping? Does it move the needle in our desired direction? Or is it counter-productive owing to how alienating it is? And in the end, is it harmful enough to Jenny and her loved-ones that the cost-benefit ratio is WAY upside-down?
.
On the benefit side of that ratio, I asked above for others to chime in if, unlike me, they feel inspired and energized by her tactics.
.
:::crickets chirping:::
I would bet money that these three were screaming to see the laptop during the 2020 pres campaign. Transparency is a slippery slope.
The supervisors’ unwillingness to act against Curtis shows their belief that Curtis can, and will, turn the election any way he wants it to go. He can get them re-elected or voted out, at his discretion.
File a complaint with the CA Secretary of State (elections) at: https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/election-voter-complaint-form
It should make the state watch the election here, and possibly take some action.
Complaints: Conflict of interest. Abusive behavior. Failure to uphold county policy.
What? Even though the Oppenheimer Investigations Group, a well-established premier investigations law firm specializing in impartial workplace investigations, and Shasta County’s thorough 7-month internal investigation by Support Services Director Monica Fugitt found legally substantiated evidence (objective proof, data, or information that validates, supports, or proves the truth of a claim, allegation, or statement) of willful misconduct, including Abusive Conduct Towards Employees, Harassment, Retaliation, and Workplace Intimidation, as well as a host of past controversies, including allegations of illegal campaigning on county time and excluding specific local media outlets (Shasta Scout) from First Amendment rights, Mr. Kelstrom, Crye, and Corky won’t censor? Of course not!
.
Mr. Kelstrom, Crye, and Corky are hardcore MAGA supporters of Trump and Clint Curtis. They put him in power to spread mistrust in democracy and elections and to propagate their avatar’s (a lying, immoral, court-adjudicated rapist and criminal convicted of 34 felonies) claims that he won 2020 and that unless he (Trump) takes over all elections and unless Measure B is passed, all elections are nothing but fraud and therefore can’t be trusted. And illegal activity is okay as long as Patrick Jones and Curtis say so. After all, both took a lie detector test! Morals, ethics, lawfulness, and support for Shasta County employees? Naw, all that’s just woke collateral damage in the quest for MAGA righteousness and domination.
.
During the meeting, Kelstrom, Crye, and Corky empowered Curtis and his supporters to flip the script of R-1 and assert that Curtis (the sole subject and focus of R-1) was not the problem at all! The problem was and still is Joanna Francescut, who was rejected by Curtis, Kelstrom, Crye, Corky, and their MAGA Posse Leaders, Jones and Hobbs! After all, Curtis says, Joanna (who was NOT the focus of R-1 at all and who’s been out of the office for a year) is still in control of the ROV office; in fact, she has instigated a rebellion against Curtis himself and even hacked the computers! After all, he’s an Honest Abe; he took a lie detector test and will sue her to prove it! Give Kelstrom, Crye, and Corky an A for gaslighting!
.
As in the United States of America, the danger posed by the Kelstrom, Crye, Cooky, and Curtis MAGA infestation here in Shasta County is the acceptance of lawlessness, rejection of county codes, rejection of court rulings and grand jury reports, and rejection of substantiated evidence, all in service to their chosen candidate, Clint Curtis, and to propagate their avatar, a lawless, lying authoritarian. We have the opportunity to vote them out and restore law and order, morals, ethics, and democracy back into county government. What will you do?
I hope I am not a lone republican who agrees that what has been going on with the ROV and BOS has become intolerable. Joanna F. should have been the interim ROV until the election. To hire 2 completely inexperienced men because they are willing to ignore CA state election guidelines is mind blowing. Mr Toler to his credit saw for himself how valuable the experience of Joanna’s years working elections was and told the BOS as much. It is outrageous and the we need to vote for Joanna and get the ROV office back on track.
D – I’m a fiscal conservative and I think enough is enough. We are wasting taxpayer money on lawsuits. We have already paid a small fortune in election related lawsuits that were tossed out of court due to a profound lack of evidence. And I guarantee there will be future lawsuits against Mr Curtis and the county because of the failure to meaningfully provide protection to employees who have been subjected to his harassment.
.
We’ve already blown money trying to get rid of the election machines when there was no proof of fraud. The cost of elections has gone up since Mr Curtis took office.
.
