New Shasta results show margins for Francescut, Resner, Gallagher increasing, Measure B’s decreasing
The vote totals are still far from complete, about 30,000 of the county’s estimate of 58,000 ballots — also a moving target — still remain to be counted.
Shasta’s latest election results include an additional approximately 5,500 ballots that were processed today.
Those results show a 2% increase in former Assistant Registrar of Voters Joanna Francescut’s lead over current Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis. She now has 58.11% of the vote for Shasta’s county clerk role.
Redding Council member Erin Resner is also improving her margin for the Shasta County District 1 supervisor seat. Her top competitor is Supervisor Kevin Crye. She currently has 55.35% of the vote, an increase of almost 2%.
Anderson City Council member Mike Gallagher’s vote totals increased by about 1%, to 49.51% of the vote. He’s running for Shasta County’s District 5 supervisor seat against Supervisor Chris Kelstrom, who has 40.81%.
If Francescut and Resner hold their leads, they’ll secure their races in the primary without needing to go to a run-off this fall. Gallagher has not yet reached the critical 50% plus one needed to avoid a fall run-off with Kelstrom.
Meanwhile Measure B, a controversial ballot initiative that appears illegal to implement under current state and federal laws, has lost some of its early margin of success. Yes votes are currently at 53.64%, that’s a decrease of 2%.
Votes from about 28,500 ballots have been counted for the June 2 election so far. Approximately 30,000 remain to be counted, according to an estimate shared by Shasta election official Clint Curtis earlier today.
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Author
Comments (51)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
Shasta sheriff’s office announces plans to resume in-person jail visitations in September
The announcement was made after Shasta Scout reported on the suspended visitations earlier this month. Visitations have been paused since last September, reportedly due to construction.
Some Millville School District employees describe turbulent last year under new district leadership
After a superintendent transition in 2025 some staff at one of Shasta County’s smallest school districts say they experienced a challenging last school year and are disappointed in a board that didn’t hear their concerns.
Shasta elections official Clint Curtis throws out big name: Tina Peters
Curtis said he hopes to hire the former elections official from Colorado, who’s served time for felony election crimes. Peters is considering the offer, her attorney said.
Just announced: the Board of Supervisors will hold a Saturday meeting at 5pm tomorrow to discuss a possible legal case. No mention of a case title or number. Private discussion estimated at 45 minutes. Maybe Curtis has filed papers, maybe the State has seen something. Maybe nothing to do with the election but still … a Saturday meeting?
https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/05/california-ballot-seizure-law/?fbclid=IwdGRjcASRelpjbGNrBJF4O2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHp4YcVO7SfYpeOsOT8xPu0-Cz0oucCuchxdPViIVCyqwYjd7Hk68yI3-K2L0_aem_dSrFFMCaExfB-qt-t18n-A
The counting is not going as fast as Clint Curtis told us it would.
Just think how slow it would be if they were allowed to go back to hand counting.
You are 100 % correct.
And if Joanna were in charge, they would be screaming bloody murder at the top of their lungs. These election deniers are all total hypocrites.
Assuming the best, will the front runners – Joanna and Erin – take office immediately or will we still be stuck with with the two C’s, curtis and crye, until November?
They will serve out their terms, unless they have the dignity to resign. When Jones lost, he served out the year.
Selah
As I predicted Curtis is already planning to sue.
Terms for office don’t begin until January 2027 no matter what.
Nice way to truncate a sentence to fit your need, but courts do not look at things thru a knothole in search of loopholes. Read the sentence again, more completely: “…majority of all the ballots cast for candidates for that office…” It does not just say “ballots cast” and end right there where you want it to. Rather, it says: “…ballots cast for candidates for that office…” as the operative phrase. The only ballots counted in each race are those cast for the respective candidates in that race, and no others. Your point is this moot
Right, “votes on a majority of ALL ballots cast” for that office would technically mean >50% of all the ballots in that contest, including the ~10% of ballots cast for that office with no candidate selected.
Again using 2024 as an example:
CORKEY HARMON 9,428 54.95%
MARY RICKERT 7,729 45.05%
Cast Votes: 17,157
Undervotes: 1,779
Overvotes: 2
Cast ballots would then be 17,157 + 1,779 + 2 = 18,938
So Harmon recieved 9,428 votes out of 18,938 ballots cast, or 49.8%.
