The Shasta Elections Commission Welcomed A Self-Identified Expert. He Advocated For Resisting State Law.
Douglas Frank, whose education is in chemistry, advocated for armed resistance to “unconstitutional” state laws during the raucous meeting.
Urson Russell, part of Patriot Force California, speaks to the Shasta Election Commission on January 22.
Telling commissioners he’s glad to offer his expertise, invited guest presenter Dr. Douglas Frank spoke to the Shasta County Elections Commission for about forty-five minutes during the January 22 meeting.
Frank, whose area of academic training is in surface chemistry, offered a verbal presentation that included significant allegations of fraud, without including evidence of his claims. During his presentation he encouraged commissioners to fulfill their civic duty to protect constitutional election rights which, he said, may include “nullifying” or refusing to comply with state elections law.
To illustrate his point, Frank spoke approvingly of citizens in New Mexico who responded to a temporary ban on open carry laws in response to a school shooting by showing up to the state capitol with guns in their belts.
Comparing fraudulent election violations with sexual assault, Frank continued by saying that citizens have the constitutional right to take action in response to witnessing wrongdoing without waiting for the courts to rule.
“In the same way (as when witnessing an assault),” Frank said, “citizens once they’re aware that fraud is taking place in their elections; once they’re aware that their constitutional rights are being violated . . . you have the right to nullify, but not merely the right you have the obligation to do so.”
Law that disenfranchises voters from their constitutional rights, Frank said, is not merely a legal issue, it’s a constitutional issue which empowers the citizens to defy state law. Asked by Commissioner Dawn Duckett to clarify if election fraud would have to be proven before state law was defied, Frank said it’s true that citizen actions would be more credible if they were in response to an unconstitutional mandate from a state leader.
His statements are particularly important in light of the recent passing of California’s Assembly Bill 969. That law, which made hand counting votes across Shasta County illegal, has been called government overreach by some, including county supervisor Patrick Jones.
State election officials showed up to monitor a special Shasta County election this fall in response to statements by Jones and others about the validity of AB 969. During today’s Board of Supervisors meeting, Jones said that Frank’s “excellent presentation” to the Elections Commission is going to “shed light on some issues here in Shasta County.”
Frank claims that he’s aware of about 400 ballots in Shasta County that were cast either illegally or fraudulently. He offered no verifiable proof of that claim, but said he and others have reported those concerns to the Shasta County Sheriff’s Office. Shasta Scout has not yet reached out to the Sheriff’s Office to confirm.
Franks’ comments throughout the meeting were met by support from about twenty members of the public. The same crowd also showed strong support during the meeting for Laura Hobbs, a candidate for the Shasta County Board of Supervisors who describes herself as “100% MAGA” and frequently makes claims of ongoing fraud at the Shasta County Elections Office.
Just as she did at the last meeting, Hobbs used her public comments to mention her campaign for supervisor, going so far as to share her campaign website. Joanna Gin, an attorney with Best, Best and Krieger, which was contracted by the county to provide election-specific legal advice, spoke up in response. She reminded Commission Chair Ronnean Lund that allowing Hobbs to use public resources for campaigning is prohibited by state law.
Lund, who was informed of the same issue with Hobbs comments at the last meeting, asked Gin to provide specifics. Gin did, reading from the state law, which says that public officials must prohibit others from using public funds for personal campaigns. In response, Lund warned Hobbs later in the meeting, saying if she continued to mention her campaign, she may have to ask her to leave the meeting. Hobbs did not repeat the mention of her candidacy during her next comment.
The commission took little real action at yesterday’s meeting. Instead, in addition to hearing Frank’s presentation, the commission provided brief reports on the activities of ad hoc subcommittees and agreed to spend $40 to request public records from the Elections Office.
The next Shasta Elections Commission is scheduled for February 5.
Do you have a correction to this story? You can submit it here. Do you have information to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org
Author
Comments (17)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
New Redding manager announces “assault” style overhaul of city operations
During what was originally planned as a press conference about city electric rates, Redding’s recently-hired city manager William Tarbox announced a “new era” in Redding’s governance. Council members haven’t yet met publicly to discuss such a plan but some say they’re on board.
Get ready for California’s 2026 primary. Your questions about voting, answered
Get answers to your election questions ahead of California’s June 2 primary election.
No state funds for proposed True North Behavioral Health campus
State funding wasn’t awarded to build a proposed behavioral health campus that supporters said would have met intersectional county needs. Local leaders say problems have been identified and solutions are still needed.
Another Shasta County kook.
This tag-team, Frank & Russell, travel around the State of CA with Happy emoji smiles thinking they can fool the public…not so. Please go back to your little den of falsehoods. Who paid these fact-free two to come here ? Likely out of our county budget. And…the Sheriff of Shasta Co. has no jurisdiction to order the Election Dept. to do anything, so forget that Hobbs & Co. Their job is to protect the staff at county polling sites from coo-coo birds like this charlatan from who knows what planet.
Yes-Recall. No on Measures C & D.
When Frank provides solid proof of those 400 illegal/fraudulent votes we can evaluate his claims. Till then, it’s a fantasy and talk is cheap.
Kari Lake. . .the tide is turning for the right! Yahoo!
