As Shasta voters approve Measure B, California’s lead attorney says he’s ready to act 

More than half of Shasta’s voters have said yes to Measure B. While election results remain unofficial until the vote is certified, almost all of Shasta’s ballots have now been counted. 

Measure B changes Shasta County’s local election procedures in a variety of ways, all of which currently contradict statewide law: establishing voter ID requirements, eliminating most early voting, mandating hand-counting ballots rather than relying on machines, and containing the county’s voter roll on a device that the California state government cannot access. 

That’s caught the attention of California’s attorney general, the state’s chief law enforcement officer. 

“We are closely monitoring the Measure B results and, if necessary, stand ready to take appropriate action to protect voters’ rights and enforce state election laws,” a spokesperson for the California Attorney General told Shasta Scout yesterday. 

If the AG moves forward, it wouldn’t be the first time the state has prevented a local government body from enacting election procedures that violate state law. In 2024, the AG filed a lawsuit against Huntington Beach, when the Southern California city attempted to implement voter ID laws by way of a similar local ballot initiative. In that case, the California Supreme Court declined to hear the city’s appeal in favor of changing its local laws, essentially striking down any voter ID requirement.

Despite looming legal threats, Jim Burnett, one of the five proponents behind Measure B, said he feels “vindicated” by the voters’ support. Speaking to a reporter at the Shasta elections office on Monday, he expressed determination.

“We’re not going to just roll over and let all of our elections be administered by, say, Sacramento. We want local control as much as possible,” Burnett said. 

Another central proponent of Measure B is Laura Hobbs, who was hired by Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis to administer elections around the same time the initiative was approved to be placed on the ballot. She’s faced criticism for her hands-on approach to matters related to Measure B while in her official staff role, matters she’s taken on despite her significant financial contributions to the initiative.

While legal action from the state has yet to materialize, Measure B has already faced multiple other legal challenges. Last year, when proponents first submitted paperwork to circulate the petition in hopes of gaining signatures in support of Measure B, Shasta County’s attorney pushed back. County Counsel Joseph Larmour filed a legal action asking the courts to issue a ruling on whether the county should expend taxpayer money advancing a ballot measure that, he said, violated the California and US Constitutions. A Shasta judge determined that the county’s case against the measure did not meet the criteria for the courts to prevent it from moving forward at that time. 

In March, after Measure B had been approved to appear on ballots, local voter Jennifer Katske challenged the measure again, this time in hopes of preventing it from reaching voters. She was unsuccessful. In his ruling at the time, Judge Benjamin Hanna did not weigh in on the merits of Measure B itself, but determined that the appropriate time to consider its legal ramifications would be after the election, not before. A third lawsuit, also filed by Katske, focused on concerns about conflicts of interest, but was later withdrawn.

Moving forward, Burnett said, proponents expect more such challenges. 

“I do expect that this is going to be litigated,” Burnett acknowledged, adding that he’s hopeful that Shasta would win a legal challenge from the state, either outright, or in the appeals process. When asked about the possibility that the California Supreme Court might refuse to hear an appeal in the case at all — as was the case with Huntington Beach — Burnett remained calmly pragmatic.

“There’s many ways to fail, and only one way to succeed,” he said, “and that’s true in many aspects of life.” 

Regardless of the potential for legal challenges, once election results are certified, Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis will need to begin preparing to administer Measure B’s complex processes in the fall election. In a declaration Curtis submitted to the Shasta Superior Court as part of a legal skirmish over the measure this spring, Curtis said he believes he can successfully do so, even within the confines of state and federal law.

The declaration outlines his proposed methods, which involve conducting both a hand count of votes at every precinct and a machine count in-office. He also plans to maintain two separate voter rolls in an attempt to comply with both Measure B and the state.

---

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