Breaking: California sues Shasta County over Measure B
The ballot initiative, which has just been approved by voters, set out to impose voter ID and eliminate mail-in voting — among other changes to local election procedures, which appear to contradict California law. The state had previously warned it was prepared to act if Shasta County attempted to circumvent state authority over elections. Today it did.
Update June 12, 2026 4:45 p.m.: This story has been updated to reflect responses from Shasta County and from a former litigant against Measure B.
“There can be no serious dispute that Measure B—a voter initiative to establish a county-specific elections system in Shasta County—is unlawful.”
That statement is the opening line of a lawsuit that was filed today in California’s Third District Court of Appeal by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber against Shasta County.
Measure B is a ballot initiative that was just approved by a majority — 56% — of the county’s voters in the June primary. It seeks to reform local election procedure by mandating voter ID, eliminating most mail-in voting and imposing a one-day election process. If implemented, it would also disconnect county voter rolls from the oversight of the state and require a full hand count of ballots rather than relying on machines, among other changes. The measure appears to be illegal to implement in the state of California.
Earlier this week, as votes were being tallied, the AG’s office told Shasta Scout it stood at the ready “to take appropriate action to protect voters’ rights and enforce state election laws.” Election results are still unofficial, but the vast majority of ballots have been counted, the local elections office said.
The lawsuit names Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis as a respondent and the five central election activists behind the measure as the real parties of interest. They include Laura Hobbs, Deidre Holliday, Kari Chilson, Jim Burnett and Richard Gallardo. Hobbs is employed by Curtis as an analyst at the elections office and helped preside over the election that determined the outcome of the measure she was pivotal in creating.
“That’s the way it works,” Curtis told a reporter today at the elections office, remarking on the lawsuit shortly after the news broke. “The courts are doing what they do,” he added, acknowledging that the proposed federal SAVE Act could present further complications to the impending court proceedings.
Shasta County declined to offer a comment this afternoon. The board of supervisors will be discussing the litigation during closed session during its meeting on Tuesday, June 16.
Measure B proponents have claimed that the county’s status as a charter allows for local election control. The state’s lawsuit contradicts that, saying despite Shasta County’s charter status, such changes to local elections would exceed county authority “because charter counties are not granted any degree of home rule over voter registrations or elections.”
Even if elections were in the bounds of Shasta’s rights as a charter county, the lawsuit said, Shasta cannot enforce laws “that are inconsistent with or impede statewide regulation of the integrity of the political or electoral process.”
The state’s action is only the latest in a number of legal challenges to the measure, all of which have either been pushed back by a Shasta County Superior Court judge, or withdrawn.
Last year, Shasta County’s attorney Joseph Larmour attempted to halt the measure in its tracks, but a judge determined that Shasta’s case against Measure B did not meet the criteria to prevent it from moving forward. Later, community member Jennifer Katske filed two lawsuits against the measure. She was unsuccessful in the first and voluntarily withdrew the other. She reacted to the state’s announcement by continuing to emphasize her concerns about the measure.
“I warned that Measure B would lead to costly litigation and divert public resources away from the real needs of our community,” Katske told Shasta Scout after hearing the news. “Unfortunately, those concerns are now becoming reality.”
Earlier this week, Measure B proponent Burnett said he and others expected a lawsuit, but are prepared to follow through in hopes of succeeding against the state or other challengers. Shasta Scout was not immediately able to reach ballot proponents for comment today.
This is a developing story.
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Comments (85)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
Shasta ROV Curtis says he has requested federal intervention, claiming a lot of June election ballots ‘did not feel or look right’
Records obtained by Shasta Scout document Curtis saying he’s contacted federal officials over “suspect ballots,” which he believes require outside intervention — potentially from the FBI. A little-known gubernatorial candidate is amplifying his claims.
