The State of Jefferson Secessionists vs The New California State

The State of Jefferson: Regional Identity, Secession Aspirations, and Public Debate

QUICK OVERVIEW

• Goal: Advocates for the creation of a new State of Jefferson by combining rural Northern California and Southern Oregon counties.
• Rationale: Supporters frequently argue that rural regions face neglect and underrepresentation by state leaders in Sacramento.
• Proposed Area: Northern California counties (generally north of Redding) and parts of Southern Oregon.
• Key Themes: Local autonomy, natural-resource management, taxation concerns, and cultural differences between rural and urban regions.
• Current Status: Some county-level symbolic resolutions have passed in support of the idea, but the movement has not achieved formal steps toward statehood and remains largely aspirational.

Historical Roots and Recurring Interest

The State of Jefferson concept envisions parts of northern California and southern Oregon forming an independent U.S. state. The idea gained widespread attention in 1941 when supporters staged symbolic actions, including roadblocks and pamphlet distribution around Yreka, proclaiming the establishment of a new state (Adams, 2015; Allen, 2023; Vankin, 2023). The name was reportedly chosen to evoke ideals associated with Thomas Jefferson and self-governance (Wikipedia, n.d.).

The original effort faded shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor refocused national priorities (Allen, 2023; Adams, 2015). Still, the idea persisted as both a cultural symbol and a periodic political movement (IJPR, n.d.; Vankin, 2023).

In modern times, interest has resurfaced during moments of perceived political or cultural conflict between rural communities and state governments. The COVID-19 pandemic period saw renewed visibility for the movement among some local-control advocates (Frost, 2022). Scholars and reporters note that, for many, the idea functions as a regional identity or “state of mind” as much as a literal secession effort (IJPR, n.d.; King, 2023).

Motivations and Supporter Perspectives

Supporters often argue that rural counties experience underinvestment and limited political influence compared to metropolitan regions (King, 2023). They contend that greater regional autonomy would better reflect local priorities.

Some observers have noted that rhetoric surrounding the movement sometimes overlaps with broader skepticism of state authority. Commentators have also raised concerns that certain interpretations of Jefferson's ideology could evolve toward civil disobedience or resistance to laws if taken to extremes (Vaughn, 2021).

While many proponents describe the movement as peaceful and rooted in constitutional principles, journalists have documented occasions where more fringe or militant elements have expressed support. Analysts caution that such overlap has prompted concern about the potential for radicalization within small factions, though this does not represent the beliefs of all participants.

Claims, Symbolism, and Public Controversy

Although some supporters assert the movement had no connection to the January 6, 2021, events in Washington, D.C., journalists reported that Jefferson imagery, including its green-and-gold flag, was visible among those present that day (Pogue, 2022). For critics, this visibility suggested that portions of the movement’s symbolism may appeal to individuals frustrated with federal authority.

Researchers and reporters have also documented instances where Jefferson-aligned imagery has appeared alongside the Three Percenters, a self-described anti-government militia movement, including references to groupings such as “Jefferson Three Percent” (Wiles, 2018). Analysts interpret this as a sign that some individuals blend regional separatist identity with national militia symbolism, though not all Jefferson supporters endorse or participate in such associations.

Symbolic political milestones exist as well. Between 2013 and 2014, several Northern California county boards of supervisors—including Siskiyou, Modoc, Glenn, Yuba, Tehama, and Sutter—approved resolutions supporting the concept of joining a prospective Jefferson state (Wikipedia, n.d.; Vankin, 2023; Sacramento News & Review, n.d.). These actions carried no legal authority but demonstrated regional sentiment among some officials.

Considerations for Governance and Community Dynamics

Political scientists and local observers note potential risks when separatist or autonomy movements intersect with militant rhetoric or anti-institution sentiment. They identify several concerns:

• Rule of law: Questioning the legitimacy of state authority can be interpreted by some as permission to follow laws selectively. 
• Polarization: Binary narratives of “rural versus urban” or “locals versus the state” can heighten community division. 
• Radicalization: Movements appealing to grievances can attract more extreme individuals who project broader anti-government ideologies onto local causes. 
• Governance focus: If local leaders fully adopt secession-based politics, analysts caution that day-to-day governance priorities could shift away from essential services toward ideological goals.
   

Some residents and community leaders have expressed concern that social pressure within Jefferson-identified regions could discourage dissenting views, complicating constructive dialogue.

Local Context and Civic Responsibility

Shasta County sits within the geographic area associated with Jefferson discussions. Commentators note that, should the movement more strongly influence local political leadership, public policy priorities could shift in ways that reflect the movement's ideology rather than broader constituent needs.

Given the rising political polarization nationwide, scholars and civic engagement advocates recommend that voters evaluate the Jefferson concept thoughtfully — distinguishing between cultural identity, symbolic advocacy, and practical governance implications.

Conclusion

The State of Jefferson idea represents a longstanding expression of regional identity and a periodic secession campaign. While many supporters describe peaceful goals grounded in local control and constitutional values, reporting also indicates that symbolic associations and occasional overlap with more militant sentiment have generated public concern about the potential for polarization and institutional strain.

