Shasta County Board of Supervisors Meeting Recap
- Elisa Ballard
- Dec 10, 2025
- 10 min read
Supervisor Crye Reveals He Must Have Surgery to Have a Tumor Removed and Supervisor Kelstrom is Elected as Chair for the Board Next Year
December 9, 2025
A regular meeting of the Shasta County Board of Supervisors was held starting at 9 a.m.
The employee of the month award went to Karen Ottman, Eligibility Supervisor of the Health and Human Services Agency, for her exemplary service to the agency being described as knowledgeable, respectful, genuine, and helpful.
Recognition was given to two Deputy Probation Officers, Gabriella Redelsperger and Kurtis Hult, who on November 20, 2025, performed heroic actions to save an unconscious male on the roadside of State Hwy. 273.
The County Executive Officer, David Rickert, and the five Supervisors, Matt Plummer (District 4); Corkey Harmon (District 3); Kevin Crye (District 1); Chris Kelstrom (District 5); and Allen Long (District 2), each gave brief summaries of their activities in the community since the last board meeting.
Plummer mentioned the County has received almost 2000 responses from the public to their online survey concerning priorities for the County’s strategic planning which will be presented next week. He is looking at options for using AI (Artificial Intelligence) in the County for improving workflows. He led a townhall event regarding the proposed Behavioral Health Campus on Monday evening. He wants to amend a policy to allow for any Supervisor to be able to bring forward an agenda item without approval from the Chair. That will be brought back for discussion at the next meeting.
Harmon wanted to remind everyone that it is Wrangler National Finals Week for the Rodeo (held in Las Vegas December 4 – 13; nightly performances begin at 5:45 p.m. – broadcast on the Cowboy Channel). He attended LAFCO (Shasta Local Agency Formation Commission) where Brenda Haynes was elected as a new public member of the board. He is working on the problem with the wolves and stated he will be attending a meeting in Sacramento on December 19th.
Kelstrom attended the “Coffee with the Cops” event in Anderson, which allows the public to meet their police officers. He attended the McConnell Ranch Board Meeting, the town hall meeting in Anderson for the strategic plan, the opening of Waste Management’s new recycling composting plant in Anderson, the LAFCO meeting in Shasta Lake, the Frontier Senior Center Breakfast in Anderson, and the public meeting on the Statewide Deer Conservation and Management Plan hosted by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) at Shasta College. He stated that the deer population is suffering due to restrictions on bear hunting and the ban on mountain lion hunting.
Long attended the Shasta County Fire Safe Council Board Meeting and is working on developing an updated Community Wildfire Protection Plan. He met with Jonathan Anderson of the Good News Rescue Mission to get to know him and the programs at the Mission. He also viewed the Sylvia Lane abatement project where there are squatters and six to eight trailers. He stated that the Shasta County code enforcement team is doing a great job. He attended the Igo Christmas Parade and there will another Christmas Parade in Ono this Sunday. (Cowboy Santa makes his grand entrance on December 14th at noon sharp, 11920 Platina Rd., – per Ono Grange #445 Facebook post.)
Crye attended the Redding Public Market grand opening in downtown Redding. He Met Doug Bond, CEO of Amity Foundation (their website states that they are dedicated to the inclusion and habilitation of people marginalized by addiction, trauma, criminality, incarceration, poverty, racism, sexism, homelessness, and violence.) As a child, Doug Bond and his parents were helped by the program provided by the Amity Foundation. Crye stated that progress is being made on the plans for a medical school for the North State and that a press release went out yesterday about it. Crye revealed during a routine medical screening he underwent, a tumor was found that will need to be removed. He asked for the media and the public to respect his privacy.
Regular Calendar Items:
Certification of Special Election Results - Clint Curtis, Registrar of Voters (ROV) presented the November 4, 2025, Special Election results to the Board, stating that turnout for the election was approximately 65,000 voters, which was higher than expected since it was not a major election. General elections usually see 95,000 voters participating, so this was a good number of ballots coming in and being processed using his new, more secure and transparent system. The former ROV had six to nine security guards overseeing the election office on election night due to issues with the public being angry about not having reasonable access to oversee the process. Clint Curtis said he didn’t need any security guards and there were no arguments or problems. He stated 70% of the Shasta County voters voted “No” on Proposition 50 (redrawn district maps). For Measure A (the sales tax increase), 64.7% voted “No”.