Mount Shasta appoints new acting city manager, contracts with new attorney, amid ongoing data center concerns
An inquiry from the Dunlieh Infrastructure Group about a potential data center project near the city of Mount Shasta has caused public concern since the query was revealed late last month. It’s unclear if the city’s decision to place its manager on unexplained administrative leave and appoint a new attorney are related to the inquiry.
‘Looking down the barrel of a November election’: Shasta judge hopes to move quickly on state’s case against Measure B
Another hearing has been scheduled for Aug. 7. It’s the next step in determining how Shasta’s general election will be run this November, after county voters approved a ballot initiative slated to overhaul multiple parts of the local election process.
Support for “B” = 16.8% of voting age adults in Shasta County
.
.
Support for “B” = 24,184 people
.
Adults/Potential voters in Shasta County: 143,917
.
.
Ballots Cast Recent Election: 43,717
.
Support for Measure B: 55.32%
.
.
Registered Voters Shasta Co: 116,380
.
Persons under 18 years Shasta Co: 21.2% 38,256
.
Population Shasta Co: 182,173
.
.
Did my humble best – found the data from official sources, ran simple calculations.
.
16-17% of locals supporting illegal steps in Measure B is a much better match of my understanding of Shasta County community interests.
(yes, 56% of voters cuz very few people voted)
I’ll be happy to see this disenfranchisement plot/election-fraud-solution-in-search-of-a problem go down in flames. Measure B is unconstitutional. Anyone who argues that Shasta County is some sort of sovereign entity that gets to flout state law needs to retake 8th-grade civics class.
.
That said, California really needs to do something about its drawn-out process of counting ballots and certifying elections. The long delays invite the formation of paranoid delusions on the part of MAGA kooks. Tightening up the ballot counting would take away much of the basis for complaining. Would it make the MAGAs finally believe that our elections aren’t rigged? Probably not, because they’re mouth-breathing idiots. But it would at least remove one of their primary harping points.
The way the local MAGAs behave, makes me wonder if they ever got to the 8th grade.
Or did they just get promoted to get them moved along, kinda like a participation trophy
I find it ironic that 25k VBM ballots voted Yes on Measure B. Using the method you’re trying to eliminate instead of voting in person sends a weak message. Do they all think they’re in the short list of special exceptions to keep receiving a VBM ballot? Poll workers were not on the list of VBM exceptions, so will everyone need to abandon their now busier-than-ever polling site to go wait in line at their precinct to vote? The county has a hard enough time finding poll workers at the $100 stipend but now the proponents expect the same or additional volunteers to go out to every precinct that late at night and stay until they’re done. Poll workers don’t want to stay extra hours even now after they have already worked 6am to 8pm. Increasing costs and regulations for each election cycle is antithetical to classic conservatism that this county surrounded me with while growing up.
Thousands of people surging into the polls before work or after work as to avoid inconveniencing their bosses, coworkers, or their own small businesses is a huge increase in taxes on our local economy’s time and wallets. Instead of filling out my ballot leisurely over the course of weeks and turning it in whenever is convenient I will have to take time out of my day to wait in line. Hopefully there’s more than 2 clerks and 4 voting booths to process the unknown increase in voters or else I might be stuck in that line an unreasonable amount of time. Will I go before work and be late because the line is long? Will I go after work and delay dinner because the line is long? Will I go after dinner and wait beyond 8pm because the line is long? Maybe I’ll use the 2hrs of state-mandated time at the beginning or end of my work day and tell my employer, “too bad. I don’t want to get stuck in the after-work rush at the polls.”
I think the voter ID proposition coming up statewide in November is more palatable than this election’s bureaucracy bomb. I’m confused how hand counting at every single precinct on election night is more secure than centralizing the security and processing in a controlled environment. Inserting manual processes, dummy computers, and poorly designed charter amendments will do nothing but decrease election integrity, increase election costs, and drive down voter turnout. Blind obedience to party leaders spewing misinformation is dangerous. Come up with decent improvement ideas and I will listen. Half-baked ideas from coked-up nut jobs selling pillows should be laughed out the door.