Had that been the primary and not the general election, Rickert would have been able to say Harmon did not get the majority needed to be elected immediately.
What? “Greater than 50% of votes cast for that office” does not include ballots for which no candidate was selected. Undervotes (no vote cast) don’t count as votes cast for that office.
.
Frankly, it’s disappointing that you’re trying to rescue your bungled post. The logic is laughable.
Except the law says BALLOTS cast, not votes cast.
I think this was intentional: if a majority of voters select one candidate in the primary, that candidate should move on. If the top vote getter only gets a plurality, the top 2 should move on to the general where even more voters get to decide.
Otherwise why have primaries at all? Why not just elect the candidate with the most votes and be done with it?
Additionally, legal ambiguities in the US are generally interpreted most favorably for the underdog. In criminal law it is called the rule of lenity. In civil, contra proferentem.
Really reaching there, arntcha?
.
But no, you’re never wrong and you’re just digging a deeper hole.
“…ballots cast FOR CANDIDATES for that office…
A ballot is not cast for any candidate if there is no vote.
Where and when has it EVER been interpreted using your method?
Tell it to the Judge….
Just another garden variety election conspiracy
So whose side are you on?
Do you favor election conspiracies?
well said!
5500 hundred votes in two days? What an embarassment. If this had happened under Cathy Darling Allen, the local election-fabulist fruitcakes would be losing their minds. I hope the state people have stayed around to document this cluster.
Selah
Yup, my vote was never lost under Cathy and Joanna. Under Curtis it is still missing.
Definitely trending in the right direction for the sane law-abiding candidates. However, since Curtis and his Conspiracy friendly C team is in charge, we’ll have to wait until sometime next week before we get any answers. What an embarrassing, pathetic, pitiful performance.
Keep the cameras rolling and the power on!
Election Code § 8140: “Any candidate for a nonpartisan office who at a primary election receives votes on a majority of all the ballots cast for candidates for that office shall be elected to that office.”
“Ballots cast” is an interesting phrase. The legislature could have said simply “votes counted” but they didn’t. About 10% of Shasta County voters leave blank down ballot contests like for county supervisor (in 2024, 1,779 District 3 voters left their ballot blank compared to 17,157 who voted).
Perhaps Curtis and/or Crye will challenge their losses based on this legal ambiguity and advance to the general election anyway.
Darwish…. I don’t know how else to say it but your guys are losing….
.
And frankly that’s good for Shasta County.
Not my candidates.
FWIW, I voted for only 1 candidate on the entire ballot (Wendy Castaneda Leal for state Superintendent of schools) because I will not vote for anyone running in a platform of fascism. Even the libertarian candidate for governor was a fascist this year!
Americans are coke and pepsi–nuance is not our thing. Your stats are great, however the fascism takes are poor.
.
Classic fascism is subjective–if it ever existed at all. American fascism would be the most superficial and toothless because of constitutional turn-over.
.
Fascist American policies such as Obamacare (depending on your $) or Prop 13 (depending on your age) endure for decades, but classifying legislation as charismatic and dangerous is too complex for the public to understand. It’s much easier to say so and so on a four-year term is Hitler or Stalin.
I use only 2 questions to determine a fascist candidate:
1) Do they want to take away an existing right (or, to a lesser extent, a privilege)? Examples include voting rights & access, free speech (including freedom from compelled speech), ownership of weaponry needed to defend against tyranny, private property rights, etc.
2) Do they want to enact policies for the benefit of only some citizens, especially at the expense of other citizens? Examples range from housing redlining to “eat the rich” policies.
Every fascist throughout time has justified their fascism, usually under the nebulous guise of safety or public good.
Darwish, Trump hasnt met your criteria. Who has?
You’re grasping at straws. Sometimes you just have to accept the fact your candidates are losers.
You fancy yourself as some sort of exacting math and logic guy (and you generally are), but with this one you really fell on your face. Juan Grande explains exactly why your truncation of the operative sentence is faulty.
.
The only question is whether you bungled it, or if you were intentionally trying to mislead. Your reading comprehension and logic with this are so obviously clumsy that I find it hard to believe you thought you were being clever. I think you just tripped over your own feet.