I for one, do not approve how things are being run currently. I hope other fiscal conservatives will also stand up for truth this election by showing some of these ass hats the door.
Mr. Hunter, I agree, and as a Progressive “Lefty,” or “My little Socialist,” as Clown Clint Curtis calls people that aren’t MAGA, I know where I live, and I swear, I’m just looking for a Safe and Sane Conservative or an Independent to vote for!
.
There are two Safe and Sane Conservatives on the Shasta County Board of Supervisors, and one ready to take Crying Out Loud’s place, but people like Clown Cutis and his sidekick Hobbs, Cosplay Gen. George Washington Jones, Crying Out Loud Platitue Keven, Wolfman Corky and Mr. Free Tina Petters Kelstom have dragged this county into the tRumpian BIG LIE Grifetr MAGA Swamp for the last few years, and it’s really hurting Shasta County, let alone making us a ShastaTaliban laughing stock of much of the nation.
.
Please, let’s all vote for Safe and Sane.
D Hunter – You are not the lone Republican. There are many of us who see what is happening and want to see Joanna returned to office to restore sanity.
I agree wholeheartedly. We, the citizens of this county, from all sides of the political spectrum are tired of the chaos created, the lawsuits that have happened and are to happen, the abuse of our county workers, and the corruption of our Supervisors by those who falsely cloak themselves in conservatism.
As a solid Republican we can not let this abuse stand. Time to return to sanity and reject extremism from both the left and the right.
Vote for candidates that are not part of the “lets get to three crowd”
And vote a qualified, reasonable, county worker, Joanna, back into the office she has served in, faithfully, and deserves our vote to be returned to. Custis is completely toxic.. send this carpetbagger packing
Trust the women
Corky is just plain ignorant…Kelstrom compromised.. and Crye… egomaniac
VOTE THEM ALL OUT…
Republicans for sanity
PS just wait for the Magrini lawsuit and work comp hearing.. its all on Crye and will cost us millions.. and Magrini WILL win
Crye is dirty on that one and they are hiding the reports
Vote all three out. Help to vote them out. Let our action be stronger then our reaction.
I’m just here with my popcorn, waiting for the lawsuits—and watching our tax dollars get burned in the process. Not just now, but for years to come.
You don’t have to care what California thinks of us, but you should care about how much funding we rely on from the state. Ignore the bigger picture if you want, but this affects our roads, infrastructure, and whether that support starts drying up because we’re ignoring things that will start resulting in public, monies being spent on a avoidable litigation.
At some point, the county may need to borrow for long-term projects. When that happens, lenders decide how risky we are. That’s how it works. Poor leadership, bad press, and looming legal issues? That’s risk. And when risk goes up, bond ratings drop, interest rates rise, and taxpayers end up footing the bill.
This isn’t just noise—it’s long-term financial consequences.
Joanna Francescut is the safe decision because she knows how to run the office and she’s a professional and she’s willing to take that terrible job and not get sued every five seconds. HHSA is empty because nobody wants to work for the county anymore. If she’s willing, please yes take over. Curtiss is…I don’t even know what he is other than a massive liability who crawled out of Florida who is gonna bolt (mark my words) and leave a mess. Crye, do you really want to hitch your wagon to that guy? Honestly, why? He’s not connected. He’s not gonna get you lunch with Trump. He’s not gonna do anything for you or this county. He’s an odd odd guy. Cut bait.
Yet again, the grievances of women are dismissed by A panel of men. Who is surprised?
Crye sure seemed concerned about making sure that Curtis knew HE only voted in closed session against him because of transparency. Then, he made sure to make the point that after reading the investigation he didn’t believe it. I wonder what Curtis has on Crye?
This has the potential to be very beneficial for Joanna’s campaign. A censure is a slap on the wrist, no force or effect. Curtis could frame a censure in his campaign as a “witch hunt” by the leftists. Meanwhile, voters paying attention will be aware of the conclusions of substantial misconduct from two separate investigations, not a good thing, a stain on Curtis’s reputation. I believe litigation is on the horizon by Curtis, or whistleblower, or both. I hope voters will wait for the release of the investigative files before marking their ballot.
Meanwhile, I hope a restraining order will be requested by election office employee at the heart of this.