The success of Measure B is as much the fault of we who opposed it as it was the misguided zeal of its proponents. I can’t speak about the County as a whole, but down here in District 5 there was a near total absence of signage against the Measure while signs urging a vote for voter ID were ubiquitous. Let’s face it, many voters do not follow the news nor bother reading arguments for and against ballots measures. A significant portion of my neighbor thought they were only voting for Voter ID because that’s all the pro Measure B signs said. “Why not?” I’d hear them say. After all, they reasoned, everyone has to show an ID to cash a check.
Measure B, voter ID.
That’s all that was heard. Yes, no effort to promote a NO vote because it was illegal. A pipe dream. A way to get the promoters name in the news.
Im also glad the state is stepping in. This is a ridiculous measure.
I haven’t been able to find when Measure B goes into effect. Is November election supposed to be run this way (assuming the courts don’t stop it)? Or does it go into effect in January?
County, Steve, we’re talking county and by the way, I’m not a State of Jefferson guy.
“approved by a majority — 56% — of the county’s voters in the June primary” This mistakenly sounds like alot of people in our county …. however – could you please also clarify how many of registered voters – actually voted in this election. (and maybe – also give numbers of people in the county, since not all are registered)
So we are clearer about just how many locals voted for this. — my understanding is the number of voters in this election is a small number of registered people, and smaller number of 18-older people living in our county.
—- I’m thinking — it’s not accurate to suggest that more than 50% of adults in our county voted for this …. but without the context data, that’s the takeaway for readers.
Anne: Just over 29,000 “yes” votes were cast for Measure B in Shasta’s June 2 primary. That’s about a quarter of Shasta’s registered voters. There were 23,000 “no” votes.
“approved by a majority — 56% — of the county’s voters in the June primary”
Ya
Having elections European style, where people need to show an ID, and the votes are swiftly counted. What a silly idea..
Much better to have a vote by honor system, no ID, count votes over weeks. No opportunity for immense fraud there..
Just plain silliness.
Who are the ding dongs who could possibly want an election with actual rules and accountability. The horror-
There were no voter fraud issues before maga
LOL to that comment Joe.
Prove fraud. There’s none.
Identity must be proven when registering to vote. There is no “honor system”. Still waiting for any proof of massive voter fraud.
Selah
Rob Bonta is involved? Oh, you’re sending in RB? Well sh#t, that’s all you had to say.
The BIG LIE proponents are finally getting what they deserve and what the Safe and Sane people of Shasta County have long asked for: state intervention. And no, Clint, Trump, the court-adjudicated rapist – a convicted 34-count felon – and his never-to-pass SAVE malarkey will not ride in to save you and your BIG LIE conspiracy theorists and let you rig our elections.
.
We can thank people like P. Jones, G. Hawes, L. Hobbs, D. Holliday, K. Chilson, J. Burnett, R. Gallard, C. Cutis, the local far-right extremist media, and other low-information conspiracy theorists who have rambled on like they’re “constitutional scrollers” over the last 4 years, as well as the supervisors who have brought this to a head, including Supervisors Crye, Kelstorm, and Corky. This far-right extremist circus has divided our country and has cost us millions of dollars to date. Congratulations, Curtis and Hobbs. Your day in court is here.
.
We can also thank our local media (which our BIG LIE conspiracists call fake news) and people like J. Katske and the many others who have spoken out against BIG LIE bullshit at supervisor meetings. We also thank E. Resner and J. Francescut for once again rising to the occasion and taking our county back from the Trumpian crazies who have infected Shasta County government for far too long!
.
Hopefully, this Tuesday, the supervisors will say enough is enough, and all the above, including Haberbush (or whoever represents you), will go to the Third District Court and lose on their own, without costing Shasta County taxpayers millions more.
.
And while you’re at it, supervisors, how about the censor Clint has coming to him?
As a Shasta county resident who voted against measure b, I condemn this county’s actions as unlawful.
And a pain in the ass.
