Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Shasta County certifies November results after protracted public debate over procedures
Summary
After hours of public comment that ranged from praise for new transparency measures to allegations of mishandled ballots, the Shasta County Board of Supervisors voted 5-0 to certify the November election and to bring back a staff briefing on election procedures.
The Shasta County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously on Dec. 9 to certify the county’s November election after an extended period of public testimony that included both praise and sharp criticism of the Registrar of Voters' office.
Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis summarized operational changes he said increased transparency during the election, telling the board, “we made it so everybody could see everything,” and describing additional cameras and chain‑of‑custody steps the office introduced. Curtis said turnout exceeded expectations and that many of the procedural changes were intended to make observation easier.
But dozens of speakers who signed up for public comment offered a range of views. Some observers said the office’s new layout and cameras made the count far more examinable; long‑time election observers said the 1% manual tally matched machines and praised the chain of custody. Other speakers alleged staffing and reporting problems, questioned signature‑verification timing, and urged the board to consider replacing or auditing the ROV office. One public speaker asked the board to “follow the law” and requested more detail on certain late reports; another called the process “night and day compared to previous elections.”
The board took two separate procedural votes tied to the certification. By unanimous voice vote the board approved a motion to return an item for discussion of election procedures to allow supervisors to ask staff specific operational questions and consider potential process changes. After taking public comment and asking questions of the ROV, the board then approved certification of the results by a 5‑0 roll call.
The board did not take any action today to reverse results or to place legal holds; several speakers said they plan to pursue external review through other channels. Supervisors recorded a motion to have staff return with procedural details and timelines for any recommended changes.