Mr. Brent Turner, you hitched your wagon to the wrong horse. Since you’ve only been in the office, what…. 14 minutes this year? you can’t possibly have been witness to the abuse… right?? Cut your losses and find employment elsewhere while your name is still somewhat not inextricably linked with this loser. At least, outside Shasta County. Oh, and don’t bother trying to get a job in any other Elections Office in CA. They’ve all got your number.
Interesting to see the votes come down for Curtis as the concocted evidence fell apart. Many think Monica should recuse as Clint’s investigation lead as she is friend / allied with Francescut We must now come together under one flag and leave high school friendships outside the election office
Are you insinuating that the two went to school together? Funny, I knew Monica would be next on the list since shes just doing the job she was hired to do. If anyone disagrees ir goes against the MAGA leaders they are next on the list. speaking of next on the list, Mr. Turner I forgot your name on my little list. When Joanna is elected to the ROV office in June I guarantee you her first line of business is going to be firing you. Bye bye!
I agree! Brent is pompous and arrogant.
Utterly ridiculous
Mr Turner, once again you spend more effort in the comment section than your actual job but you spelled ‘Substantiated’ wrong……
You are a complete embarassment. The corrupt Supervisors that installed Clown Clint refusing to censure him is vindication? Resign now, even though you will be swept out in June anyway.
Selah
No evidence “fell apart”. Two separate investigations concluded Curtis engaged in substantial managerial misconduct. If he were an employee he would be fired, immediately. Voters can fire him five weeks from now. Fingers crossed!
And one of the investigators was external, with absolutely no political axe to grind.
LMAO.
.
Okay Brent, bring the proof. Please show absolutely any little thing that shows they’re besties.
Brent sez: “…as the concocted evidence fell apart.”
.
The allegations against Curtis were substantiated both by Fugitt and by an earlier outside investigator.
.
Brent sez: “We must now come together under one flag and leave high school friendships outside the election office”
.
Nah. You and Clint are more crooked than a barrel of snakes. Francescut and the voters are going to send you two carpetbaggers back to where you came from. My hope is that before you’re both sent packing, the lights come on and you get caught doing something blatantly illegal, the state AG prosecutes you, and you join Tina Peters and other imbecilic MAGA crooks in state prisons.
Mr. Turner: Let’s use the same rules for EVERYONE. Shouldn’t Mr. Kelstrom and Mr. Crye recuse themselves for their conflict of interests with Curtis? Afterall, they appointed him to the office, they tried to discipline him “hundreds of times”, and their names are on the ballot that he oversees. Doesn’t matter if they knew each other in high school, when elected to a public office, you take an oath. The Registrar of Voters is a NON-PARTISAN office. Curtis’ words from the podium were disgusting.
Hey, do you happen to have proof of anything other than trying to turn everything into some massive conspiracy theory?
.
Joanna is one heck of a woman! I mean think of all the things that you are accusing her of:
1. She hacked into Mr Curtis’s accounts
2. She’s somehow has formed alliances with everybody, everywhere. That includes people local government state government federal government; you name it somehow she’s connected to all of it.
3. Somehow she’s the mastermind behind a political operation that has infiltrated both our government, the elections office, and more.
4. Somehow she’s behind brainwashing all the previous election staff, poll workers, and even former board of supervisors members.
.
Wow, sure sounds like she is a forced to be reckoned with! If she is able to do half of what you guys are claiming, then I can see why you’re so afraid of her. Sounds like she has more qualifications in her pinky toe then you and Mr Curtis combined together.
.
But in all seriousness, I still challenge you, Mr Turner, to provide proof of ANY of your allegations. Come on, time to put up or shut up.
.
So whatcha got? We’re all waiting…
I would say that I am surprised by your response, but that would be remiss of me. I have sat as an outsider for over two years and to say you and curtis have given the Registrar of Voters office the worst shame on a non-partisan office I have ever seen and that is saying something in the current climate of election deniers and tin hat followers. You should definitely be concerned that there will be a forthcoming law suit for violence and hostile workplace. Unfortunately for you, you are not an elected or an appointed official and can lose your position in any given microsecond.
Brent Turner is such a liar. Here are several easily verifiable facts. Joanna is about 10 years older than Monica. Joanna went to school in Montana and Monica went to school in Redding, California. No one should be surprised why Clint Curtis picked this loser to be his number two in the ROV office.
Yeah, some of these claims are so EASILY refuted, it makes you wonder who actually believes anything he says.