I attended the meeting. Mr. Frank did not present any evidence to support his charges. He did claim to have spoken with two people from the Sheriff’s department a month ago about illegal voting in Shasta County. He happily referred maybe 5-6 times to the fact that they gave him a case number. But he didn’t mention any other action from the Sheriff. When I had a petty theft in my front yard and talked with the police, they also gave me a case number, that’s standard procedure and, by itself, doesn’t mean law enforcement gives the case a high priority.
A person recently attended Mr. Frank’s town hall and then analyzed his claims that the State is illegally inflating the voting rolls in our county. Evidently the population stays about the same but the number of registered voters sometimes shoots up. Frank says this proves illegal inference. This person (Jenny?) claimed the upticks in registrations aligns with the campaigns of Obama, Sanders and Trump, three very popular candidates who inspired many people to register to vote for the first time in their lives. This is a very reasonable explanation. Mr. Frank just laughed it off. I’ll trust Cathy Allen over this fool any day!
Since Mr. Frank is a public citizen with no affiliation to Shasta County, and no warrant for confidential information; I’m finding it very difficult to believe our Sheriff’s Department would give him such confidential information, especially “case numbers”, of an open case!!! Someone should be following up on that! I’m praying Shasta county constituents can see through all the MAGA BS!!!
I liked when “Dr. Frank “ referred to himself as a “whackadoodle” during today’s board meeting. He seems to understand his presentation is a bunch buffalo them with bulls—t fast talk.
He must love having folks like Patrick Jones fund his trips. I think even Kevin Crye rolled his eyes at one point when Frank was talking about “dirty” politics. Absolutely unbelievable… literally.
These are not just some random yokels approaching an open microphone. This is a well rehearsed campaign to sow totally false information, wild conspiracy theories, and damaging accusations against county workers, poll volunteers, and state officials!
Their victims are people already poisoned by red state politics, Trumpism, lies, rumors, and deftly planted false stories. People are being cultivated to respond to violent acts of protest and rebellion, disparaging any local leader who answers back.
All we can hope for is sanity among our north state people, new leadership to arise, and a tremendous tsunami of voter support for new candidates.
Sounds just like trump. Lies and conspiracy. We have to remove those maga nuts soon.
Sounds like a bunch of school kids arguing. Maga needs to go. There conspiracies are ridiculous. And that Frank tried trying stir things up. Typical maga moves. They always go violent and loud. Trying to intimidate people. Sad.
OMG!
Our county is literally crazy.
Our BOS is instigating nonsense, conspiracy, and maga stupidity.
Crye and jones must be replaced
Sanity has to take over.
You have got that right! Need to recall the whole bunch of them. We have laws for a reason. To keep nuts out.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Laws in violation of the Constitution are null and void (see Marbury versus Madison). I witnessed Dr Franks presentation and this article is very biased/exaggerated against Dr. Frank and those fighting for fair and transparent elections. It is not always possible to wait on the judiciary to rule on an issue such as the New Mexico issue sited which involves public safety. The New Mexico issue was an obvious violation of the 2nd Amendment which numerous sheriffs and citizens agreed. Going the judicial route can be extremely costly and time consuming. Our own Sherriff has stated the recently approved CA SB2 law is unconstitutional (violates 2nd Amendment), and he will not enforce. The judicial has not always gotten it right and decisions have been reversed. The people need to get involved in cases of blatant disregard for citizens constitutional rights.
Dr. Laura Hobbs is not an elected public official. She has freedom of speech rights that I feel are being violated. All she did was introduce herself as a candidate for District 2 supervisor and she mentioned her website votelaurahobbs.com where lots of relevant information about elections and fraud in elections can be found. She has done an extremely thorough analysis of our elections that Shasta County citizens need to look at. She is a true patriot of the highest integrity who loves her Country and Shasta County.
You mean Hobbs’ fraudulent website about election fraud???
Lol, too rich.
Frank’s is selling “snake oil” to gullible people and has no proof of anything. He’s a waste of time.
Ridiculous waste of time bringing in a person who has no evidence to support his claims.
I’m not happy with my tax dollars being spent on crackpot theories.
That meeting was an echo chamber masquerading as a circus masquerading as solid “facts.” Dr. Frank’s presentation was merely a way of stirring emotional outrage with the already unstable Election Deniers. He’s yet another flimflam man preying upon the misguided individuals who were traumatized by the Pandemic. Urson Russell stated in his public comment that he is not from the area, so it seemed quite suspicious that he hyped up Dr. Frank before and after his presentation saying he really believes in what Dr. Frank is doing. His attendance smacked of nothing more than being the inside guy in the audience. Kudos to Jenny for getting up and calmly providing evidence as to why Dr. Frank’s data, while technically accurate, does not take into account certain factors like election popularity (Obama, Trump) and the increase in voter registration.
When Dr. Frank was backed into a corner with actual facts, he spoke in circles and when all else failed he would liken voter fraud to sexual assault and even murder, which was way over the top and diminished those actual heinous crimes. At times it almost sounded like he was “subtly” endorsing armed revolt to defend our rights as a “Constitutional Republic.” Throw in a few references to the 2nd Amendment, a few random “fraud” numbers here and there, half-truths, outright lies, vague PowerPoint graphs and you got yourself a charlatan!