On county time, Shasta election official Clint Curtis uses tour for state candidates to smear his predecessors
Shasta’s ROV pitched his process for counting ballots while alleging that past election officials, which would include his political opponent in the upcoming midterm, were engaged in fraud.
On the morning of Jan. 15 in the near-empty Market Street elections office, a group of out-of-towners idled in the lobby. They included six gubernatorial hopefuls and one man running for Riverside county supervisor, ranging in attire from suit-and-tie to flannel-and-work boots. A tall woman armed with a video camera worked the room, making sure everyone felt welcome.
That was Kim Yeater, whose business card read “mastercoach and host.” She’s a political influencer with the show Take Your Power Back on Rumble. Her content features interviews with guests including Shasta County election official Clint Curtis himself, a variety of J6’ers and 9/11 truthers, and a reservist with the Israeli Defense Force who holds “grave concerns” about American border security.
Alongside nationally-known election activist Douglas G. Frank, she helped facilitate Thursday’s tour of Shasta County’s election office, which was led by Curtis, on county time.
The event flier, billed under the slogan TAKE OUR CALIFORNIA BACK! described the tour as an “election transparency walk-through” and press conference, which was scheduled to be followed by an evening debate between the six candidates running for governor. According to the Secretary of State’s list of registered candidates; four of those six have no party preference, and two are Republicans.
Curtis used the tour to promote his own election processes and denigrate those of former election officials, which include his political opponent in the 2026 race for Shasta County’s Clerk and Registrar of Voters, Joanna Francescut.
Asked by Shasta Scout if the event was an appropriate use of local taxpayer money — given that he facilitated it during his working hours, paid for by the people of Shasta — Curtis responded, “we didn’t use any taxpayer funds. We gave a tour. I give a tour every day.”
State law prohibits elected officials from using public resources, including staff time, for personal gain, including campaign activities. Such activities can include, the law indicates, influencing or attempting to influence the action of voters for or against … the election of a candidate.
As to whether hosting the group was consistent with Curtis’ obligation to nonpartisanship as a county election official, he replied: “the Republicans wanted to come. I’m a Republican. We have invited the Democrats. [Assistant ROV] Brent Turner’s Democrat.”
Along with statewide candidates, there were local faces among the crowd as well: Leslie Sawyer, chair of the local chapter of Moms for Liberty, Daniel Ladd, whose election fraud lawsuit against the county has been dismissed by a Shasta County court, the soon-to-be incarcerated activist Jenny O’Connell-Nowain — one of Curtis’ most fervent opponents — as well as other concerned citizens who both support and oppose the election official’s controversial shake up of Shasta County’s election processes. Besides the current ROV, no other Shasta politician or political hopeful was in attendance.
“What you’re showing us today is not general practice in California, right?” election activist Dr. Frank asked Curtis rhetorically, as the group moseyed back to a part of the office where staff would typically stack ballots and run them through tabulators. “You’re spearheading election integrity in the state, and you’re showing other counties how to do this,” he stated.
For those who’ve followed Curtis’ tenure since he was appointed to his position last May, his pitch yesterday would sound familiar. He advocated integrating hand-counting alongside machines, because he believes voting technology could be easily compromised by Chinese hackers or other nefarious actors. He complained that the Shasta Board of Supervisors had declined to increase his budget to hire more people to hand-count ballots — a decision attendees took issue with, agreeing with Clint that a trustworthy election is “priceless.” And he recalled his decades-old history of testifying before Congress about alleged vulnerabilities innate to voting machines.
“And they still use them, and adopted it and made it harder and harder to check them,” Curtis remarked. In broad terms, he described the state’s objective as making elections increasingly opaque rather than transparent, while insinuating that a variety of government officials could have something to hide — whether that be those in charge of elections statewide, or those in Shasta who held the role before his time as ROV.
The majority of participants commiserated with Curtis on the feeling that nearly every card is stacked against those who believe American elections are being run fraudulently. The politicians on site also strategized on how to replicate Curtis’ approach to elections among their own communities, with the hope of bestowing more trust in the process — a goal they referred to as nonpartisan.
But not everyone was sold. Local resident Jeff Carr repeatedly rebutted Curtis’ claims, drawing visible irritation from others in the group. At one point Carr raised his voice after Curtis alleged without evidence that prior Shasta election officials may have been involved in ballot stuffing, a term that refers to the illegal submitting of more than one ballot per voter. Those officials would include his political opponent Francescut, who ran the March 2024 election in Shasta and helped run many others over recent years.
“You’re asserting, right now, that there was criminal activity?” Carr probed. Curtis affirmed that idea, claiming to have reported the alleged fraud to the federal government. In response, Carr demanded to know why the ROV hadn’t approached California’s Department of Justice about the matter.
