Shasta board will reconsider censuring elections official Clint Curtis
Supervisors expressed conflicting perspectives on the idea of censure during today’s brief discussion. The board plans to reconsider whether to issue a formal rebuke against the county’s top elections official in July.
“It’s a waste of time.”
That’s what Shasta County Supervisor Kevin Crye had to say today about the possibility of censuring Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis. The idea of a censure — or formal rebuke — was first discussed in May after two county investigations into Curtis found he had engaged in verbal abuse against staff that included threats of violence.
Those substantiated findings included reports that Curtis had threatened to slap or “throat punch” a staffer along with a threat to pull a staffer out of their office by their hair. Curtis has denied any wrongdoing.
When the findings first became public, just weeks before the June primary, supervisors voted 3-2 — with Supervisors Allen Long and Matt Plummer dissenting — not to censure Curtis, at least not yet. The decision to delay a possible censure was made, Chair Chris Kelstrom said at the time, to avoid impacting the public’s vote.
Since then, supervisors have faced repeated questions from the public about why no further action has been taken.
Curtis, who both administered the June election and ran to maintain his appointed seat as ROV, failed to gain the votes needed to continue in his role for the next four years. He’s slated to be succeeded by Joanna Francescut, the county’s former assistant registrar of voters, who garnered nearly 58% of the public’s vote.
Today, a few public commenters debated Shasta County’s dual investigative findings about Curtis’ behavior, accusing Shasta County Support Services Director Monica Fugitt, who conducted the second investigation into Curtis, of dishonesty and bias. One even said Fugitt, or one of her superiors, should be disciplined as a result of the findings.
Supervisors did not address those concerns, instead voting to support a motion by Long, seconded by Plummer, to reconsider censuring Curtis. The motion was supported by Kelstrom, but only after Long amended it to ensure the discussion of censure won’t occur before election results are certified, something that’s expected to take place on July 2.
Crye — who was among the three supervisors who voted to appoint Curtis to the role last year — was the only one to oppose the vote to discuss censure today. He said he’s “never been up for censure” and considers the idea a waste of time.
Like Curtis, Crye failed to gain the votes needed to maintain his seat. In January, he’ll be replaced by current Redding council member Erin Resner, who won the primary with about 54% of the vote.
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Author
Comments (22)
Leave a comment
Related Articles
Some supervisors want to put limits on Shasta County’s nonprofit contracts. Here’s what you should know
On June 8, Shasta supervisors voted to move towards passing a local law restricting the county from contracting with nonprofits that spend more than 18% on administrative costs. The county’s elected auditor-controller has pushed back.
Shasta elections official says he’ll certify June primary despite demands from activists
At a recent board meeting, election activists — some of whom now work for the county elections office — alleged fraud on statewide voter rolls, demanding that Shasta’s election official not certify the vote. Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis told a reporter yesterday he’ll certify the vote unless a court order tells him otherwise.
Reach-out from an unnamed entity raises fears about possible data center in Mount Shasta region
This week, the Mount Shasta city manager revealed that the city had received an inquiry from an entity interested in building a data center at the former Crystal Geyser facility in Siskiyou County. The discussion comes amid ongoing concerns about water shortages across California.
Of course, Crye calls it a waste of time! Both Curtis and Crye are Trumpers. Crye will try to cover for Curtis, who was identified by an outside investigation and an internal county probe commissioned by Shasta County, of committing substantiated threats of physical violence, abusive and unprofessional conduct, retaliation, and creating a hostile work environment. After all, such conduct might or might not be a factor for Crye or Curtis, as both support their social – political leader, a court-adjudicated rapist and criminal 34-count convicted felon.
.
Crye, Harmon, and Kelstrom enthusiastically brought Curtis on to Trumpify Shasta County elections, as P. Jones, L. Hobbs, and Crye have been advocating for years; they only balked at defending Measure B in court because of the massive cost involved.
.
HERE’S the BIG WASTE: Millions of taxpayer dollars and 5 years of countless hours adding up to hundreds of thousands spent in SACBOS meetings by people like Crye, Hobbs, Curtis, Kelstorm, and Jones, pimping and propagating the proven-to-be-false BIG LIE election conspiracy for MAGA, believing that Shasta County would have their backs and that they would be elected or stay in office. Nope. Shasta County voted to deny that nonsense. And we won’t even talk about Crye’s Chemtrail – Covid – Chriss Street or Nigel Skeet B.S.
