Shasta County Supervisor Kevin Crye Will Face A Recall Election, Likely Next Spring
The county’s election office has certified enough District 1 signatures to move the recall forward for a vote. Crye says he’s unafraid to face voters at the ballot box because he’s the same guy they elected last year.
Shasta County Supervisor Kevin Crye pushes a shopping cart for a member of Redding’s unsheltered community leaving the Mercy Canyon camp on March 28. Photo by Annelise Pierce.
Opponents of Shasta County Supervisor Kevin Crye turned in just over 5,100 signatures last week in an effort to recall him. On September 25, they learned their months of efforts will indeed put Crye’s name on the ballot for possible recall.
County Clerk and Registrar of Voters Cathy Darling Allen’s office released a press statement saying almost all the signatures that recall proponents turned in were verified by the elections office. Only fourteen signatures were rejected as unverified and another fifteen were withdrawn.
The fact that so many of the recall signatures were verified concerns some who support Crye. Yesterday, September 26, two local community members spoke to the Board of Supervisors saying that the fact that so few signatures were rejected by Darling Allen likely indicates some sort of election office fraud. Speakers compared the Crye verification numbers to those during former Shasta County Supervisor Leonard Moty’s recall, when the elections office rejected far more signatures.
Crye recall organizer Dana Silberstein replied strongly to that idea during her own public comment, saying the reason so few of the recall signatures were found to be unverified this time around is because she and other recall proponents did their homework before passing the signatures in.
“We kicked out several hundred of (the signatures) before turning them in.” Silberstein responded to those who had concerns. “It’s called homework and organization and planning. So thank you, for the A.”
Her statement matches similar remarks made by recall organizer Jeff Gorder in response to questions from Shasta Scout last week when the signatures were turned in. At the time, Gorder said recall proponents had rejected around 500 signatures through their own confirmation process before turning in the rest to Darling Allen.
In a statement released to the media, recall organizers said they’re proud of their politically diverse volunteers, funders and petition signers.
“We all stepped forward to address Supervisor Crye’s behavior and votes. During his short tenure he has divided, betrayed, and failed our community. We have shown that actively participating in local government, and following the law, we can make a positive impact with our community.”
Speaking to Shasta Scout during a break in the Board of Supervisors meeting, Crye said he’s feeling quietly positive despite the recall moving forward.
“I care but I’m not worried. It is what it is. I’m feeling confident. I’m the same guy.” Crye said.
Holding up a framed photo of his wife and children he had displayed in front of him at his Board seat he continued: “I’ve started bringing this in because it just helps me bite my tongue.”
The County Clerk will present the certification of recall to the Board of Supervisors, on October 3, 2023. While the date of the recall election has not yet been officially set, Darling Allen said she anticipates that it will occur on March 5, 2024.
If you choose to leave a comment please keep in mind our community guidelines. All comments will be moderated to ensure healthy civic dialogue. Have questions, concerns, or comments you’d like to share with us directly? Reach out: editor@shastascout.org.
Through December 31, NewsMatch is matching donations dollar-for-dollar up to $18,000, giving us the chance to double that amount for local journalism in Shasta County. Don't wait — the time to give is now!
Support Scout, and multiply your gift
Author
Comments (13)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
A group of community members are hoping to start a new medical school in Shasta. Here’s what we know
Redding Vice Mayor Dr. Paul Dhanuka and Simpson University President Dr. Norm Hall are some of the leading figures behind the plan.
With more rain ahead, Redding officials explain flooding, urge caution
This weekend, the city’s stormwater infrastructure became clogged with debris due to the speed and volume of rain, officials said, leading to serious flooding in parts of Redding.
The Redding Public Market opened about a month ago. Here’s how it’s going
The CEO of the development company that owns the market said the venue, which is serving around 2,000 people a day, is revitalizing downtown.
The recall people came by my house and said”Kevin Crye has cost us millions of dollars”. My Crye has not cost us any money to date.
“Mr. Crye cancelled the Dominion contract”. False, the whole board cancelled the contract.
He voted for it, he owns it . Your statements again is ignorance. Really, let’s review this statement. My Crye didn’t cancel the contract the board did.
Sounds like what children say when they project their guilt.
Like I said ignorance
This still leaves me wondering how “millions of dollars” have been lost because of Mr. Crye. Please explain this.
Thank you, Paul.
Marsha Collins
Well let’s see Marsha:
1. Money wasted on canceling the Dominion contract.
2. Money wasted on having to buy new voting equipment for accessibility purposes
3. Millions spent on outside legal counsel because Crye, Jones, & Kelstrom will not listen to county counsel.
4. Crye went to see Mike Lindell on the County’s dime, and we still don’t know fully what they discussed. (So much for transparency.)
5. Crye had a Pac Man machine installed using county funds.
These are just some of the things that he’s done to cost us money. Along with that he has said and done some incredibly dumb things.
One of my favorites is him justifying putting Jon Knight on the mosquito board by saying that Jon Knight has experience with West Nile virus because Jon Knight was one of the first people in Shasta County to catch it.
You can’t make this stuff up…
Honesty and integrity were two qualities missing in the signature gathering process.
You’re making an absurd false statement. Signatures were gathered with the utmost integrity and honesty, and that’s why 99.7% of the signatures were perfect.
Your ignorance floors me! I have no problem with debating opinions but out and out ignorance like yours is shameful.
Honesty and integrity are two qualities that are missing from those making fraudulent accusations against those who gathered the signatures.
Mr. Crye has not been truthful on too many occasions. He has fallen under the spell of the hard – far – right, and has fallen down on the job of being a fair and balanced supervisor.
Mr. Crye seems to be showboating his new far right acclaim and using Shasta County as a stepping stone for higher political aspersions, while stepping on Shasta County citizens, and stepping all over the Shasta County infrastructure of governance and county departments that serve the people.
In typical extreme right political fashion, Crye is purposely causing chaos, social division and harm to citizens, doing so in the style of far right political advocate Grover Norquist.
Mr. Crye has forgotten that the supervisor job is supposed to be politically nonpartisan and the voters need another opportunity to vote for someone that is a uniter rather than a divider.
Kudos to the hard work of the recall committee.
I read somewhere that the County supervisors have spent $16 million on outside counsel over the past year or so. Why is that? Does Shasta County have incompetent counsel? I think some of that $16 million could/should have been allocated to the Sheriff’s department to help reopen the closed floor and also to offer some pay increases to current County employees. Do the supervisors plan to continue to outsource counsel (likely because they don’t like the recommendations county counsel gives to the supervisors)?
The correct figure, according to the county, is $16.5 million since January 2020 . . . a period of about 3.5 years. As to why the county is spending money on outside counsel, it’s likely a reflection of a) typical practice b) unforeseen changeover in county counsel positions c) increased litigation. The last one is potentially the most concerning but without research into how an additional $4.5 million each year on outside legal counsel compares to previous years, or to counties of comparable sizes, or to the county’s in-house spending, it’s difficult to make much use of this number.
Mr. Crye is hiding his true feelings. If he truly is concerned about the health of the county and the county budget, he’ll resign his seat so it can be filled and the county can move forward. That would be the truly conservative move to make, with the handwriting on the wall.
I totally agree, but Crye is far from a conservative, he’s more right wing radical in my opinion, a Patrick jones wannabe.