As an employee, I will guess that the actual behavior is worse than is being released to the public. Having watched the inability of County Personnel to take any action against other bad behavior, it must be pretty bad for them to be forced into taking action now.
Your comment really makes me wish there was a LIKE button on this forum.
Agreed!
SILENCE IS NO LONGER AN OPTION IN SHASTA COUNTY’S ELECTIONS CRISIS
Shasta County’s governing authorities are presiding over a mounting administrative scandal that can no longer be dismissed as personality conflict, political noise, or routine workplace friction. Reports describing a hostile environment inside the elections office, coupled with public refusal to impose even symbolic accountability after substantiated findings of misconduct, reveal something far more serious: a breakdown of managerial oversight in one of the county’s most sensitive institutions. When the office charged with administering democracy is itself mired in dysfunction, the crisis is no longer internal—it is civic.
The allegations reported are not trivial. They involve claims of intimidation, retaliation fears, morale collapse, and threats toward staff. In public-sector management, such conduct can implicate core duties of supervision, workplace safety, and compliance with anti-retaliation policies. When investigators reportedly find sufficient evidence under a preponderance-of-evidence standard, elected officials are placed on formal notice. At that point, inaction is not neutrality—it is acquiescence to risk.
The refusal of the Shasta County Board of Supervisors to censure Clint Curtis despite those reported findings is particularly troubling. Censure is not removal. It is not criminal punishment. It is a formal statement that standards matter. When even that modest accountability measure is rejected, the public is entitled to ask whether political loyalty has displaced fiduciary duty. Government bodies that ignore substantiated misconduct invite the appearance of arbitrariness and selective enforcement.
This failure carries real legal consequences. Counties that disregard documented management abuse can face exposure through labor grievances, whistleblower retaliation claims, constructive discharge allegations, negligence theories, and escalating personnel instability. Even when litigation never materializes, the operational damage is immediate: experienced employees leave, morale deteriorates, errors multiply, and public confidence erodes. In an elections office, these are not abstract harms—they threaten readiness, continuity, and trust in official processes.
Equally damaging is the message sent to rank-and-file employees: report misconduct and nothing may happen. That is the textbook formula for organizational decay. Administrative law and sound governance both recognize that institutions collapse not only because misconduct occurs, but because leadership normalizes it through passivity. A board that declines corrective action after being presented with findings risks becoming part of the problem it refuses to solve.
THIS MOMENT ALSO PLACES A DIRECT BURDEN ON JOANNA FRANCESCUT. A CANDIDATE SEEKING TO INHERIT THIS OFFICE CANNOT REASONABLY REMAIN VAGUE WHILE THE DEPARTMENT’S CREDIBILITY IS UNDER ACTIVE PUBLIC CHALLENGE. SILENCE MAY BE INTERPRETED BY VOTERS AS UNWILLINGNESS TO CONFRONT DYSFUNCTION; TEPID RESPONSES MAY BE READ AS MANAGERIAL WEAKNESS. NEITHER IMPRESSION HELPS A CANDIDATE ASKING THE PUBLIC TO ENTRUST HER WITH RESTORING ORDER.
Francescut should therefore issue a categorical and official statement calling for immediate corrective governance measures: an independent operational audit, external HR review, anti-retaliation protections for employees, preservation of records, and a transition plan for comprehensive departmental reorganization if elected. She need not prejudge any individual. She need only affirm the principles that matter most—lawful administration, professional management, staff safety, and public trust.
The stakes are larger than one officeholder or one election. Shasta County must decide whether standards still govern its institutions or whether accountability depends on political convenience. And Joanna Francescut must decide whether she seeks the office merely to occupy it, or to reform it. In moments of institutional disorder, leadership is measured not by caution, but by clarity. Now is the time for both.
Pure and simple if tge board of supervisors won’t do their job. Vote Curtis out. Pure and simple. We don’t deserve to be abused by the supervisors.
Nick Gardner here,
Shasta County must decide whether standards still govern its institutions or whether accountability depends on political convenience. And Joanna Francescut must decide whether she seeks the office merely to occupy it, or to reform it. In moments of institutional disorder, leadership is measured not by caution, but by clarity. Now is the time for both.”
This battle is about transparency.
Clint Curtis who opened up the elections for the citizens to see the whole process and recorded it or,
Joanna who locked the electorate out and lied to the BOS ?
