Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves Runbeck printing contract after heated public comment on elections office
Summary
After nearly an hour of public comment focused on the Registrar of Voters and two investigations, the Shasta County Board of Supervisors pulled and discussed a ballot‑printing contract with Runbeck Election Services (C7) and approved it as a fee‑for‑service agreement. Speakers debated past printing errors, contract length and transparency; the board approved C7 5–0.
The Shasta County Board of Supervisors voted 5–0 on May 5 to approve a fee‑for‑service contract with Runbeck Election Services for ballot printing and related services after pulling the item from the consent calendar for separate discussion.
The contract (C7) drew sustained public comment: 30 speakers addressed the meeting overall and eight people spoke directly on the Runbeck item, asking that the board move election‑related items from the consent calendar into open discussion and demanding termination or 180‑day cancellation clauses. Speakers cited a 2024 overspray incident and urged local printing if Measure B (local control of elections) passes. Others defended the Registrar of Voters (ROV) appointee and called the criticism a pre‑election attack.
County staff and counsel said the Runbeck agreement is a fee‑for‑service arrangement requested and drafted by the ROV’s office, reviewed by County Counsel for legal sufficiency and constrained by a $3.5 million maximum. Chair Kellstrom and supervisors emphasized that the county would only pay for services actually used: “If we don’t use them, we don’t pay them,” the chair said during discussion.
Supervisor Long noted earlier efforts to evaluate local ballot‑printing alternatives on cost grounds and said printing locally remains an option the county should continue to study. County Counsel described the process for department‑initiated contracts and confirmed the ROV requested the Runbeck services.
The board’s approval does not obligate the county to use Runbeck; staff said the contract authorizes pricing and services if the ROV elects to engage them. The motion to approve passed unanimously. The board also left open the option of bringing related items back for additional conditions at staff or board request.
What’s next: The ROV office will decide whether to use Runbeck for upcoming elections; supervisors and members of the public said they expect continued scrutiny and possible policy changes about election contracting and local printing capacity.