“You reported it to the federal department of justice because you felt that was a friendlier venue, but you didn’t report it to the state, which is the institution in charge of running elections,” Carr claimed, insisting that the ROV should contact California’s DOJ. Curtis acquiesced, agreeing to do so, while others in the group rolled their eyes. “You got what you wanted, it’s going to the state!” one man said.
Responding to Curtis’ fraud allegations, Francescut told Shasta Scout that Curtis is trying to distract from the goals he wasn’t able to achieve in the last election. For instance, she pointed out, his transparency-led livestream video of ballot processing did not capture the vast majority of ballots in the county — mail-in votes that arrived to the office before Election Day.
“My mother taught me better,” Francescutt said, adding a rebuke for Curtis based on maternal advice. “Stop talking poorly about people. Do good, work hard, and state the facts.”
After the tour concluded, organizers shepherded the group outside for a press conference. From behind a makeshift podium — a stack of milk cartons draped in black fabric — the speakers took turns opining on similar themes of increased election transparency.
Influencer Yeater’s final gesture was unfurling a 50-foot banner commemorating jailed Colorado election clerk Tina Peters, who was convicted for election tampering and recently symbolically pardoned by President Trump. Referring to Peters as a “political prisoner,” she addressed the participants who had elected to help her hold up the signage from end to end.
“She needs to be released now, President Trump is working his end,” Yeater exclaimed. “We’re in the fight with her for election transparency!”
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Comments (55)
Leave a comment
Related Articles
Local chapters of Turning Point USA will host a “faith night” amid looming protests
The conservative youth organization’s event, scheduled for Feb. 7, is the latest flashpoint among ongoing political debate in the county.
Disaster declaration by federal administration makes loans possible for December flood victims
The city and the federal Small Business Administration will host a Disaster Loan Outreach Center for several weeks to help individuals and businesses affected by the flooding apply for loans. It opens Feb. 6.
Civic Auditorium secures crucial funding through June, though future remains uncertain
The Redding City Council is allocating $116,000 a month for the next four months as a short-term solution to the Civic’s financial problems. Council members will discuss the future of the venue again in May to decide on further action.
See Shasta County Personal Manual Rules Code 27.1 let alone Ca. Government Code 8315 and 54964. Seems there could be a serious problem for Curtis in the near future…
Yes, county policy is a reflection of state law in this case so we simply cited the law as it trumps policy anyway.
Shasta County is watched closely by other elections officials from all over the state, and I can assure you, not one is looking to replicate a single thing Mr. Curtis is doing. He leads the state in nothing.
First of all – real brave election officials don’t hide behind fake log in titles
Secondly even a half smart official knows these security measures are simple and appropriate. We must have strong chain of custody over our ballots coupled with open source software to bolster voter confidence
In all of my adult voting years I have never heard, read or seen anything like this Curtis guy.
What is typically a thankless job, has been turned into a sideshow from a guy that seems to making up as he goes.
Being unprepared for deadlines, unreasonable funding requests and always grandstanding for attention are just some of the character defects of Curtis. It only makes me wonder what’s behind the curtain that has yet to be revealed…
Oh good Lord—election fraud? Donald Trump won the last three votes for President in the North state. Until recently, our congressman was and likely will again be a Republican. Our state assembly person and state senator are Republican. Almost all of our local government officers are rightists. Excuse me, but what election fraud?
She falsified the November 2024 post election audit report, falsely claiming only 10 differences between her post election audit and the initial machine count (a 0.09% error rate) when her audit actually uncovered 511 differences (a 4.7% error rate).
Worse, 505 of the differences affected only vote by mail ballots (a 7.7% error rate) likely due to staff often copying the wrong ballots when encountering blurry bar codes. With 86% of Shasta voting by mail, this suggests an average error rate of 6.6% for the election (exceeding the margin of victories in numerous contests).
But she covered it up.
Thanks so much Harry, for Truth.
It’s not true.
Harry doesn’t know, that’s why he is saying “likely” and “suggests”. He is also getting pretty creative there with his math to support his suggestions.
I suggest that it is very likely that it is untrue. (Can you spot the humor in the last sentence??)
“…this suggests an average error rate of 6.6% for the election (exceeding the margin of victories in numerous contests).”
.
You are asserting audited error rates that differ significantly from the ROV’s reported error rates, which would amount to criminal fraud. That’s a damningly strong assertion, but you provide no evidence in support of that assertion.
.
If there is a real average error rate of 6.6% which exceeds the margins of victory in “numerous contests,” are you suggesting that the errors in the counts were systematically skewed in favor of the winners—not random—and thus swung the election outcomes? If so, where’s your evidence?
At best, this was in bad taste. At worst, it indicates that there’s a wolf in the hen house. Thanks for this investigative reporting and analysis.