Public comments were received, with three speakers applauding Clint Curtis’ transparency and chain of custody for the ballots, the 100% accuracy of the results according to the 1% manual tally, and adherence to State election codes. It was pointed out that under the former ROV Thomas Toller and Assistant ROV Joanna Francescut, the manual tally did not match, showing 511 errors, even though Francescut reported that there were only 10 variances. Also, it was pointed out that there were 1) 2700 more ballots processed than voters who voted, 2) the random alphabet draw was not followed for placement of the candidates’ names on the ballot, 3) and there was a lack of chain of custody of the ballots once they were received by the ROV office, calling those 2024 election results into question.
Six speakers expressed dissatisfaction with the way the election was run, stating that the paper poll books used at the precincts slowed down the voting process, that there was confusion and lack of proper notice for the random ping pong draw for selecting the precincts to audit, the estimated count of ballots needing to be processed was not given on time to the Secretary of State, nor was it accurate.
The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to certify the Special Election Results as per their ministerial duty.
Discussion of the Proposed True North Behavioral Health Campus – Crye put this item on the agenda because he wanted a discussion with all of the Supervisors on this issue. He said that since the October 24th Special Board Meeting, the State of California has provided more information and changed their stance on reimbursements for IMD placements. Crye had voiced his opposition to the project in conjunction with Health and Human Services Director Christie Coleman’s opposition due to unknown costs to the County and the need for a 30-year commitment. Over the last month, Coleman’s staff has been in contact with ARCH Collaborative (who prepared the grant application for Signature Healthcare Services) and the State’s agency providing the grant funding for the project to get more clarification about costs and responsibilities on the County staff. Christie Coleman has since reversed her position, and now supports the proposed campus. Kelstrom has already sent his letter of support to the State for the campus. Crye wants to provide a letter of support to continue the conversation going forward, but also to state the conditions that he thinks should be included such as prioritizing the use of the facility for Shasta County residents, making sure the facility is secure for patients and the public, having out-of-county patients transported back to their own county upon discharge, and reimbursement for the Sheriff’s office if their services are needed at the facility. Plummer, Crye and Rickert will work on preparing the letter to reflect the board’s wishes, however, the November 28th deadline for sending letters of support to the State has passed. There are some conflicting requirements from the DHCS (Department of Healthcare Services) and AHP (Advocates for Human Potential) and Coleman is wanting to get answers from DHCS.
Approximately 16 members of the public commented on this issue, some thanking Crye for looking out for the County’s financial interests, while others were unhappy with Crye, Kelstrom, and Harmon’s earlier opposition to the proposed campus.
A vote was taken to bring the matter back for a decision on the letter in support of the conversation going forward on the proposed campus, once the letter is drafted. The motion was approved unanimously by the Board.
For the Public Comment portion of the Board meeting, 17 speakers voiced their opinions on a variety of matters, including:
- Concerns about local hotels providing transitional housing to pedophiles and arsonists without proper permits and without public notices to other hotel patrons.
- Opposition to a jail/alternative custody campus proposed to be built at 7251 Eastside Rd., next to a residential neighborhood (River Ranch), where residents rely on wells for their drinking water, where residents have already seen a drop in their property values on the mere suggestion that a jail facility will be built next door, where traffic, lights and noise will increase, where their safety may be jeopardized.
- A complaint was made that Crye blocked this person from his Facebook page.
- Concerns that there has been insubordination inside the ROV office by employees still loyal to Francescut. Concerns as to why the Election Commission has not been meeting for the past year, while others felt the Election Commission was a waste of money.
- Plummer commented that his nominee for Election Commission is a neighbor of his named Mark Reno who had some experience as a Shasta Lake City Council Member. This was Item C6 on the Consent Calendar to be approved by the Board at this meeting.
