Source: CPRA records · Shasta County Elections
Phase 1 — Petition circulation
Mar
5
2025
Notice of Intent filed — explicitly as a "charter amendment"
Proponents Hobbs, Holliday, Chilson, Burnett, and Gallardo file with Shasta County Deputy Clerk. The filing is titled a "charter amendment for election transparency reform." This language is critical: charter amendments require a significantly higher signature threshold than general ordinances under California law.
View PRA Request Exhibit A · Notice of Intent (CPRA 25-823)
Mar
13
2025
County Counsel files lawsuit against its own initiative
County Counsel Joseph Larmour files in Shasta County Superior Court, arguing the initiative is unconstitutional and he cannot ethically write its ballot summary. Supervisor Kelstrom: "He cannot ethically write that summary because it would be misleading the public."
Mar
21
2025
Board drops lawsuit — signature gathering begins
Board of Supervisors withdraws the complaint. Larmour issues ballot title and summary. The initiative begins circulating for signatures as a charter amendment.
Why this matters: According to the Notice of Intent on file with the county, the petition was circulated as a charter amendment. Under California law (Cal. Const. Art. XI §3(b)), that requires 10% of registered voters — 11,573 valid signatures. For a general ordinance, the bar is 6,852 (Elections Code §9116 —
§9116 has been repealed; same formula now in §9118). What threshold was ultimately applied is at the center of the court case.