.
True, Measure B won. Kelstrom’s excuse for coming in second was, “People thought they were voting for Gallagher (for Congress).” I wouldn’t necessarily disagree; I’ll say the same about Measure B. People thought they were voting for Carl DeMaio’s Voter ID measure on the November ballot.
.
Hey Crye. It’s not your money or time to waste!
““…accusing Monica Fugitt…of dishonesty and bias. One even said Fugitt, or one of her superiors, should be disciplined as a result of the findings.”–that was me–Nick Gardner
When a government employee is tasked with an investigation all the facts should be presented. Monica cherry picked only the side of older employees who didn’t like Curtis and his way of running the office and who, in my opinion, were less than truthful.
Monica excluded written statements contradicting what Curtis was accused of and didn’t mention interviews of newly hired staff who stated the accusations were bogus. Unless someone higher up directed her, she should be fired.
Perhaps you can explain why the employees you say are liars never had any issues with Tom Toller who, like Curtis, was appointed over Joanna after CDA retired? And we all know who the newly hired employees you are referring to, who will say anything to protect their election denier hero, Curtis. Not to mention Crye and Kelstrom admitted they told Curtis many, many times to stop threatening and harassing employees, even calling Curtis an idiot and a moron behind closed doors.
” Perhaps you can explain why the employees you say are liars never had any issues with Tom Toller who, like Curtis, was appointed over Joanna after CDA retired?” —Maybe because Joanna ran the election?
” And we all know who the newly hired employees you are referring to, who will say anything to protect their election denier hero, Curtis”—They don’t deserve a voice?
” Not to mention Crye and Kelstrom admitted they told Curtis many, many times to stop threatening and harassing employees, even calling Curtis an idiot and a moron behind closed doors.”—??????????How would you know? Your credibility is lacking.
NG
You’re calling up someone else’s lack of credibility? I guess Hacks-R-Us is happy to have you as a card-carrying member. As far as your male hormones go…HAHAHAHA. What a joke. Get a grip.
The election denier election office employees were interviewed, and like everyone else, investigators had to gauge their bias and judge their credibility. Curtis waived confidentiality of the closed door deliberations about the investigations during a board meeting and one of the people present was free to disclose what Crye and Kelstrom said about Curtis in closed session and shared it with me. Calling him an idiot and moron is verbatim, Nick. I would say ask your buddy Crye yourself, but he is such a liar I doubt he would admit it. Perhaps Kelstrom would tell the truth. Let me know if they own up to it. I suggest you interview them on your radio show and get their answers on the record.
Funny nick, you make it seem like you were there for the investigation. You weren’t, and you just showed that you have no idea how investigations are conducted.
.
You do realize that they will typically have in-person interviews during the investigation? Typically these interviews are also put “on the record”, or recorded in some way, so that it makes it very difficult for a person to change their story after the fact?
.
Whatever written statements you’re talking about came after two separate investigations.
.
In other words, those written statements aren’t worth a hill of beans.
.
But sure, this conspiracy keeps growing by leaps and bounds and now includes Monica, the county, and well… EVERYBODY else who isn’t a part of your little election denier group. Yep must feel terrible to feel that the whole world is closing in on you. (It’s not, there is no conspiracy)
“Funny nick, you make it seem like you were there for the investigation. You weren’t, and you just showed that you have no idea how investigations are conducted.”—-I was there for Monica’s presentation to the board.
“Whatever written statements you’re talking about came after two separate investigations.”—The written statements came during the investigations, the interviews also.
“But sure, this conspiracy keeps growing by leaps and bounds and now includes Monica, the county, and well… EVERYBODY else who isn’t a part of your little election denier group” I was only refering to the investigation Monica preformed.
“Yep must feel terrible to feel that the whole world is closing in on you” —No and at least I have the male hormones to use my name, Nick Gardner.
1. You were there for the presentation, not the investigation, and you still are showing that you have no idea about what happens in an official investigation.
