Second Lawsuit Filed Against the Shasta Election Office by Activists, Largely Dismissed
The majority of the lawsuit, which has been repeatedly referenced by activists as evidence for the need to appoint new Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis and terminate former Assistant Registrar of Voters Joanna Francescut, was dismissed because it addressed matters not within the court’s jurisdiction.
On Tuesday, May 27, the Honorable Judge Benjamin Hanna formally ruled against petitioners Daniel Ladd and Laura Hobbs in Shasta County Superior Court, dismissing the bulk of their case against the Shasta County Election Office. The court found that Ladd and Hobbs complaint largely scrutinized parts of the election process that are up to the discretion of election officials.
The final written ruling in the case has not yet been made publicly available, but Judge Hanna’s tentative ruling in the case, released the morning of the hearing, indicates that the dismissal occurred because Ladd and Hobbs, who represented themselves, alleged “no specific ministerial act” that the election office had failed to perform.
In lay terms, this means that Ladd and Hobbs allegations of election malfeasance leveraged against the elections office in regards to the November election, do not amount to actual violations of election law. Instead, the procedures and practices that Ladd and Hobbs took issue with, fell within the boundaries of the professional discretion afforded to election officials under California law.
The ruling, which sided with Shasta County’s contracted attorneys, Christopher Pisano and Joanna Gin of Best, Best and Krieger, does not address whether or not the actions alleged in the lawsuit occurred. Instead, the judge’s ruling indicates that even if the allegations had hypothetically occurred as described in the suit, none would have constituted a violation of the law.
A Closer Look at the Allegations
Petitioners Ladd and Hobbs are the Vice President and President of the Shasta Elections Task Force, a private citizen group which has been active in protests against the election office. Their two part lawsuit was filed in February against former Registrar of Voters Tom Toller, in his capacity as the head of the elections office. Toller has since resigned due to health issues but since the case was filed against him in his capacity as an election official, it continues.
In the first and most substantial part of Ladd and Hobbs lawsuit they claim the election office gravely mishandled the November 2024 election process, accusing Toller of breaking election law in how he handled ballot processing and election observers.
Ladd and Hobbs specifically accused the election office of failing to allow for meaningful election observation, failing to maintain the ballots’ proper chain of custody, using a flawed tabulation system, and failing to follow the proper ballot duplication process among other allegations. The allegations were based largely on “52 affidavits”, essentially statements by a number of election observers, some of whom submitted multiple declarations for the lawsuit.
To hone in on one example, Ladd and Hobbs accused Toller of “failure to allow meaningful observation of the election process (Cal. Elec. Code § 15104)”. They described this violation in the suit as “preventing public observers from meaningfully monitoring critical election processes, including vote-by-mail signature verification, ballot duplication, and tabulation.”
The issue comes down to how the term “sufficiently” is defined. California law requires that election observers be able to “sufficiently” observe, but does not clearly define what that word means. However, past case law addresses the issue. In Election Integrity Project, Inc. vs Lunn the judge ruled that “sufficiently” close means close enough for observers to observe elections workers verifying a signature, but does not require that observers are close enough to make the verification themselves. “‘Sufficiently close,’” the judicial opinion indicated, “does not mean breathing down the necks of the election workers.”
In other words how close is sufficient for observation is largely a matter of managerial discretion, so the fact that Ladd and Hobbs felt they and other observers weren’t allowed close enough during the last election isn’t a matter the courts can rule on, because it’s within the purview of election officials.
The issue of observation was just a single fine point of many that the county’s legal team teased apart in documentation filed along with the request to dismiss the case.
Ladd and Hobbs lawsuit, Judge Hanna determined, asked the court to tell Toller how to do his job as an elected official. But telling a member of the executive branch how to do his job, he explained, is not the role of the judicial branch and therefore doing so would only constitute “metaphorically shaking his finger” at the election office.
This is the second lawsuit Hobbs has filed against the county. The first lawsuit was dismissed due to what Judge Hanna referred to as a “profound” lack of evidence. While this most recent lawsuit is now largely dismissed, one part remains, a section of the suit related to how the election office responded to public records requests by the petitioners. That issue will be addressed by the court on June 16.
How the Lawsuit Intersected with Hiring a New Election Official
After Toller announced his resignation, Shasta County Supervisors held a nationwide recruitment to fill the unexpected vacancy. Shasta County’s ROV is usually chosen through election but the position must be filled by appointment when it becomes vacant mid-term.
Toller’s Assistant County Clerk and Registrar of Voters, Joanna Francescut, was among those who applied for the role. During her public interview for the ROV position on April 30, Francescut faced a litany of allegations from a small but vocal group of the public who referred to her as dishonest and lawless, at times citing Ladd and Hobbs case against the Election Office as proof of their allegations. Most of those who spoke out publicly against Francescut were either petitioners in the lawsuit or individuals whose declarations had been included in the suit.