Mahmoud dahrish
So you favor AK15s or similar assault weapons in every household?
No county elections office includes undervotes or overvotes when determining whether one candidate received the majority of votes cast for all the candidates.
My in-person vote is still missing. Mr. Curtis called me back after I reported the problem. My vote has not even been accepted on Ballottrax. Curtis tried to just tell me that my vote had been counted if I voted in person. I have asked him to prove it. Someone was supposed to get back to me but, crickets.
Burney VFW was my polling place.
A similar thing happened to me. I went down to the office and demanded they checked their system to see if my ballot was reviewed and recorde, as Ballotrrax indicated that even after 2 and 1/2 days my vote had not been counted.
.
The person that helped me. Was very nice, and very friendly. After getting permission she was able to access the system and indeed, it showed my ballot was received and recorded. The next day it finally showed up on Ballotrrax. You might have to go down to the office and get this straightened out.
Looking forward to expanding social programs in the North State under Matt Plummer. Also, we really need to do more for the unhoused.
I was met with some hostility from front line worker but, I got the yuck yuck all is well from Curtis.
I pointed out previously that Clint Curtis is litigious and will sue Shasta for something. Now, he said it out loud. It was reported that he said “If I don’t win, I’ll sue.”
I just hope Corkey is really lonely at the dais next year without his joined-at-the-hip boyfriends.
I think CH will step down and cite some sort of reason. If he thought he was lost before he knows he will be really lost now as well as overwhelmed after the 2 new BOS are seated in January. Stepping down he will think is his only way out.
I don’t think a drive from Burney should be necessary. If a clerk could help you, why can’t Clint Curtis find my vote? I may have to drive down Monday for the Board meeting.
If you voted in person, your vote has most likely been counted but you will not be notified via BallotTrax until the signature in paper poll book has been verified. Meanwhile, Clint is focused on sorting ballots into stacks of 50 for some unknown reason.
Did you drop off your vote by mail ballot in the return envelope or did you cast a precinct ballot and put it in the bksck ballot box?
I made the mistake of voting in-person. My envelope was taken, I signed the register and they had me squeeze it into the slot.
When you cast your ballot in the polling place’s ballot box, it is counted on election night, as mandated by law.
Ballot tracking notifications are not linked to individual ballots but to your voter file. Notifications are sent when a checkbox indicating you voted is marked in your file.
With the removal of electronic poll pads, staff must manually enter each voter’s voting history. This means every in-person voter must be recorded before notifications can be sent out, making the process time-consuming.
Joanna, if this is really you, congrats on your campaign and eventual win, (hopefully).
We will never forget the last year of insanity and the mistrust that Mr Curtis has created.
Thanks for the clarification Joanna. Vote by mail early if you want timely notification your ballot has been received, verified and counted. Too bad ballot tracking does not at least notify you once your ballot has been counted with a note it is subject to signature verification. Perhaps when we go back to electronic poll pads they can be upgraded with a signature function so voter will know their ballot will be deemed valid before leaving the polling place.
And yes, congratulations on the big win!
Same here. I voted in person at my polling place on Election Day. I expected to be notified by BallotTrax my vote was counted but have heard nothing. I checked SoS website and confirmed my ballot has not been counted. Curtis clearly is doing something wrong.
Brad & Sherr haven’t seen you on Nextdoor. Everything ok?
I’m too busy enjoying my vacation to the Gulf of MEXICO! Too bad snowflakes melt when faced with the truth and report comments that penetrate their greasy thin skins. No worries, I’ll be back to speak truth to lies soon enough. Thanks for your concerns.
Turns out ballots cast at polling places are counted election night but they are not signature verified until days later and BallotTrax is not notified until that has been completed.
It will be interesting to see how long it takes to verify our signatures. So far, nothing for me.
I see no advantage to voting in person if they have to verify a signature I did in front of them. I should have just mailed it and I will from now on.
Agreed. Now that trust has been restored in elections with Joanna’s landslide win I will ditch voting in person for VBM.
I thought Curtis said they would be counting approximately 14,000 ballots a day which would make them done after Monday’s count. 5,000 more ballots added to the total today means his estimate fell short on the this first day by 9,000 votes. Not only can he not do the job, but the poor guy is bad at basic math too.