2. Prove the written statements came during the investigation and not after.
3. It still must suck to think that almost every one else is it to getcha.
4. You got male hormones, do ya?? LMAO. Rick, you do realize that saying that is a self-own, right? (Nah, you probably don’t.)
5. I told you before and you weren’t pay attention. This IS my real name. I just won’t tell you my middle name because I don’t like it. That’s really pathetic if you think that somehow because you don’t believe that’s my name, that I care.
Fugitt conducted an investigation, not a popularity contest. Curtis harassed some employees but didn’t harass everyone. The fact that some weren’t harassed has no bearing on the harassment of others.
Listening to the opinions of a lame-duck loser who is largely responsible for the Clint Curtis debacle is the waste of time.
.
MAGA leaders are all the same. They harp about accountability right up to the point where it’s one of their own who needs to be held accountable. Accountability is a one-way street for these corrupt assclowns. They see it as a weapon rather than a principle.
The widespread disapproval of Curtis evidenced in the comments to all of the Shasta Scout stories concerning him is telling.
His manner of conduct is repulsive and seemingly such that he should not only be censured but removed from office if that is possible, so that Johanna can begin to undo the damage to the election office and staff in preparation for the November midterm.
What would it take to remove Curtis without being vulnerable to a lawsuit?
Sorry Kevin, it is not a waste of time. Crye sponsored chemtrail presentation is wasting board’s time.
Censure will do nothing to clean up the hot mess Curtis has created in election office. However, since Curtis has made it clear he plans to seek other grifting opportunities anywhere in the country he can find one, from a risk management perspective Shasta County better censure him so any jurisdiction thinking of hiring him needs to know two investigations concluded substantiated managerial misconduct. The censure would likely show up in a background check.
Additionally, election office staff needs to be reassured the Supes have their backs.
Crye needs to put his big boy pants on, swallow his pride, and acknowledge he made a huge mistake snubbing Joanna for this grifter recommended to Crye by disgraced election denier Mike Lindell.
The censure vote should be 5-0 in favor of censure.
Brad, you are so spot-on. A generation from now, people should see we acted in good conscience in terms of censuring poor behavior.
They also need to censure him for accessing (with an election worker’s help), locked paperwork, making photocopies and removing whatever it was from the elections office. He is just plain crooked. The only possible fraud with Shasta County elections is this fraudster. Even if the state is looking into it (are they?), Curtis should be censured by those who chose him over Joanna Francescut. Like they didn’t know Curtis would be this bad. You put him there!
Additionally, election office staff needs to be reassured the Supes have their backs.”
Does that apply to the new hires also?
Of course it does. The board has already voted to cover any legal fees employees may incur defending themselves from litigation initiated by Curtis. Crye and Kelstrom have cost county taxpayers millions pandering to the election deniers whims and it could be millions more before all is said and done. But look on the bright side Nick, Joanna might become a millionaire at the conclusion of her lawsuit against county for unlawful termination without cause.
“…accusing Monica Fugitt…of dishonesty and bias. One even said Fugitt, or one of her superiors, should be disciplined as a result of the findings.”
.
Isn’t it funny how the election deniers claim that it is EVERYONE else who is dishonest, and that EVERYONE else is out to get them?
.
Almost sounds like a conspiracy theory…
There is no voter fraud , research has found such a small amount.
This is a manufactured issue to give the low IQ magas something to grab on to.
Same with voter ID
The alleged conduct is acceptable because Curtis lost the election? Wow.
No surprise that Crye said it’s a waste of time. If anyone is an expert in wasted time it’s that man right there. Of course he thinks that. That’s because any penalty handed down on Curtis is a direct reflection of Crye himself because as we all know Crye personally sought out Curtis for this position and then made sure he got it, the second time. Yes the same Mr. Curtis that was going to fix our so called rigged elections in Shasta County. BTW Curtis how’s that witch hunt going dear? I do think something is coming next week though right before or the day of the election certification. If so hold on to your hats folks because our Shasta County kind of crazy could get a whole lot crazier,
“It’s a waste of time. It doesn’t aggrandize me and makes me look bad”. FIFY
Selah