Hobbs also spoke, recited the allegations made in her, now largely dismissed, lawsuit. She sad Toller and Francescut took “ridiculous actions” during the November 2024 election and indicating that it didn’t matter whether or not those actions were legal, because they weren’t right.
After interviews, despite an endorsement from Toller, the support of the majority of the vocal public, and seventeen years of experience in the Shasta Election Office, Francescut was passed over by supervisors in favor of Florida-based attorney, Clint Curtis, who has never managed an election. He was selected for the position on April 30. Francescut announced her candidacy for the ROV role soon after.
Case Dismissed but Accusations Continue
On May 27, within an hour or so of learning of Judge Hanna’s ruling in person, Hobbs appeared at a Board of Supervisors meeting where she spoke publicly, continuing to cite parts of her own legal action as alleged proof of election malfeasance, without mentioning that the majority of her case had just been dismissed.
“Joanna Francescut has broken over half a dozen election laws and nobody is held to account,” Hobbs claimed.
Within hours, Francescut was fired by newly-appointed ROV Curtis. No reason was given for the termination.
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Authors
Comments (20)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
Killing of armed Minneapolis protester Alex Pretti ignites 2A debate in conservative Shasta County
Second Amendment supporters in Shasta County including some with connections to a local militia, weigh in on topics including the right to carry at protests and the federal government’s current approach to immigration enforcement.
Race for Shasta’s District 5 gets crowded as Anderson council member Mike Gallagher announces candidacy
Gallagher, who’s in his second term on the Anderson City Council, joins former Supervisor Tim Garman and current Supervisor Chris Kelstrom in a race for the seat. The three will face off during the primary in June.
Activist sentenced to three months for disrupting Shasta County board meeting, released with ankle monitor
Jenny O’Connell-Nowain was recently convicted for meeting disruption after a peaceful protest at the county boardroom. Today, a visiting Shasta County judge sentenced her to three months in jail. She’s already been released on house arrest, with an ankle monitor.
Hobbs and Ladd are acting as their own council while Shasta County has to pay tax money to defend against these charges. Prior to this hearing, Judge Hanna posted on the court website, his tentative ruling on this case. This gave both sides a chance to prepare a response and is standard procedure. Both Hobbs and Ladd were unaware. On April 1, the initial hearing had to be postponed because Hobbs and Ladd changed filing papers without telling opposing council. While accusing the ROV, they have made serious mistakes that could have been easily avoided. Their sloppy behavior shows their corruption. No preparation for court, just repeat the smears. And our tax money is again wasted!
Failed candidate for district 2 supervisor Laura Hobbs doesn’t care about election integrity.
Failed candidate for district 2 supervisor doesn’t care about truth.
Failed candidate for district 2 supervisor moved here from San Luis Obispo, showed up in 2021 spewing lies, and credited God for her mission.
But failed candidate for district 2 supervisor wasn’t a part creating a space for making anything better for anyone except herself.
Failed candidate for district 2 supervisor is here to break elections, to sow dissent, to repeat the lies until she convinces us its truth. Ultimately, failed candidate for district 2 supervisor is a pawn in new California’s game, where they keep pushing until a spilt is inevitable.
Here’s some questions to ask, if she isn’t from money how did she get a doctorate in microbiology, with no student debt? How did she afford to move here and not work after?
And while we’re at it, who is taking care of her home schooled children while she’s spends every moment of every day plotting to over throw local elections?
Your observations are absolutely spot on. Who is funding Laura Hobbs and is Laura Hobbs really who she says she is? Nothing adds up. It never has since she first stepped into the BOS chambers.
I’ve had MANY interactions with Laura Hobbs, I think she’s a fabrication. I’m sure if someone dug deeply enough and followed the money, they’d find she works for a nefarious foreign agent intent on disrupting American election integrity. But alas, just another mystery!
Several elections ago, I heard Hobbs, on her cell phone, say to someone, ‘Yes, I’ll turn in my hours’…who could that have been…someone from the East, or a local benefactor ?
So Ladd and Hobbs accused Toller of “failure to allow meaningful observation of the election process”, eh. And why is that fence around the counting portion of the election office? Because Ladd & Hobbs and the rest of their conspiracy addled minority stormed the office after the 2020 election and turned it into a scary place for the workers there, that’s why. Interesting how these folks like to create chaos and then whine (and sue) when their actions have consequences.
Curtis made an extremely compelling case and a set of direction strategies that were outstanding! Precisely what Shasta county wants by majority and needs out of common sense!
Well, let’s see. In a recent interview, Curtis said all the ballot counting processes will be videoed. He noted that while the ballot processing will be too fast to see individual votes in real time, Candidates will be able to slow the videos and count all the votes. Then he said, the candidates will likely have a total vote count before the election department will.
.
Huh? Candidates can slow the videos down but still get to the end before the vote counting machines? That idea and $5 will get you a 50 cent cup of coffee at Starbucks.