Where there’s smoke, there’s fire and it seems to me that Curtis is laying out a huge smokescreen to.cover up something much larger brewing within in ROV office.
Really? Please, what is he covering up?
To access the Election Complaint Form go to https://www.sos.ca.gov. I urge everyone with a conscience to complete this form online and submit it to the Secretary of State.
FYI – you can complete an Election Complaimt Form online (sos.gov)
Maybe if enough people submit complaints the State will investigate.
So he is politicking during his ROV time? Sounds like Patrick Jones needs to get on the ball and sue over this obvious law-breaking. If Curtis will be this dishonest in front of cameras while extolling his virtues and bad-mouthing previous staff, WHAT THE HECK WILL HE DO WHILE IN PRIVATE OR SECRET? Oh, I think we know that- it was caught on video back in September.
“If Curtis will be this dishonest in front of cameras”
Come on, what was Clint Curtis dishonest about?
Well Nick, as a former observer, I can say “plenty”.
Nick, I have a bridge to sell you for very cheap. It’s such a tremendous deal that you absolutely must take it.
Best deal in the whole history of the world. Ever. You’ll never see anything like it again.
Nick, I’m the most honest person will ever meet and I want what is best for you. This deal, again, will never be seen again because there has never been one like it.
Nick, I’m sure that you, being the utmost honest person ever, will recognize this deal for what it is…
So Nick, want to buy a bridge??
But what did he lie about?
Uh, for starters his lie about “Ballot Stuffing”?
So, how was it a lie? First hand knowledge please. No more “He lies about everything” Proof!
It was a lie because it never happened. He has presented not a scintilla of evidence of ballot stuffing and what can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
This isn’t that hard, Nick. If a person makes an assertion that a crime has been committed, he’ll be asked to present the evidence. If he simply repeats the assertion again and again, but fails to provide the evidence (or even acknowledge that he’s been asked to provide it), people are going to assume that the assertion of crime is total BS. A flagrant lie.
.
That’s how it’s always been. Way it’s always going to be.
Maybe Joeanna could tell us why boxes were stacked in front of the windows that obstructed the view of the observers from observing the vote counting. Thomas Hilderband who is 6’3″ was the only one who could see over the boxes. Yes, I can provide other witnesses.
Is that really the best you got?
Pathetic attempt at a distraction from the real issue: Curtis was campaigning pure and simple.
Patrick Henry Jones is suing our district attorney because supposedly she campaigned on county time. By that standard, surely you would agree that Mr Curtis was in the wrong here. Right Nick?
Wouldn’t you say that campaigning using county resources is wrong? And guess what, I too have plenty of witnesses for what Mr Curtis did.
In your opinion. To me he’s trying to get the community involved or explaining the new vote counting system.
Proof, Nick! Provide proof, not opinion.
Would you agree that using county resources to campaign is wrong?
You ask for proof, then you say isn’t proof, and then ask for proof again, that you again say isn’t proof. Never good enough for you.
And …whoooosh!
Oh Elizabeth, thank you for the chuckle. The fact that I was doing a parody of Nick Gardner went right over your head.
And by the way Elizabeth, Nick’s opinion in no way shape or form, is “proof” of anything.
You do understand that, right? That a person’s opinion isn’t proof?
So you’re right Elizabeth, his opinion isn’t good enough for me when he isn’t offering any real solid proof.
Thank you, and please come again real soon.
These continued nitpicking complaints over past elections staff by all you self-appointed election inspectors remind me of a tunnel job I was on years ago. We were drilling holes and pumping grout to seal the porous rock behind the concrete tunnel lining. The specifications provided that for every two grout pumps we had to have one standby pump. One night a pump went down and an inspector refused to allow us to bring the standby pump on line to save the hole. His complaint was that we would then have had two pumps running with no standby as required by the specifications. If your nitpicking complaints had not be so accusatory and obnoxious perhaps the election staff would not have felt compelled to shield themselves from you.
Nevin, thanks for the great reporting. It amazing that the Shasta County ROV Office went from a nonpartisan position to a fullblown MAGA conspiracy propaganda machine, paid for by Shasta County taxpayers.
How is this event and use of county resources not a simple example of illegal electioneering?
Great reporting. Thanks
As an election reform activist now assistant ROV .. I must state clearly the Miracle on Market Street 2025 election was stellar and beyond reproach. There was strong new transparent methodology and the restless natives were calmed. This is a huge success for the county as the previous situation left behind by former election admins was unacceptable
Wait…
Wut? The “restless natives”??!
Oh boi, you really don’t know the people of Shasta County very well.
LMAO,
Brent, I don’t need to trip you up, cuz you do it to yourself…
Ask yourself what you did wrong here. Bet you still don’t know.
G’day, Mr Turnet.
