Shasta Supervisors Appoint Clint Curtis, Squabble over Tourism Designation

Shasta County supervisors faced a raucous crowd during their Tuesday night meeting. At times, protesters drowned out the voices of official speakers. During one such incident, following a 3-2 vote by the board to appoint Florida-based attorney Clint Curtis as the County’s chief election official, a protester was given two warnings. The protester left voluntarily but not before yelling an expletive back at Board Chair Kevin Crye.

Most of the noise during the meeting came from a small crowd in the back of the room who wore black clothing, face masks, and hats, and carried signs referencing Supervisor Kevin Crye, fascism, and the need for nonpartisan elections. The group of about six sometimes mocked public commenters by mimicking their voices as they spoke. 

After Supervisor Crye repeatedly called for quiet, Supervisors Matt Plummer and Allen Long also addressed the crowd, reminding them of the importance of being able to conduct the public’s business without disruption.

“I agree with Supervisor Crye on this,” Plummer told the crowd. “Our board wants to get stuff done. You have your… three minutes and you can say whatever you want during that time. But please be quiet so we can get through this and we can have a robust discussion up here and make some decisions that will improve the community.”

It was one of the only times he and Crye spoke cooperatively last night. Tensions between the two were palpable as Crye repeatedly utilized a unified voting block of three — himself, Supervisor Chris Kelstrom and Supervisor Corkey Harmon — to take decisive action, often after summarily dismissing Plummer’s comments and concerns.

Clint Curtis Appointed

During the board’s discussion on whether to appoint Curtis as Registrar of Voters (ROV), Supervisor Allen Long shared information about Curtis’ background check material. A staff report provided to the board indicated that CEO David Rickert and Director of Support Services Monica Fugitt had “found no reason to disqualify” Curtis based on the background results. 

Long told his fellow supervisors that he was concerned that only a limited staff-led background check had occurred. Noting that background check materials are public record when it comes to appointing a position that’s usually filled by election, Long brought up a history of seven lawsuits — including one related to garnishment of wages due to a bankruptcy filing. Shasta Scout has requested the background check materials but is still pending a response from the county.

“My point with this,” Long said, “is that we’ve got a lot of litigious activity that is swirling around this particular candidate. And when we’re talking bankruptcy and garnishment and some of those things from financial institutions… I think it’s important that we consider this in the context of an elected position, which we’re appointing, for dealing with public funds and those kinds of issues.”

Rising to speak to the board, Curtis acknowledged the bankruptcy filing, claiming his history of whistleblowing related to election machine code had made it difficult to make money. He did not address a second point raised by Long, that Curtis had failed to list on his application a current position with a public defender’s office in upstate New York. During his interview with the board a few weeks ago, Curtis told Long he “didn’t know” why he hadn’t included the current position in his application materials. 

In response to Long’s remarks, Crye chastised him, saying he wasn’t supposed to share Curtis’ background information publicly. Long calmly rejected that claim, explaining that he’d already checked with County Counsel Joseph Larmour. Long then made a motion to conduct a deeper background investigation into Curtis before voting on whether to appoint him. No one seconded the motion and Curtis’ appointment was approved moments later, opposed only by Long and Plummer. 

Tourism Designation Awarded to Shasta Chamber

Board members also voted 3-2 to grant the title of Designated Marketing Organization (DMO) to a for-profit entity known as the Shasta County Chamber of Commerce which was started in 2023 by several local business owners. Shasta County does not have a tourism contract with any third party and has not had a designated marketing agency, at least in recent years.

Kelstrom, who introduced the agenda item, did not explain whether offering the Shasta Chamber the DMO title would benefit the county in any specific way. But he referenced his interest in gaining the Shasta Chamber’s help with securing flight services to and from Redding’s airport. 

Plummer and Long both opposed the decision to give the contract to the Shasta Chamber, noting that there was no competitive process. But Supervisor Kelstrom said he wasn’t sure why it was “such a big deal,” explaining that no money would change hands after the designation, and claiming that the board is not supporting the Shasta Chamber financially in “any way, shape or form.”

“(DMO) is just three letters”, Kelstrom emphasized. “They asked us if they could be supplied with these three little letters, and they didn’t seem like too big of a deal to me… I figured this would be very non-controversial.”

It’s true that no county general funds are being transferred to the Shasta Chamber, but the designation does likely provide financial benefit. As Kelstrom acknowledged in response to questions from Supervisor Plummer, the title will give the Shasta Chamber “a little more legitimacy” and “a little more clout” when it comes to tourism contract negotiations. 

It’s a truth that was reaffirmed by Shasta Chamber Director James Mazotta, who stated similarly that the designation will give his organization more credibility and legitimacy. Whether or not the Shasta Chamber has a DMO title, Mazotta said by way of example, has come up in responses to various requests for proposals, and in interactions with Visit California. 

Laurie Baker, the General Manager of the Shasta Cascade Wonderland Association, which holds a regional DMO contract with Visit California, told the Board last night that her organization would like to receive the benefit of the county’s DMO designation.

“We’ve been doing this work for years,” Baker said, “we already have a website, we already have social media, not to mention one of the nicest welcome centers in California. And we already have a 72-page visitors guide.”

She said she knows there’s no exchange of funds for the title at this point, but said she imagines “once somebody’s official the money could follow later”.

Crye told her if she wanted the designation she should have asked for it earlier, saying he’d told Todd Jones of the Redding Chamber the same thing. Asked by Plummer if the Shasta Chamber is seeking the regional contract with Visit California that Baker’s organization currently holds, Mazotta said the Shasta Chamber hasn’t applied.

“We’re actually taking the stance right now”, Mazotta said, “that we’re interested in running (the Shasta Chamber) without having to find or ask for funding from anybody.”

That’s a departure from the stance the organization took last year when the Shasta Chamber was among a number of organizations who applied for a tourism contract worth up to $1 million annually. The Shasta Chamber came in fourth place for that RFP process out of 11 respondents. The Redding Chamber of Commerce came in first. After the results of the RPF came back, supervisors decided not to fund the tourism contract.

Plummer reminded Mazotta of that history, which had already been alluded to in a public comment by former Supervisor Mary Rickert. In response Mazotta called the RFP process “a big lesson” saying it helped him realize “maybe that’s not really where I want to go.”

Crye responded by calling the rating and ranking process for the tourism contract last year “complete sabotage,” a remark that prompted Plummer to remind Crye that the scores were formulated by a committee of three, including Kelstrom.

“I think if we’re going to do this designation,” Plummer added, “then we should do it to someone who we’ve already established is qualified at the highest level through a competitive process.”

“And we’ve already established that”, Plummer continued, “and it’s not this organization.”

His comments angered Crye.

“You’re talking about someone who’s the backbone of Shasta County,” he said, referencing Mazotta, “someone who’s been promoting the county and being in that space.”

“You,” Crye said dismissively to Plummer, “have been here all of 10 minutes.”

Notably, the Shasta Chamber’s founding Director, Nigel Skeet, is represented by Valor Talent, one of Crye’s businesses. Skeet was in the room last night but did not speak to the board.

Crye was among the three supervisors who voted to pass the resolution designating the Shasta Chamber as the county’s official DMO. Scant details about what that title might mean are documented either in the staff report or the board’s official resolution. 

5.15.25 7:41 am: Out of an abundance of caution, we have removed a section of this article referencing information related to Mr. Curtis voter registration.

---

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