Why Voters Cannot Afford to Elect Joanna Francescut

Opinion Piece

“It is not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes.”

Joseph Stalin (infamous communist):

Stalin understood that control of the counting process trumps everything else. In Shasta County’s race for County Clerk and Registrar of Voters, voters face a choice that tests this reality.

Joanna Francescut, the candidate with 17 years in the office, is on the ballot despite lacking a college degree — a credential that many other California counties treat as a baseline for this critical executive role. While the California Election Code sets only minimal statewide requirements, most counties establish higher standards through job descriptions and board policies, typically requiring a bachelor’s degree in public administration, business, or a related field, plus substantial management experience. A formal degree signals training in administration, ethics, and analytical oversight of complex operations: voter rolls, ballot security, tabulation systems, legal compliance, and multi-million-dollar budgets.

Shasta County’s flexibility in allowing Francescut to run on internal tenure alone may feel like local control, but when the office literally counts the votes, lowering the professional bar carries real risk. Hands-on experience is valuable, yet it must be paired with broader qualifications — especially given the transparency concerns surrounding her record.

Francescut’s tenure as Assistant Registrar raised serious red flags about openness and accountability. Election observers reported limited access to signature verification, ballot duplication, and tabulation. Procedures were often rushed, and there was resistance to meaningful public scrutiny. Critics further allege that legacy staff slow-walked required reports and maintained barriers that eroded trust. Reports of unauthorized access to office systems after her termination only compound these issues.

This is precisely what Stalin’s cold warning cautions against. When those overseeing the count prioritize restricted observation over sunlight, public confidence collapses. Shasta County has already seen heated debates over election integrity. Expanding mail voting and complex processes without robust, real-time transparency fuels suspicion. Voters deserve to witness the machinery — not simply be told to trust the experts behind closed doors.

Effective election administration demands:

• Maximum lawful public observation at every stage

• Strict chain-of-custody protocols

• Timely, verifiable audits

• Staff committed to neutrality rather than institutional defensiveness

Incumbent Clint Curtis has pushed for greater access and reforms to restore faith in the process. Francescut’s approach risks reverting to the less transparent practices that left many observers frustrated.

Local races like this rarely draw statewide attention, yet they are where the counting actually happens. Shasta voters must treat the ROV contest with the gravity it deserves. Electing a candidate whose leadership has been linked to reduced transparency would validate Stalin’s cynical logic: the counters, not the voters, decide.

Shasta County’s elections belong to its people. Protect that principle in June by rejecting any candidate who treats transparency and professional standards as optional. The integrity of every future vote in the county depends on it.