I have had the pleasure of conversation with Shasta folks – many if them born and raised – with an overwhelming amount supporting the security upgrades we implemented for 2025 Election security is s non partisan issue and the social experiment has now been proven up as a major success. By embracing snd including the fringes the friction was dissipated and the “Miracle on Market Street” set the statewide standard for security. People might br upset by personalities but knowledgable reformists must stipulate that the Curtis Plan was very effective
Thank you, sir!
The “Miracle on Market Street”. Great slogan for a made up nothingburger. Cracks me up every time!
No, it wasn’t effective at all.
By what metric do you determine success? According to Clinton Curtis, all the ballots were going to be counted in hours and live streamed for all to see. By that metric, you guys failed.
Shasta county was the LAST county in the entire state to finish the counting. As far as the Livestream, I don’t think it actually worked for anyone trying to view it.
That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Need more examples? There are plenty more.
What an odd thing to say…
Yes I agree with you, Jack never backs up his claims, just word salad. Doesn’t even use his full name, like you.
I know that reading comprehension isn’t your strong point, but hey at least you are trying. And that’s what matters Nick, you just keep on trying and one day you’ll get there.
(Hint: Leroy was responding to Mr Turner.)
Actually I do use my full name. I am a one-namer. Kinda like Prince or Madonna or Cher
Campaigning is a series of activities meant to achieve a political goal.
What Mr Curtis is doing is more than just a tour. He is bad-mouthing his opponent, and praising his own activities because he wants the votes, pure and simple.
He is campaigning on county time, and it’s on the taxpayers dime. (Which is illegal, btw.)
Waiting for someone to try and refute this.
It seems people are curious about the condition of the Shasta County elections office when we first arrived to reform it Here’s a bit of what we found –
Chain of custody protocols and logs – absent or deficient
Process regarding physical ballot security
– absent or deficient
Institutional knowledge / cross training
– absent or deficient
Office morale –
– deficient
Those rooting for a return to the daze of dysfunctional security and inside baseball gamesmanship are misguided. Shasta was gifted with new vision that now leads the state and is to be celebrated!!
I have observed election procedures for 4 different leaders now: Cathy, Tom, Joanna, and Clint.
What you say about the previous three, that’s not the truth is far as I have observed.
I’m going to have to call baloney on your claims.
That’s ok. Obviously you are just guessing as to the condition of the office and I am speaking from actual experience. There is a difference between guessing and actual hands on experience
Thosr rooting for the county over high school friendships agree the new system has valuable security upgrades
Nope. No guessing. First hand experience as an observer through 4 ROVs.
No is buying what your selling, but nice try.
Brent-you are failing to address the issue addressed in the comment to which you are responding.
Mr. Curtis is blatantly campaigning while on county time.
Respectfully, Mr. Turner, chain of custody logs are sealed with each election, so of course you wouldn’t (or rather, shouldn’t) have access to past logs. The process regarding ballot security, naturally you’d disregard it since you don’t agree with it or think your ideas are better. Institutional knowledge and office morale? Uhh…. the minute Joanna Francescut was let go was that office’s downfall in both those regards. Plus – way to talk down about your own staff, man. Read the room. Perhaps YOU are the reason the morale sucks?? Mr. Curtis’ “new vision” is laughable at best, and no matter how many times you repeat the lie that it now leads the state, it doesn’t make it so. What a joke.
Of course your comment raises the question… How do you know? We tend to speak truth to Power regardless of who’s in the room by the way. As an observer, your problem is you are still behind the curtain and cannot actually know what’s happening. The idea is to remove the curtain so that the public has complete transparency. Enhancing public confidence is the key. Please don’t pretend like you have working knowledge here because obviously you are using fake names and have no idea what you were talking about.
I’ve not heard him use his opponent’s name in a negative manner.
Accusing someone of ballot stuffing without proof isn’t negative?
Hey, we get that you have a man crush on Clint Curtis, but at least be truthful.
FYI, I am not the Jeff mentioned in the article, and my comments in previous articles should not be attributed to him.
I would hate for someone else to be blamed for my “not-so-gentle” comments because of some knuckle head in Shasta county coming to the wrong conclusion.
Excellent coverage of this event. I was astounded at the number of times Curtis demeaned the previous election office staff. I really considered this whole event to be electioneering.
In your opinion. To me he’s trying to get the community involved or explaining the new vote counting system. Why are you socialist so angry?
LOL,
So much anger in Judy’s post. Just wow.
Thanks for pointing all that anger out because I had missed it. Completely.
You sir, have an uncanny knack at reading people. You should be putting that talent to good use. Maybe the CIA or FBI? Bless your heart.
(In case it isn’t clear to you, /sarcasm.)
Bottom line that CANNOT be refuted: Curtis was campaigning on county time.
I don’t care what else he wants to call it.
He was campaigning, and using tax payer dollars. Against the law.
Any attempt to defend against that is WEAK.