.
Plus he brags that he once wrote a vote switching program. Yet we are to trust him?
With all due respect, what Shasta county wants are free and fair elections. We can only have that with integrity, knowledge, and a proven track record. By over 90% the people want Joanna Francescut to oversee the office. Not a sleight of hand lawsuit- magnet with no job references and sketchy employment.
Imo, Curtis will try to subvert democracy and the rule of law in a slick smiley way to show favour to his patrons.
I hereby demand that Curtis place a document on the Election Dept. site that says: I, the undersigned, hereby do not allow my ballot, one side or both sides and the envelope my ballot was mailed in, not to be photographed by any means whatsoever; and that my ballot remains anonymous and secret.
Voters must have an option if Curtis is going to get away with this unconstitutional move. At least until the Attorney General makes a ruling on such.
Election Code § 15360(f) The official conducting the election shall include a report on the results of the 1 percent manual tally in the certification of the official canvass of the vote. This report shall identify ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE MACHINE COUNT AND THE MANUAL TALLY and a description of how each of these discrepancies was resolved.
Joanna Francescut: Wow! Our sample audit of 10,843 ballots found a whopping 511 discrepancies between the machine count and the manual tally. We’re not supposed to have a 5% error rate, we’re supposed to have a <0.1% error rate! I guess I will feloniously report only 10 discrepancies to cover up just how widespread the vote by mail errors were. Afterall, Tom and I repeatedly promised we would correctly count every ballot even though 50% required manual duplication due to blurry bar codes.
Judge Hanna: Well I guess she did submit a report, as required by law. I'm not one to judge the quality of her fraud, er work, so case dismissed unless See-No-Evil Bridgett decides to pursue charges.
Hi Harry – you seem to be sharing the exact same words as Jay Daggett did over on Facebook.
That’s because J Noble Daggett and Harry are one and the same.
They lost in court, and they now want to try people in the court of public opinion.
I am. If you look up Harry Markopolos you’ll see why I adopted his name of late.
Have you yet found the 15 minutes needed to verify that Francescut reported only 10 differences when her audit found 511? I would think allegations of fraud levied toward someone running for office, backed up by evidence repeatedly provided, would warrant at least that.
12/4 I first messaged you on FB about something being screwy with Dhanuka’s new vote totals when the county first announced the official results at the Redding Council Meeting.
12/26 I messaged you identifying 511 discrepancies, not 10 as reported, and pointed out that they appeared to disproportionately certain precincts, even providing a map. I also gave you context by providing a list of all 6 discrepancies – combined – found in all the prior elections to show how insane 511 discrepancies was. I also pointed out that they did not do a full hand count of the Happy Valley contest, contrary to Francescut’s claim in her report.
12/29 you said you’d look into it.
1/6 you said you’d look into it.
2/13 you said you hadn’t looked into it yet
6/1 you asked to see my “so-called” evidence
6/6 you said you acknowledged receiving it, but hadn’t looked at it yet.
Hi Harry/Jay: Thanks for the timeline.
Harry and Jay, not a voter in Shasta County, but spends countless hours researching a ‘Nothing Burger’ to quote a local supervisor.
I’m not? News to me…
And falsifying election documents to cover up massive errors is only a nothing burger to the corrupt.
So let us count the ways of crazy. Chemtrails, Secession from CA because our state is an illegal entity, Crye’s taxpayer charged trips to “Hand deliver a letter to Trump,” (he didn’t) and pray with Mr. Pillow (he did, but where’s that check, Mike), Dr. Mu (Crye Campain Contributor), an anti-vaxer, and Misquto-Milita-Man Knight (Flying Jewish Syrenges), Mass Election Fraud in Shasta County, (Dominion flipping votes through HVAC thermostats), and the millions spent replacing said machines… with machines, the hundreds of hours of said conspericies pimped for years in SCBOS Meetings, where no legal juirstrictin exists, even if there was any legal proof of this nonsence, (and there isn’t). Now, after Hobbs flunked out twice (at a taxpayer cost of $ 100,700), has Hobbs flunked out again? At what cost? When will the Bat____ stop!
Fascinating that an hour or so after judge Hannah’s sound decision, Hobbs was back in the Chambers of Chief Inquisitor Torquemada to report what was already decided (multiple times) in the court of law and public opinion. This represents a complete break from reality. Shattering stupidity and obduracy reign. In the land of Western Appalachia, extremist false ideology and fear trump reason, intelligence, experience, and responsible governance.
Western Appalachia- good one !! Redding definitely has that culture as it’s strongest influence, because so many of the people who moved there are from the Deep South, or those states in Appalachia proper. When moving to California, they wanted a place that reminded them of home. It’s amazing,when you think about it. No coincidence that one sees the Confederate flag everywhere too, including license plates. ” Hill culture” is alive and unwell,as always.