Proponents have appealed suspension of Measure B, Shasta ROV says ‘they better hurry’

Proponents of Measure B, the initiative passed in the June primary that’s intended to make sweeping changes to Shasta County’s elections, are racing the clock to get the measure’s provisions implemented before the county’s ballot order is sent out to the printers. 

Shortly after voters passed Measure B in June, California sued the county, arguing that it violates state law. The measure would implement voter ID, significantly restrict mail-in voting and require hand counting of all ballots, among other significant changes.

Earlier this month, a Shasta judge suspended the measure pending further court order, saying that leaving the measure in place while its legality is debated would likely result in voter disenfranchisement due to uncertainty and confusion. 

Proponents of the measure appealed that suspension just days later in California’s Third Appellate District Court. Because the appeal process may take some time to work its way through the courts, the attorney for the proponents, Alexander Haberbush, also asked the court to act urgently to essentially unfreeze the suspension while the appeal is pending. 

He requested the court do so by Aug. 27, a date previously identified by Shasta Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis as the day before he planned to send ballot material to the printers for the November election. 

“They better hurry,” Curtis said over text, referring to the proponents’ legal fight to appeal the suspension of the measure so it can be implemented for the November election. 

Haberbush said he appealed in part because he wants the courts to ensure the county can implement whatever parts of the measure can be legally implemented for now.

“Measure B was approved by Shasta County voters,” Haberbush wrote, “and we believe their enactment should be given effect to the fullest extent permitted by law while the courts resolve the ultimate legal issues.” 

Haberbush explained that the state didn’t identify any laws that directly contradict implementing several of the measure’s provisions, including the use of paper poll books, selecting hand counters through a public lottery 60 days before the election and utilizing “a supplemental tally-sheet format.” 

His argument is one that’s already been discussed in court. During the hearing earlier this month when Measure B was suspended, Shasta Judge Benjamin Hanna said in a written ruling that the unchallenged parts of the measure can’t be separated from the provisions being argued, adding that those provisions were integral parts of the measure’s enactment. 

“It is simply not possible to functionally sever the provisions of Measure B without the Court turning Measure B into a statute wholly divorced from what the voters approved,” he wrote.

Yesterday, the state filed an opposition to the proponents’ requests to unfreeze the suspension. The secretary of state’s and attorney general’s offices did not respond to a request for comment on the filing or the status of the case. 

Shasta County declined to comment on the case, instead referring to a press release made earlier this month following Hanna’s suspension of the measure. 

“The election and voting policies described in Measure B will not be implemented for the November 3, 2026, General Election, unless further order of the court,” the release emphasized. 

Measure B would significantly limit mail-in voting, a method used by about 85% of Shasta’s voters. 

“Consistent with State and federal election law,” the release continued, “all Shasta County active registered voters will receive a ballot for the November 3, 2026, General Election by mail.” 

The state’s battle over Shasta’s Measure B is taking place as it simultaneously fights President Donald Trump’s executive order that seeks to limit mail voting in the upcoming election. Similar to Measure B, critics have argued that implementing such sweeping changes so close to an election would cause chaos and significant uncertainty among voters. 

---

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