Letter of Opposition to AB 2642
I submitted this letter to the California legislature, which states my opinion that Assembly Bill 2642 maligns Nevada County citizens. Assembly Bill 2642 is an urgency statute related to elections that will address a nonexistent problem of voters and election observers carrying firearms to the polls. Authors of the bill have dragged Nevada County and Shasta County into their justification for the urgency.
You must strike the language about Nevada County from AB 2642.
If the Legislature passes AB 2642 with the language about Nevada County, it will codify into law false statements about Nevada County citizens. The claims made in the bill about Nevada County refer specifically to an isolated incident prompted by mask mandates that occurred on January 20, 2022 that led to a restraining order granted against one person.
This issue was related to mask mandates – not elections.
The Court’s ruling makes clear that the three people involved were not at the elections office in connection with any election or to express grievances regarding elections, but only to check on the status of a recall petition. Moreover, the incident in question was prompted only over a mask mandate that had been ambiguously enforced within the county building.
The three members of the public visiting the elections office on January 20, 2022 found the door locked after Ms. Adona, the Assistant Clerk-Recorder at the time, had yelled at other citizens the day before, outraged that people were coming into the office without masks. The Court found Adona’s treatment of the public “very concerning, as her behavior appeared to escalate the situation and was only marginally rational.”
On January 20, 2022, a staff member – the “staffer” referred to in AB 2642 - came to the locked door in response to the bell. The staff member wanted the woman to wear a mask before entering but the woman wanted to enter without one. A scuffle ensued. The Court found that while the woman’s “shoulder was placed against the door to also prevent it from closing,” at the same time, the staffer “was trying to close the door and appeared to use some force, as she grunted while doing so” as the woman “was getting squeezed into the door frame.” This encounter at the door constitutes the entirety of this incident, which the Court calls “the focus of the case”, with no further incidents of threats, assault, or harassment occurring at the Nevada County elections office.
The Court found two of the three Respondents totally innocent.
The fact that the scuffle at the door occurred between only one woman and one staffer did not stop Nevada County from seeking a restraining order against the two innocent people - an elderly couple - who were standing in the hallway and never shoved the door, raised their voice, or touched any staff. Fortunately the Court also saw the error in this persecution and clarified that “there is no conduct by either of the [Respondents] which show violence or a credible threat of violence” and that “while they did enter the elections office after being told a mask was required and they were not wearing one, the entering appeared to be a peaceful gesture of defiance without accompanying defiant words or gestures.”
Nevada County succeeded in obtaining a restraining order against the one woman involved in the scuffle at the door. The Court found her pattern of defiant behavior related to mask mandates coupled with her intention to return to the elections office for the “legitimate purpose” of following up on the petition was concerning enough to merit the restraining order. This is an isolated and unfortunate incident and not an indicator of widespread behavior either in Nevada County or statewide that justifies this urgency statute. It does not support the “statement of facts constituting the necessity” of this bill.
AB 2642 disregards the truth about Nevada County.
The authors of AB 2642 ignore the details of this complex case in order to exploit any incident at a county elections office to fuel a political narrative that election workers are threatened and harassed by voters. This disregard for the truth is clear in the false language in subsection (g) of the bill: “Similarly, in Nevada County, the registrar-elect had to take out a restraining order against residents who harassed her, pushed their way into her office, and assaulted a staffer.”
This language is not only false, but inflammatory. It conveys a story that “residents” (in the unspecified plural) pushed through the door, rushed into the elections office, and then assaulted a staffer. With no context given, the public is led to believe that the “residents” were angry enough to take their angst out on a random staffer who happened to be in their way. Nothing could be further from the truth, as both video footage of the entire event and the Court’s ruling bear out.
Moreover, Ms. Adona was not the “registrar-elect” at the time, as she was not elected until the June 2022 Primary election. In January 2022 she was the Assistant Clerk-Recorder, not an elected official but hired staff.
Nevada County citizens are peaceful and respectful of our Elections Office.
Records requests to the Nevada County Sheriff’s Office confirm that there are no incidents where threats or harassment occurred involving the Nevada County elections office, from years 2017 to present. During elections, observers and voters have proven to be peaceful and respectful. To refer to this incident– which was sparked only by a disagreement over a mask mandate and involved one woman only – in AB 2642 to justify the urgency statute is misleading to the public and defamatory of the other two people present.
As legislators you serve the public. You must insist on accuracy and truth when writing and passing legislation, especially when points to a public case that can be traced back to three people, two of whom are totally innocent. The Court has exonerated them of any wrongdoing in this incident. Now the authors of AB 2642 disregard the Court’s ruling and unjustly drag them back in to state legislation.
Please refer to the March 3, 2022 ruling in Nevada County v Kenney et al and US Senator Chuck Grassley’s testimony to the US Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing on election security.
Amy Young
June 4, 2024