The people of Shasta County voted for this. It’s the ultimate exercise in democracy. The State may have a case on the limits of home rule (and the State supreme Court is a partisan clown show) but there is no evidence at all that these basic measures infringe on voters rights.
Most certainly infringes upon my right to vote by mail. A franchise that is QUITE popular with California voters – both inside Shasta county and out. Continue to think that a lot of voters remained ignorant of what Prop B actually entailed.
Think about this. When we want to go fishing, hunting, and to drive. We need a license. When it comes to a government related items. You need a license. So why are you fighting this when this should be an automatic to have ID to require you show you are alive and you live here. Then you can vote.
Voter ID was the least innocuous change in Measure B. Eliminating mailed ballots was the most significant change since the vast majority of voters VBM. Proponents intentionally misrepresented the measure when securing petition signatures and on campaign signs. I’m confident this measure will be nullified by the judiciary since it is patently unconstitutional.
From the beginning, my challenge to Measure B was never about Democrat versus Republican. It was about protecting Shasta County taxpayers from the financial consequences of an initiative that conflicted with existing California and federal law.
I warned that Measure B would lead to costly litigation and divert public resources away from the real needs of our community. Unfortunately, those concerns are now becoming reality.
Measure B proponents chose to continue pursuing and defending this measure despite repeated warnings about the inevitable legal and financial burdens it will impose on Shasta County taxpayers. Reasonable people can disagree about election policy, but political ideology should NEVER outweigh fiscal responsibility. They chose election conspiracy theories over the needs of this county. And others chose to target me with harassment, threats, and intimidation as well.
Now, as this unfolds EXACTLY as I stated in front of the court, taxpayers must know that these decisions were not inevitable. They were the result of DELIBERATE choices made by the proponents of Measure B and Mr. Curtis who pushed it forward despite knowing the financial risks that had been demonstrated to them over and over again.
Victories are easy to celebrate when someone else is paying the price. You, Shasta County taxpayers, are now paying the price.
Shasta County CLERK-ELECT Joanna Francescut MUST have NO LENIENCY towards Curtis & Assoc: time for Mrs. Francescut to PUBLICLY and OFFICIALLY request the county’s BOS the establishment of an INDEPENDENT COMMITTEE of attorneys and government-administration professionals to thoroughly investigate the dealings and actions of the current clerk.
She has to make sure before being sworn into office in January 2027 that the ROV department is clear of legal, administrative and financial issues.
I’ve lost count on how many lawsuits this county has against it.
Such a shame and waste of tax payer dollars.
Pretty soon there won’t be a Shasta County. Bankruptcy, loss of revenue, loss of property values for homeowners, etc. will be disastrous for everyone. Why would visitors want to visit a ghost town? 😢
And they wonder why we have a shortage of medical providers. Poor decisions result in costly outcomes in this county over and over again.
Evidently money is more important to you than honest, transparent elections.
There you go again with baseless allegations about election integrity. Just because you parrot the election denier nonsense repeatedly does not make it true.
Tired of the poor condition of county roads?
Blame the self serving MAGAs and all of their ilk.
If he’s rent free and truly interested in the health of Shasta county, perhaps he can donate funds to improve roads and other aspects needing money to survive.
But no, the whole bunch of them are traitors
So, we just had an election run by your boy Mr. Transparency Curtis. In this election, he, along with Crye and Kelstrom, were decisively rejected by the electorate. Was this election rigged? Under the watchful eye of Mr. Transparency? Your protestations become more pitiful by the day.
Selah
They named Clint Curtis , it should have named Laura Hobbs, Patty Plumb, and every other person who pushed this onto a ballot. There should never be a measure that is against state law on a County ballot. I also would hope that Patrick Jones, Kevin Crye , Chris Kelstrom, Corky Harmon and Teverge Anselmo be named for their participation in this be it voting to let it get on a ballot in the first place or funneling money to support it! My message to those mentioned : You live in California, you chose to live here and as such must abide by its laws. If you disagree with said laws you start at the State level to change things! Counties do not get to make their own laws by a few disgruntled people. As you all like to those of us who oppose your idiocy, you don’t agree with the laws move to another state that better suits you! There are 51 states and / districts to choose from! Get packing !