Remember, with Liberals, The End Justifies The Means.
Who?
Yo, Nick. Fiscal conservative here.
.
If there’s one thing I believe in, it’s the truth. And so far, every single claim of yours has been debunked. Repeatedly. Over and over.
.
You’ve been directly called out on things, but then you run away or go silent when confronted. Why is that?
.
So I challenge you directly, just like I did Brent. Time to stop crying Wolf and to put up or shut up.
.
People have provided evidence against what you say multiple times. You have yet to provide a shred of proof.
Nick, your sauce is weak. Especially that last line, which is a perfect exemplar of the observation about you MAGAs: All of their accusations are confessions.
Stephen Towers and that other guy who is ashamed to use his name, #1–Joanna refused to allow meaningful observation –#2 Joanna lied about the 1.5 million dollars to the BOS–#3 Joanna went to Sac. and lobbied against the will of Shasta Counters voters (hand count)
Stephen Towers? LOL.
.
You go by the pseudonym “Rent Free” here. Again, all of your accusations are confessions.
.
As for your string of factoids: Meaningful observation is in the eye of the beholder. I don’t trust anyone who Curtis is allowing to fill election worker, observer, or poll worker roles—he’s already dismissed volunteer poll workers who object to his partisan politicking and conspiracy theory peddling during training.
.
Worse still is stacking the ROV staff with MAGA cult members—a cohort that in the past demonstrated that they’re unwilling to accept election losses and will go to extreme lengths to thwart election results. As things stand, a huge share of Shasta County voters have little faith in the way our ROV office is being operated by Curtis and his cultist cronies.
.
Do I think Clint Curtis is the type of scheming dirtbag who would cheat to win his upcoming election against Francecut? Absofuckinglutely. Is he smart enough to pull it off? I seriously doubt it…but given that he’s had some success driving off ROV employees who aren’t loyalists and appointing others who are, he has a chance.
Brent. We know this is you. Please stop.
.
We also thought that you wanted everyone to post under their real name?
Organizational Decay. Exactly.
Selective enforcement is par for the course at the County. What boiled over at this meeting, in the public’s face, is just more of what staff have watched from the inside for years. Ever since the Board fired Health Officer Ramstrom. (Hey Crye – THAT was a witch hunt.)
The whistleblower has now been publicly targeted by Clint. (I’m sure Clint knows exactly which employee he made the comments to.) He will sue her. Her life is likely to be crap for a few years. For what? Nothing. Literally NOTHING has happened to Curt.
Is it any wonder she thought dropping the issue might be a wise choice?
Law enforcement is apparently the only hope (restraining order) here. The government, again, fails the People.
Few current and former County employees don’t know the cost of being a whistleblower. No law really protects them. Personnel doesn’t protect them. The Board? HA! But the Board sure paid out a cool $2 million to their friend Kropholler by skirting normal claims processes. I won’t be surprised if Clint gets some sort of sweet deal. My tax dollars. Your tax dollars.
Employees are not protected. (Maybe if they have the right friends. Looks like Curt figured that out.) Liars get rewarded.
The County has hemorrhaged so many resources (money, staff time, quality employees, institutional knowledge, etc) since the Jones-Crye-Burch plague took hold. Will anyone be brave and responsible enough to use a tourniquet before we bleed out?
I live in kelstrom’s district. He won’t be getting my vote.
With the exception of a woke pronoun, the article lists fully the issues with County Clerk and Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis. Supervisor Kelstrom, Supervisor Crye, and Supervisor Harmon are between the proverbial “rock and a hard place.” They cannot make candidate Joanna Francescut’s potential lawsuit against Mr. Curtis and the Shasta County Board of Supervisors stronger, and they cannot interfere with the upcoming election for County Clerk and Registrar of Voters. (Of course, two of the three have their own elections entwined in the matter.) My opinion is that the three did the best that they could do under the totality of the circumstances.
“My opinion is that the three did the best that they could do under the totality of the circumstances.”
.
Where have I heard that kind of reasoning before in defense of decisions made?
.
Oh yeah….the Nuremburg Trials.
Which Nuremburg Trial (there were twelve or more)? Which defendant put forward that nonsensical one-line defense?
You may be confusing the one-line defense that you put forward with a too-often-use one-line defense that was used long before World War II started. That one-line defense was, I was only following orders.
