Special Shasta board meeting results in a decision to release information, ‘as soon as possible’

The board’s closed session was related to the initiation of litigation. Supervisors voted to release as much information as possible
“related to an issue that falls under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State,” California’s chief election official.

Deputies arrive at a special meeting of the board of supervisors. Photo by Annelise Pierce

During a special weekend meeting today, Shasta County supervisors discussed a closed session item related to initiating litigation. 

Afterwards, a report to the public was made by County Counsel Joseph Larmour, who said the board had agreed to “release as much information as legally possible regarding an issue that falls under the jurisdiction of the secretary of state, as soon as possible.” 

The Secretary of State is California’s chief election official. 

It’s not clear what information will be released by supervisors or when. The meeting was held as ballots for the June primary and a combined special congressional election were being processed a few blocks away at the Shasta Elections Office on Market Street. 

Shasta’s chief election official, Clint Curtis, has come under considerable scrutiny since being appointed to the position last year. He’s implemented a number of new processes and procedures and hired election activists, including proponents behind a controversial election-related initiative known as Measure B that’s currently on the ballot.

Here’s what happened today

Chair Chris Kelstrom began the meeting by saying he was unsure what the public might have to add during public comment noting that even most of the supervisors were unaware of the topic to be discussed. 

But the public did have things to say, mostly speculating during the open comment period that the closed session was related to elections. With the first speaker, Kelstrom enforced staying on strictly on the topic of litigation, forcing them to halt a reference to elections. With other commenters, he allowed comments on elections to be shared. 

Election staffer and central Measure B proponent Laura Hobbs was among those who spoke. She said she was in the process of preparing a time-sensitive document for the Secretary of State yesterday when she was called away to speak to County Counsel Larmour and County CEO David Rickert. 

“Not surprisingly their line of questioning focused on Clint Curtis,” Hobbs said, as Larmour and Kelstrom called out, trying to stop her from speaking. “It appears there are more false allegations that have been levied against Clint Curtis.”

Kelstrom interrupted Hobbs, firmly calling for the next speaker. Hobbs protested, saying it was her right to speak. They went back and forth briefly as she held her ground at the podium. Hobbs then continued speaking over the commotion saying, “you guys are being played.”

“Contrary to what this county is claiming, none of those allegations are true,” Hobbs said.”I’m opposed to litigation against Clint Curtis. Do not spend taxpayer dollars in litigation against Clint Curtis.”

She also referred to Larmour and Rickert’s interruption of her report to the state as “election interference.” 

Kelstrom responded firmly, saying she was interrupting the meeting, and looking to Larmour for help. The county attorney said the appropriate thing to do would be to have Hobbs removed by law enforcement, noting that none were present. Kelstrom then told Hobbs she was disturbing the peace and threatened to call law enforcement to intervene, while Larmour said a report would be forwarded to the sheriff’

Shortly after, supervisors moved to closed session for about an hour. While the board was in closed session, two Sheriff’s deputies arrived, taking up positions in the chamber. Before the closed session ended, Supervisor Kevin Crye reappeared in the chamber, chatting with county staff as other supervisors continued to meet.

When the board returned from closed session, County Counsel Joseph Larmour announced the board’s vote. Supervisor Kevin Crye also spoke briefly, saying he hoped a statement could be released by Monday. Then, referencing his reappearance in the chamber mid-meeting, Crye said he didn’t need to listen to the board’s discussion because “I already know where I land on all of this.”

Crye told a reporter that he did participate in a vote on the matter.


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

Author

Annelise Pierce is Shasta Scout’s Editor and a Community Reporter covering government accountability, civic engagement, and local religious and political movements.

Comments (5)
  1. So we now have possible litigation that involves the Secretary of State. Of course Laura Hobbs would shoot her lying mouth off . She has been the catalyst for much of this discourse in County business. This mayhem is not done by a long shot, these conspiracy theorists will see to that.

  2. It makes the election results even sweeter- except for Measure B which will certainly be overturned by State Supreme Court.

  3. Wow! Sounds like the state is getting ready to drop the hammer on Clintie the Incompetent Clown, and Loony Laura tried to ride to his rescue. The fact that Kelstrom threatened to have her removed speaks volumes. They all are on the verge of being kicked to the curb and seem to have had enough of the local election-fabulist fruitcakes. Pass the popcorn.

    Selah

  4. Thank you for accurate and informative reporting. The public needs to understand the underlying conflicts going on in our election process.

  5. Woah. Sh*ts goin down.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Shasta Scout is proud to have been providing in-depth coverage of local elections since 2022. 

Close the CTA