Supervisors will discuss in closed session on Tuesday, June 16, a lawsuit that pits the state of California against Shasta County over a local ballot measure that runs counter to state law.
Will the county decide to defend the lawsuit, or take no position, which it did in February when a local resident, in a separate lawsuit, sued to stop Measure B from appearing on the June 2 ballot?
On Friday, June 12, California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the lawsuit, calling Measure B an “illegal election overhaul, including ending mail voting and requiring hand counting of ballots.”
Measure B would also require voter ID.
The state’s lawsuit contends that Measure B exceeds Shasta County’s authority as a charter county, and even if the county had such authority, the measure is preempted by state law.
With all ballots processed, the measure easily passed with 56% yes votes. Results from the June 2 election still need to be certified.
The state’s lawsuit against Shasta County was filed in the California Third District Court of Appeal. It comes nearly five months after the state Supreme Court on Jan. 28 rejected the city of Huntington Beach’s voter ID policy, upholding a lower court decision that it violates state law.
“Measure B is legally indefensible. It directly conflicts with state law and threatens to upend the orderly administration of elections. The stakes are especially high because voters in Shasta County are just months away from casting their ballots in the November midterms,” Attorney General Bonta said in a news release, adding that “no city or county gets to unilaterally rewrite our elections rules.”
Even before Shasta County supervisors approved putting the controversial measure on the ballot, the county’s legal team raised concerns about the measure because it conflicts with state and federal election laws, including the California Constitution and the National Voter Registration Act.
After supervisors approved the measure for the ballot last November, the California Secretary of State’s Office told the Record Searchlight that the initiative requiring voter ID will likely “suffer the same fate as others have.”
Chris Kelstrom, chairman of the Shasta County Board of Supervisors, said his position on Measure B hasn’t changed since March, when during a special board meeting he said overriding state election law with a charter amendment is not a path forward.
“I want all the stuff that is in Measure B,” Kelstrom told the Record Searchlight on Monday, June 15. “But all of that is illegal on the state and federal level and the way to change that is on the state level.”
Kelstrom said he will vote for a state voter ID initiative that has qualified for the Nov. 3 ballot. Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, R-San Diego, led the effort to get the measure on the ballot.
The District 5 supervisor did not say how he will vote in closed session on Tuesday if the board votes on whether to take a position on the state’s lawsuit.
“I will have to hear the information in closed session and be informed on it,” he said.
However, Kelstrom added that in February he was in the 4-1 majority that voted not to take a position on the lawsuit attempting to stop Measure B from appearing on the ballot. A Shasta County judge eventually ruled that the initiative could be placed on the ballot.
District 4 Supervisor Matt Plummer said he wanted to wait until after Tuesday’s closed session before commenting on the state’s lawsuit — though he was not surprised by the state’s action.
“I am sorry I couldn’t say more but with pending litigation and the county potentially on the hook for that, it’s an important conversation to have in closed session and figure out what the board as a whole wants to do,” Plummer said.
District 2 Supervisor Allen Long also would not talk about Tuesday’s closed session item, but he, too, was not surprised by the state’s action.
“Measure B violates state law and this is a very predictable result from the state,” he said.
County Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis was disappointed when supervisors voted in February not to defend the lawsuit attempting to stop Measure B from appearing on the ballot.
Curtis, who along with Shasta County, is named as a respondent in the lawsuit, did not immediately return a phone message or text seeking comment for this story.
Meanwhile, former county Assistant Registrar of Voters Joanna Francescut appears to have won the June 2 primary against Curtis that would return her to the elections office as its head.
Francescut declined to share her thoughts on the lawsuit.
“If I was the county clerk, I wouldn’t have any comment on that and I think it’s best to keep that between the state and county and let them figure it out for themselves,” she said.
Also named in the lawsuit as “real parties in interest” are Laura Hobbs, Diedre Holliday, Kari Chilson, Jim Burnett and Richard Gallardo, the group that helped Measure B get on the ballot. Hobbs and Gallardo co-chaired the Shasta Election Task Force.
Hobbs did not reply to an email seeking comment.
David Benda covers business, development and anything else that comes up for the USA TODAY Network in Redding. He also writes the weekly “Buzz on the Street” column. He’s part of a team of dedicated reporters that investigate wrongdoing, cover breaking news and tell other stories about your community. Reach him on Twitter @DavidBenda_RS or by phone at 1-530-338-8323. To support and sustain this work, please subscribe today.
This article originally appeared on Redding Record Searchlight: Shasta supervisors react as California sues county over voting rules
Reporting by David Benda, Redding Record Searchlight / Redding Record Searchlight
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
By David Benda, Redding Record Searchlight | USA TODAY Network