Misrecalled history can be as misleading as not-recalled history.
Also :
A formal investigation was conducted. . . . .
With a formal investigation the conduct and the person being investigated is informed of a complaint having been made, informed an investigation is to be conducted, is given warnings about communication, interactions and conduct that could be perceived as potential retaliation….. AND THEN an additional investigation occurs on a subsequent complaint- THAT WAS NOT DENIED, but excused as a joke in very poor form, delivery and substance….
Add to that the BOS members relaying they have read the reports from both investigations (and know the names of employees who made the complaints). IF AT ANY TIME ANY BOS member directly or indirectly indicated who those employees are to ANYONE outside of BOS, HR or County Counsel- They themselves are personally liable for any damages resulting from retaliation. Maybe that is why they are wanting the formal report released.. Maybe Curtis, “I will sue anyone for any reason with or without merit”, already does know the employee names but cannot file his slander lawsuits against them unless it is made public and the BOS realize he is 1/2 cocked & would likely file anyways so may as well release the report publicly, if they directly or indirectly shared confidential information, in order to protect their own Ass ets.
If it jokes like a vindictive, self-absorbed narcissist and talks like a vindictive, self-absorbed narcissist, and walks like a shirtless, vindictive, self-absorbed narcissist……..
Did Curtiss actually say he wants the report released so he can identify and sue the employee’s under him?
Did the Board acknowledge the concern of releasing reports without redacted names of complainants they are setting themselves up for any and all liability on damages related to whistleblower retaliation.
Can you imagine a department head suing an hourly employee & the County sitting back and saying “we dont want to interfere, lets let nature take its course-
But in the meantime- “we need you, Mr Curtis, to behave professionally”-
WTF – isn’t behaving in a professional manner a requirement of Department Heads?
LMFAO at the level of BS being tossed out while expecting citizens to think the BOS “did their job to the best of their ability”.
I guess Crye noticed that accountability is nonexistent in DC, so why not in Shasta too? The lawsuits are coming. Let’s not forget who made the coming payouts possible….
I have been thinking exactly as you point out. Leadership set the tone; what is acceptable in DC becomes acceptable down the line. For those lacking a moral compass here is the excuse for abominable behavior. It’s a tragedy, we are so much better than this.
Mr. Curtis began his rebuttal stating none of the substantiated claims were true and threatening lawsuits.
If none of these incidents were true, why would the Board have stated they have repeatedly counseled Mr. Curtis in the proper way to lead and manage within the scope of Shasta County guidelines? If none of this was true, why did Mr. Crye and Mr. Kelstrom, both, firmly tell Mr. Curtis to stop with the jokes (that they are not funny) and behave more professionally? And, if none of this was true, why did both an independent outside investigator, a leading expert in their field of work, and an internal investigation find that there were enough substantiated claims to recommend censure and supervision of Mr. Curtis’ interactions with staff?
The Board of Supervisors has an OBLIGATION to keep their employees safe. Period.
Good. Keep that pos Johanna whatever her name is out! Her and her rainbow pins. Nowain is a lol clown. Only a man should be on this position.
The sexism of your last sentence is appalling! I hope that the sentiment reflects only a small minority of people.
Sexist much?? Ridiculous & ignorant statement. How about only a WOMAN should be in that position.
Mr. Travis James is perhaps being sarcastic.
Speechless.
They may not have passed a censure resolution, because they “don’t want to interfere with the election.” Right.
Voting 5-0 to have a public special meeting about a censure resolution and voting 5-0 to release a previously privileged report from an outside counsel’s investigation both send a very clear message about what the supervisors, including those who appointed him in the first place, think of the job Curtis is doing.
This is a pretty good take. Voting 5-0 to drag the accusations into the light of day protects Los Tres Pendejos from charges of hiding those accusations until after the election. They know Curtis is a turd in the punchbowl and is dragging them down with him.
.
Voting 3-2 to not censure Curtis protects Los Tres Pendejos from offending their hair-on-fire MAGA constituents and also shields them from admitting that they screwed the pooch by appointing the smirking bottle-blonde loon in the first place.
Who’s surprised the majority of the board voted no? No hand out there! This is no shocker. More lawsuits headed our way.
Why does this Boards refusal to take any action NOT surprise me. Shame on those 3. We Citizens need to rise up and VOTE – WE need a change – enough is enough!