The majority voted for measure B not a disgruntled minority. ALSO , there are 50 states in our Representative Republic.
You’re talking about the marks and rubes who only heard voter id.
The people who are so stoopid they would vote to break the law
Excellent reminder and I want to concur, but the majority is often misinformed and fooled. Look at Prop 50, covid mandates, and support for Obamacare. Trending popularity isn’t a guarantee of positive, enduring policy.
.
We all instinctively understand the need for voter ID, but someone added a bunch of extra conditions to Measure B and now it is an easy target. Prop 50 passed w a big majority, and we all instinctively knew it is fundamentally wrong to gerrymander. Weird things happen. People get swept up.
.
Voter id is all fluff, smoke and mirrors, how about getting behind something substantive like universal health care, taxing the 3%, staying out of foreign wars, removing graft from the Republican Party and the Supreme Court?
Laura Hobbs and Richard Gallardo are two of the five individuals named in the lawsuit.
The county should spend no time or any of our tax dollars defending this unconstitutional measure. Let the election deniers lawyer up and take on the state AG and SoS at their own expense. If Curtis tries to implement the changes, a cease and desist may be needed until the court decides the case.
Agree with you 100% Brad.
This, as reported on JPR, seems important, as Clint stated something to the effect of, “Oh, we’ll just change the parts of Measur B that are illegal.”
.
Proponents previously argued that if sections of the measure were illegal, they could be thrown out while leaving the rest in effect. The state’s lawsuit argues this is impossible because Measure B was presented to voters as a “package deal” with no lawful parts to save.
Every separate part of Measure B is illegal according to state law.
But sure, let’s pass something completely illegal and not only costing the taxpayers a lot of money, but making us yet again a laughing stock across the nation.
So how do you think the Pillow Guy feels about this? Oh that’s right isn’t he in jail?
As of now, Mike Lindell is not incarcerated.
He has faced legal challenges but has not been sentenced to prison.
Paying my rent every day in the tower of song
I guess my question is… If Clint Curtis is being prosecuted by our Attorney General is he still available and permitted to oversee our elections as the top official? What about Hobbs?
It seems the BOS should go ahead and appoint Joanna Francescut to run things in the interim to bring order to chaos.
It is a civil action. He is being sued- not charged with crime.
According to the lawsuit filed, there will be no elections in Shasta County if the courts don’t rule on measure B before August.
That’s why the State is asking for expedited hearings.
Hi Robert, I agree with you 100%. Let’s get some order back in the ROV/County Clerk’s Office. I look forward to the day when Joanna Francescut begins her new job as ROV.
Curtis isn’t being prosecuted. This isn’t a criminal case. It’s civil. The court’s jurisdiction extends only to the question of whether the measure should be overturned, then who’ll pay whose legal fees. Loser pays. (If Curtis loses, guess who pays? We’re looking at each other right now.) No one’s going to jail or getting personally fined behind this unless Curtis or another named party perjures themselves via either affidavit or oral testimony.
Please, can we have just one more honest election before Joanna returns?
Please,
Can we just have maga fade away
Yea, we see how Clint Curtis did with his “honest election”
Where is your proof that any election run by Cathy Darling Allen, Joanna Fancescut or Tom Toller was dishonest? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. You don’t have any. Go back to Mountain Flop Media.
Selah
That statement is the opening line of a lawsuit that was filed today in California’s Third District Court of Appeal by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber against Shasta County.
No one is being prosecuted, hence, no jail
They cannot appoint somebody to a position that is currently filled. You can only ‘appoint’ to fill a vacancy. We’ve been over this.
I hope that the AG and SOS prevail in throwing out measure B. I was disappointed that measure B passed while joyful that Curtis was defeaated.
