Board to discuss legal threat after Shasta election official withholds press release access
The nonprofit First Amendment Coalition agreed to represent Shasta Scout after newly-appointed election official Clint Curtis excluded the newsroom from receiving elections-related press releases. On Tuesday, Oct. 14, Shasta supervisors will discuss the legal threat in closed session. For now, Curtis’ office has paused press releases to all media outlets.
A series of tense communications with media in the lead up to the November special election came to a head Thursday, Oct. 9 when Shasta’s newest election official, Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis, indicated to Shasta Scout by email the organization would no longer receive press releases.
After noticing that other outlets had reported on an Oct. 3 press release that Shasta Scout never received, a reporter reached out to Curtis by email on Oct. 9. In his response later that morning, Curtis questioned whether Shasta Scout was running afoul of tax law by reporting with “a political lean,” wording he did not define. He also inaccurately accused Shasta Scout of failing to file the appropriate tax documentation. Curtis wrote that he had reached out to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) about his concerns but had not yet heard back.
“While we are fairly lenient with what constitutes valid media,” Curtis wrote via email, “this office notifies potential media outlets that appear legitimate.”
Late that same day, the nonprofit First Amendment Coalition (FAC), which is providing pro bono legal representation for Shasta Scout on this particular issue, sent a formal legal demand to Curtis informing him that his decision to exclude the organization from press releases is illegal and a violation of constitutional rights. In the letter, FAC Legal Director David Loy told Curtis that Shasta County was in imminent threat of litigation unless he restored Shasta Scout to official press release lists.
“The selective targeting of one publication for exclusion from materials distributed to other media outlets is unconstitutional,” Loy wrote, adding that such a violation is “particularly stark” when it occurs due to the content or viewpoint being expressed by the publication.
“Beyond the threat to Shasta Scout’s press freedoms, your office’s actions exert a chilling effect on the journalism community as a whole,” Loy continued. “No publication should have to couch its news coverage for fear of losing basic rights guaranteed to the media.”
Curtis’ response to Loy the next day, Oct. 10, stated he believes he is in the right to exclude Shasta Scout but said he had made a decision to stop sending out press releases to all media organizations at least for now.
“I think that our actions are correct but just to be on the safe side, we are stopping all press releases to all parties at this time,” Curtis wrote, saying he would refer the legal threat to the federal Department of Justice “to make a further determination.”
“If they agree that we must include them then we will do so, should we ever decide to continue sending press releases,” he continued.
Later the same day, the county board released a special meeting notice indicating that supervisors will discuss the threat of litigation on Tuesday Oct. 14, in closed session.
In response to questions today about election officials’ duties to communicate with the public, the Secretary of State’s Office referred Shasta Scout to California’s election code which includes mentions of various circumstances in which election officials are required to release information.
Reporting on Curtis’ Tenure
Shasta Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis was appointed to his position by a board majority in May. Curtis told the board he wanted to restore trust in the election process and would ensure access for everyone. His emphasis, he has said publicly, is on fair and transparent elections.
In the days leading up to his appointment and the months since, Shasta Scout has provided the public with ongoing reporting related to Curtis and the Shasta Election Office as well as the election process and specific measures on the ballot this fall.
Among other coverage, Shasta Scout revealed Curtis’ use of an election commissioner’s address for his official voter registration forms, his request for campaign donations that was made before filing required paperwork, and his participation in an unofficial election process run by the New California State movement.
During a July interview at his office, Curtis shared his hope for the indictment of his former staffer and campaign opponent Joanna Francescut. He also told a Shasta Scout reporter that their coverage had been negative thus far, saying “I’ll speak to people that are semi-friendly, anybody else I stop talking to altogether.”
On Sept. 25, after Curtis spoke to the public at a county board meeting and to the press afterwards, a Shasta Scout reporter fact-checked his claim that his prototype for ballot processing and livestreaming had been approved by the Secretary of State’s (SOS) Office. Subsequent reporting documented the SOS stating that his claim was false.
On Sept. 26, Shasta Scout’s managing editor received a voice mail from Curtis’ right-hand man, Assistant Registrar of Voter Brent Turner. In that voicemail and a subsequent phone conversation, Turner accused Shasta Scout of coming close to “meddling” in elections, saying the organization’s reporting related to the SoS could be considered “election interference.” He went on to suggest that Shasta Scout might be trying to influence the outcome of the 2026 ROV race. In response, Shasta Scout informed him that the goal of the reporting was to confirm the accuracy of statements from Curtis, a public official.
The last official press release that Shasta Scout received from the election office was sent Oct. 1. Curtis used the press release to provide “a point of clarification” in response to recent reporting about his interactions with the SOS saying “we enjoy continuing conversations with the SOS and staff regarding process and procedures. We always intend to be fully engaged in these conversations moving forward.”
Shasta Scout was removed from press releases sometime in the next two days, before an Oct. 3 press release was sent out.
Do you have information or a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Through December 31, NewsMatch is matching donations dollar-for-dollar up to $18,000, giving us the chance to double that amount for local journalism in Shasta County. Don't wait — the time to give is now!
Support Scout, and multiply your gift
Author
Comments (20)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
A group of community members are hoping to start a new medical school in Shasta. Here’s what we know
Redding Vice Mayor Dr. Paul Dhanuka and Simpson University President Dr. Norm Hall are some of the leading figures behind the plan.
With more rain ahead, Redding officials explain flooding, urge caution
This weekend, the city’s stormwater infrastructure became clogged with debris due to the speed and volume of rain, officials said, leading to serious flooding in parts of Redding.
