Shasta County calls special weekend board meeting
The board’s agenda includes only one closed session item related to anticipated litigation.
In a rare move, the Shasta County Board of Supervisors has called a weekend special meeting.
The closed session meeting will be held at 5:00 p.m. on June 6.
The meeting comes at a critical moment in the county’s political process, as Shasta’s novice Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis races to count ballots in an election which includes Curtis’ own candidacy, the candidacies of two sitting supervisors, and a controversial election measure championed by one of Curtis’ staffers.
It’s not clear if the meeting is related to elections. The board is scheduled to discuss only a single item. The description of that item is summarized simply as “anticipated litigation.” The discussion will occur in closed session, but public comment will be allowed prior to the closed session item.
California’s Brown Act allows the board to call a special meeting with 24-hour notice. Closed session items are discussed privately and information related to them is usually kept confidential other than any “reportable action” that is shared by the county’s attorney after the session.
The board can vote to make information shared during closed sessions public. And during some recent board meetings, supervisors have voted to move a closed session item into open session, allowing the public to witness its’ deliberations.
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Author
Comments (10)
Leave a comment
Related Articles
New vote totals show leads holding for chief election role, both supervisor seats and Measure B
While candidates Joanna Francescut and Erin Resner have both reached the critical more than 50% totals needed to win a primary, Gallagher remains just shy.
Redding Rancheria makes last-minute investment into District 1 race, donating to Crye
The Redding Rancheria made the maximum-allowed payment of $5,900. It was received by Supervisor Kevin Crye on Election Day. He’s one of only two local candidates the Rancheria supported in this election. A donation to Supervisor Chris Kelstrom for the county’s District 5 race was made two months ago.
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.
Might involve something one of Clint’s hires did on Election Day eve.
Oh I am sure it will be about Clint Curtis and his miserable performance in his job. No other time in my life and I have lived in Shasta County all of my life! Have we had to have the State come in to mo it or our elections due to this current shit show that Clint Curtis and Brent Taylor have led! And don’t forget who put Clint Curtis in that position!
Kevin Crye
Chris Kelstrom
Corky Harmon!
Their lack of intelligence and leadership is what has gotten us here!
$5 says it’s Measure B. $10 says it’s Curtis.
Since he said on camera that he would sue (yuck yuck) I’ll put my VFW bar token on Curtis.
It could be almost anything. It could have something to do with the State Attorney General’s team being down here and observing the clown show and incompetence. It could be measure B? Who knows. That’s what is so nice. They are so open hearted and transparent.
And where’s the Assistant ROV? Did Pantera Negra high tail it back to Frisco? I think they thought Shasta was going to be a soft target and threw all their eggs into the ideology first/conspiracy basket. Thankfully, there appears to be enough sane Republicans to join with the other parties and no party affiliates to reject the Crye -Jones gang’s hostile take over of our County. Nevertheless, I’ll be much happier when we have final numbers. It looks like they’re planning to work through the weekend using the labour of the people who hate and who have sued our County. At least that’s most of whom they were able to draft this week. All the anti government election deniers were in attendance this week. Let’s hope the power stays on and the cameras keep rolling during the day… And, especially, during non business hours.
What’s the difference between the terms “anticipated” and “initiated” litigation when used this way on an agenda item? R1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
(Government Code Section 54954.9(d)(4)):
Initiation of Litigation: One potential case
Hi Janice: Anticipated could mean the discussion of a threat of litigation from a party or a possible litigation move by the board. Something that’s initiated is already in-process.
I smell something.
MJF – “teen spirit”? JK.
I agree that something feels off about a weekend closed-session, emergency meeting. Maybe we’re smelling “desperation”.
and it is going to be expensive to the Shasta County taxpayers…