I really hope that Shasta County does not incur a lot of legal expense in this coming confrontation.
It was represented to most people as just being about voter ID.
.
Pretty sure that a good number of people didn’t realize they were voting to get rid of voting by mail.
Especially those who voted for Measure B by mail. 🤷♀️
You are disappointed that the citizens of Shasta County voiced their opinions and passed a measure that you disagree with? Who do you think you are ? The people have spoken and their will is obvious!
Shasta County voters are powerless to change the State or Federal Constitutions. Election laws are each states responsibility, not cities or counties.
The individuals who voted yes on measure B should now have to pay the legal fees to defend it.
Agree
So should those who helped create it… Laura Hobbs, Richard Gallardo
It looks like our MAGA BOS, their puppet ROV and cult members may have succeeded in making the tax payers pay to defend their idiocy. At least there is light at the end of this MAGA tunnel.
Shocking.
I wonder what this mess will cost us.
The county should also sue the proponents if possible to recover our legal costs
Just how soon can we get these activists out of the levers of power and get back to reasonable governance?
I wonder how many yes votes came by mail or drop box.
Same with the %2000,000 plus Jeff Gorder cost Shasta County with his failed lawsuit
Where did you hear the county spent $2 million defending Crye’s corruption?
Oh my gosh, you got me—$200,000—-I meant
Shasta County will now be spending tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars defending this -at the same time we don’t have enough prosecutors to jail our criminal element.
I hope those who voted for Measure B truly understood that they were giving up voting by mail, and will be required to vote in person on one day.
Let’s see how many votes are tallied if this ever is implemented. And for what? To appease the conspiracy theory crowd who is afraid of voter fraud that has been proven to be non-existent.
I don’t know what legal obligation, if any, the county has to defend this. If the Huntington Beach case is any guide, there will be an injunction against the measure in fairly short order. The ball would then be in the county’s court as to whether to appeal. I would bet all the money in my pocket that Crye would push for an appeal, trying to go out in a blaze of glory and Harmon would go along. Kelstrom would be the wild card. Voting to waste taxpayer funds on a futile appeal, which would probably be dropped by the new BOS in any case, is not a good look for his runoff chances. He also may not care if he keeps his seat, since he will almost certainly be in the minority on the new Board. We should find out pretty quickly.
Selah
“I would bet all the money in my pocket”—I’ll see your 75 cents and raise you aquarter.
Window washing not the life goal you expected?
Careful. Anselmo isn’t sending anymore money. You are in over your head.
Selah
I agree completely with Mike
Stupid begets stupid while the local MAGGOTS continue their search for enough revenge upon the great unwashed to go around…
You just got rid of the garbage at the top, why not continue to open your eyes?
Oh…never mind…Trump just told you not to…
That didn’t take long, I figured the state would have to wait until the election was certified. It makes sense that Curtis was named in the suit, being the county official in charge of elections. Interesting that the promoters of the measure were personally named, possibly a sign that the state has had enough of this nonsense? Do Hobbs and Gallardo now have to recuse themselves from any Measure B activity in the Elections Office since they are named in litigation regarding the Measure? Looks like the fabulists fruitcake’s 15 minutes are up, s***s about to get real.
Selah
You sure don’t want the voice of the majority heard, do you?
And when the majority of California voters elect someone the State of Jefferson folks dislike, they nevertheless respectfully accept the will of the people. I’ve been told it happens all the time.
The majority has been heard. The duly elected representatives of the citizens of California have passed election laws that Shasta County must follow. The voice of the majority in Shasta County voted for something illegal. You will lose. Deal with it.
Selah
I’m so happy that the state is going to step in and sue the county over this ridiculous measure.
Yes, it’s long overdue. I do believe there’s more there to investigate. Hopefully they will do a very comprehensive investigation. My theory has always been that Clint Curtis was hand picked by Jones, with the support of Crye, Harmon and Kelstrom. Jones wanted his election results to be overturned and he needed his guy in place to pull that off.