Shasta County Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis confirmed on Thursday that discussions about hiring Tina Peters for the Shasta elections office have ended. Curtis said Peters, who is currently focused on election‑integrity work across the United States and in Washington, D.C., does not have the time to serve in a local capacity.
Background on Peters
Tina Peters previously served as an elections official in Colorado and was convicted of election‑related crimes, serving time in prison. Earlier this month Curtis announced on a local radio program that he was exploring the possibility of bringing Peters onto the Shasta elections staff. The announcement attracted national media attention, but many observers noted that her criminal record and parole conditions made a local hire unlikely.
Peters’ Statement
In a statement released by her attorney, Peter Ticktin, Peters clarified that she has not accepted any formal position with the Shasta elections office. She wrote, “There have been discussions about ways I might assist with election integrity and ballot‑authenticity efforts, but no formal role has been accepted. This has never been about just one county; my concern is for all 3,144 counties in America and whether every citizen can trust that our elections are free, fair, and transparent.”
Registrar’s Reasoning
Curtis issued a definitive statement saying Peters will not be coming to Shasta because “She is very busy with election integrity across the country and in D.C.” He added, “I need someone that could be present at the office; she just doesn’t have the time.”
Political Reactions
Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, denounced Curtis’s earlier hopes to hire Peters on Facebook, calling the notion of a “job offer” a disgrace. The controversy has drawn additional attention to Shasta County, already dealing with ongoing election‑related issues, including a state lawsuit over Measure B, a voter‑approved initiative that would overhaul the county’s election system. Measure B remains suspended by court order, meaning Shasta will conduct its fall elections under the existing framework.
Ballot‑Fraud Concerns
Both Curtis and Peters have voiced concerns about alleged foreign interference and fraudulent ballots in recent elections. Curtis said he has locked questionable ballots in a secure room and hopes local or federal agencies will investigate, though no investigation has yet begun. He noted that the Trump administration recently announced a plan to probe alleged election fraud in California and several other states, underscoring the federal focus on election integrity.
Local Impact
The decision not to bring Peters onto the Shasta elections staff is likely a relief to many residents who worry about the optics of hiring a convicted election offender. It also allows the registrar’s office to focus on routine election operations and the pending legal battles over Measure B without the distraction of a high‑profile, nationally‑charged hiring saga.
Looking Ahead
Shasta County will continue to prepare for the upcoming fall elections under its current procedures while awaiting further court rulings on Measure B. County officials say they remain committed to transparent, fair elections and will monitor any developments related to ballot‑fraud allegations.
Original reporting: Shasta Scout (Redding) — read the source article.