Board Discusses and then Votes on New Chair and Vice-Chair – Chair Crye nominated Kelstrom to be chair for the 2026 calendar year. It was seconded by Harmon. Plummer expressed his belief that Kelstrom had a chance to serve as Chair last year but deferred to Crye because Crye had to spend part of his term as Chair fighting the recall campaign against him. Because he did not take the opportunity then, and because it has been a tradition to let each Supervisor take a turn to be Chair, Plummer stated that Kelstrom should not be Chair and Plummer nominated himself for the Chair position. Plummer argued also that he should be chair because he was elected by the largest margin of votes for his District. Long seconded Plummer’s nomination. Crye stated that Plummer and Long were both in favor of the measure to increase sales tax in Redding, which was voted down by 67% of the voters, so Crye suggested that both Plummer and Long are not in alignment with the wishes of the majority of Shasta County residents. Kelstrom spoke about working well with Harmon and nominated Harmon to be Vice Chair, this was seconded by Crye.
There were 13 public speakers, nine were against Kelstrom, and four were in favor.
Plummer pointed out that he has worked to bring people together where there are divisions. Crye point out that Kelstrom is the only person on the Board who doesn’t have another job because he is retired, so he has more time to devote to being the Chair.
A vote was taken for Harmon as the Vice Chair. Approved by a 5-0 vote.
A vote was taken for Plummer as Chair. Long and Plummer voted yes. Kelstrom, Harmon, and Crye voted no. Motion failed.
A vote was taken for Kelstrom as Chair. Harmon, Kelstrom, and Crye voted yes, and Plummer and Long voted no. Motion passed 3-2.
Public Comments on Item R8 – Closed Session Item Regarding Ladd and Hobbs v. Toller – Six speakers voiced their opinions on the case. Three stated that the County should settle the case out of Court because the plaintiffs are not asking for any monetary compensation, only a statement that from now on, the election codes will be followed. The other three speakers resorted to name calling and and/or using four letter words to express their displeasure with those suing the County over what they felt were false and unsubstantiated claims. Gasps were heard in the audience as Dolores Lucero stated when speaking about Supervisor Harmon, “We know you are stupid.” When Crye started to object, she went on to shout “Shut Up!”
R11- Public Employee Performance Evaluation for CEO Rickert – Leslie Sawyer commented that she believed CEO Rickert has been doing a great job, going above and beyond, helping out with various issues and he has been very accessible.
Hearing on County Fees - After an adjournment for closed session, the Board returned to hear from Nolda Short, Auditor-Controller, about the fees to be charged by various departments of Shasta County. Departments are supposed to update their fees annually to cover their costs, as County expenses increase each year due to salary increases, pension increases, and other factors. The fee calculations are given to the Auditor-Controller, who then compiles a Master Fee List. New fees will be in effect 60 days after approval by the Board. Two departments are requesting to charge a lesser fee than what the County actually incurs for the service.
John Ingram, the Agriculture Department Commissioner explained that the Certified Producers Certificates cost the County approximately $285 at this time. The current fee is $20 to the producer. He recommends keeping it the same. Also, the Certified Farmers Market Certificates cost the County $709.79, but he is recommending keeping that fee at $50.
The ROV office charges $22 for passport photos and the cost to take the photos is actually $35; however, ROV Curtis does not wish to raise the fee at this time as he would like more time to review office efficiencies and try to reduce these costs.
Plummer and Long argued that the fees should reflect the actual costs to the County; Crye and Kelstrom preferred to take the recommendations of the Department heads to allow for reduced fees for these particular services. The public comments came from four speakers three who were in favor of reduced fees to encourage farmers and farmers’ markets. One comment came from Laura Hobbs who stated that Plummer was trying to micromanage the ROV office, which is "not a good look". The amount of general fund impact for the unrecovered costs to the County for the fees related to the farmers markets is relatively small at around $8,000 per year. A motion was made, seconded and a vote was taken to accept the ordinance for the fees as presented, with the exception that the ROV will come back within 30 days with his fee recommendations. The motion passed 3 – 2 with Kelstrom, Crye, and Harmon voting yes, and Plummer and Long voting no.
The next Board of Supervisors Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, December 16, 2025 at 9 a.m.