The Redding Public Market opened about a month ago. Here’s how it’s going
The CEO of the development company that owns the market said the venue, which is serving around 2,000 people a day, is revitalizing downtown.
It is amazing to have followed some of the notoriously poor choices the BOS has been appointing recently, all based on THEIR political bias, not their qualifications. Curtis is one of those extremely bad choices, the worst. Hopefully they see the folly of having appointed him with all of his requests for money and no details. He seems to think he has the power to send out press releases based on his poor knowledge of the First Amendment.
Not to detract from the many excellent department heads and employees working for Shasta County. It is just that Curtis is an extremely bad choice that is going to come back to cost the County and haunt the BOS. I hate to see how the 2026 primary and general elections are handled, if Curtis makes it that far.
Yes, I agree with other commenters along with the last two ROV’s that Joanna Francescut was an excellent knowledgeable employee who can run the department efficiently and openly and hopefully will be elected.
I hope everyone votes against this guy. He arrogant and if you are going to protest against Kings might I suggest you put his name on a sign. I watched his video and he has no reason other than not wanting to be transparent to block Shasta Scout. He and his buddy need to both go back to Florida. Clint only registered as a Republican IMO to gain access to work as ROV here. He’s been a Democrat prior. I now consider him a rhino and not to be trusted.
I am feeling less and less trusting of Clint Curtis. He should not be campaigning during a time that we are voting. He seems to be hiding what he is doing. Keep doing your fact checking.
Keep up the good work. Curtis never should have been appointed.
“ should we ever decide to continue sending press releases”……
How childish can they get?
After the way The Shasta Scout represented Mr. Curtis in the “taped interview” article, I completely agree with the censure. Shasta Scout had a fair chance and did not live up to the high standards of ethical Journalism. IN My Opinion.
Babs: In what way did we not live us to the standards of ethical journalism? We follow the Society of Professional Journalist’s Code of Ethics. https://www.spj.org/pdf/spj-code-of-ethics.pdf
I, for one, think you could use more emotional rhetoric and “gotcha!” moments like the fine extremist publications do. When I read the news, I wanna get angry and burst some blood vessels! Be better next time, Annelise! (lol)
P.S. Twenty bucks says ol’ Babs didn’t even click the ethical standards link. 😉
Where can we find the “taped interview”? Also, BABS – let’s say you are correct. How does this line up with his vow of transparency? Do you know what’s going on now? Does anyone? No, we don’t and yet we are asked to trust him….can you can honestly say you are ok with the Elections office not providing press releases because Curtis got some bad press? Name me one elected representative in this country that hasn’t received bad press….one. Poor excuse to operate behind closed doors that he was supposedly going to bust wide open.
It’ll never happen, but the Board of Supervisors should censure Curtis.
Curtis is not wrong in one aspect: the Scout has not applied the same level of critical skepticism towards Joanna Francescut that it has towards him. The 1st amendment does not require unbiased journalism, but the bias is disappointing.
Johnna has history in the elections office. Clint Curtis does not. He has no experience running any election and needs to be scrutinized. Shasta Scout is doing a great job.
She has a history, just not a good one.
Accuracy of elections run by Joanna Francescut (as determined by post election audit):
11/5/2024 10,332/10,843 95.287%
3/5/2024 14721/14,727 99.959%
Accuracy of elections run by Cathy Darling-Allen:
11/7/2023 486/486 100.000%
3/7/2023 439/439 100.000%
11/8/2022 5531/5,535 99.928%
6/7/2022 2184/2,184 100.000%
2/1/2022 531/531 100.000%
9/14/2021 695/695 100.000%
11/3/2020 9776/9,776 100.000%
3/3/2020 2995/2,995 100.000%
11/5/2019 419/419 100.000%
8/27/2019 889/889 100.000%
6/4/2019 589/589 100.000%
3/26/2019 164/164 100.000%
11/6/2018 4784/4,784 100.000%
You are so desperate…
It must be so frustrating for you that people aren’t buying what you’re trying to sell.
Francescut is not the ROV. Curtis is. Perhaps Shasta Scout actually DID provide the same level of skepticism and, in finding that claims of malfeasance are completely unsubstantiated, are now being accused of bias for simply reporting the facts.
Joanna has never been the ROV. She worked under three other ROV’s so as an employee at the election office criticizing her would be biased. Feel free to be skeptical of those in charge: Allen, Toller or Curtis.
As you well know, Joanna Francescut ran the last 2 elections due to medical issues affecting Darling-Allen and Toller.
I’ll again point you to Francescut’s April 30, 2025 interview (~2:59:30 https://shastacountyca.new.swagit.com/videos/349935 ):
Crye: You have told me that you’ve ran the last 2 elections, you’ve been running that office for over a year. Is that a true statement?
Francescut: (nodding) Under someone else’s name, yes.
Call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure Clint is the one doing the job, and all the weird shit right now. Do you expect Shasta Scout to bring up some old stories or something?
Keep up the good work! Far too many people are accepting the words of Clint Curtis without bothering to verify information or ask hard questions. He is not being held to the same standards that Ann Reed, Cathy Darling, and Joanna Francescut were. I’m sure the BoS knows he wouldn’t be able to meet those standards. Curtis should never have been appointed…At the elections open house and every time I hear him speak, the words “Flim Flam Man” come to mind. I think the BoS and our voters are being conned.
Stay the course Shasta Scout, transparency is owed to the citizens of Shasta County. Too many back door deals!
Joanna Francescut for ROV 2026!