Residents and voters in affected regions may benefit from continuing to scrutinize movement rhetoric, maintain open civic dialogue, and ensure that local governance remains inclusive and grounded in lawful democratic processes.

References

Adams, I. (2015, November 27). The real history and meaning behind “The State of Jefferson.” R Street Institute. https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/the-real-history-and-meaning-behind-the-state-of-jefferson/

Allen, C. (2023). State of Jefferson brochure. Oregon History Project. https://www.oregonhistoryproject.org/articles/historical-records/state-of-jefferson-brochure/

Frost, A. (2022, March 30). COVID-19 restrictions spark a revival of the State of Jefferson in Northern California. Oregon Public Broadcasting. https://www.opb.org/article/2022/03/30/covid-restrictions-spark-state-of-jefferson-revival-in-northern-california/

IJPR. (n.d.). State of Jefferson. https://www.ijpr.org/state-of-jefferson

King, R. (2023, November 14). State of Jefferson: Rural California’s struggle for representation. Berkeley Public Radio. https://bpr.studentorg.berkeley.edu/2023/11/14/state-of-jefferson-rural-californias-struggle-for-representation/

Pogue, J. (2022, April). Notes on the State of Jefferson: A secessionist movement brews in Northern California. Harper’s Magazine. https://harpers.org/archive/2022/04/notes-on-the-state-of-jefferson-secession-northern-california/

Sacramento News & Review. (n.d.). Breaking up California: A history of many attempts. California State Library. https://www.library.ca.gov/collections/online-exhibits/splitting-ca/

Undergraduate Journal of History Editorial Board. (2022, Spring). Gilbert Gable, Stanton Delaplane, and the 1941 Jefferson statehood movement. The Undergraduate Journal of History, 2(1). University of California, Santa Barbara. https://undergradjournal.history.ucsb.edu/spring-2022/borah/

Vankin, J. (2023, March 24). State of the State of Jefferson: How the secessionist movement works today. California Local. https://californialocal.com/localnews/statewide/ca/article/show/31200-state-of-jefferson-california-north-counties-sisikiyou-oregon/

Vaughn, K. (2021, January 31). “State of Jefferson,” militia movements are anti-American. Redding Record Searchlight. https://www.redding.com/story/opinion/2021/01/31/state-jefferson-militia-movements-anti-american/

Wiles, T. (2018, January 22). A separatist state of mind. High Country News. https://www.hcn.org/issues/50-1/communities-rural-discontent-finds-a-home-in-the-state-of-jefferson/

Wikipedia. (n.d.-a). Jefferson (proposed Pacific state). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state)

Wikipedia. (n.d.-b). Partition and secession in California. In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_and_secession_in_California

The New California State: Regional Identity, Secession Aspirations, and Public Debate

 QUICK OVERVIEW

• Goal: Advocate for establishing a new state within California by dividing the state along political lines.
• Rationale: Supporters cite disagreements with statewide policies on taxation, environmental regulation, and social issues.
• Proposed Geography: New California proposes a division entirely within California’s current borders.
• Key Themes: Emphasis on ideological and political differences between rural and urban regions.
• Status: The effort has attracted symbolic support in some counties, but any path forward would require approval from the California Legislature and U.S. Congress — making the movement primarily aspirational at this stage.

The New California State Basic Information

New California State (NCS) describes itself as a political movement dedicated to the formation of a separate state, primarily composed of rural California counties. Journalistic and academic reporting note that while the movement echoes long-standing regional autonomy efforts, such as the State of Jefferson, it also intersects with recent election-administration debates in Shasta County (CBS News, 2018; McHardy, 2025).

Origins and Aims

The movement emerged in the late 2010s, led primarily by organizer and radio host Paul Preston. Preston characterizes NCS as a constitutional response to concerns about governance, regulation, and representation (CBS News, 2018; McHardy, 2025). Public materials associated with the group outline a multi-phase plan involving symbolic “state” conventions and eventual appeals to Congress (CBS News, 2018). Researchers have identified overlaps between traditional secession grievances, such as taxation and cultural representation, and more recent policy flashpoints, including elections and pandemic measures (McHardy, 2025).

Key Figures and Local Connections

Reporting has highlighted several individuals whose public roles in Shasta County have intersected with themes associated with NCS:

• Chriss Street — former Orange County treasurer who later advised Shasta County on public-policy matters. Media outlets reported scrutiny of his financial background and noted that county leaders considered involving him in a healthcare consulting capacity (Pierce, 2025a). 
• Clint Curtis — appointed Shasta County Registrar of Voters in 2025. Coverage has noted his questioning of election systems, statements about ballot livestreaming, and disagreements with state election authorities (Sosa, 2025a, 2025b, 2025c; Sosa & LaFever, 2025; Kallepalli, 2025).  
• Patty and Ron Plumb — local community activists who have engaged with NCS-aligned events; reporting notes Patty Plumb’s service on the Shasta County Elections Commission, prompting discussion about potential conflicts when elections-related duties overlap with political activism (Pierce, 2024a, 2024b, 2024c).
   

Why Observers Raise Conflict-of-Interest Questions

Commentators and legal ethics experts have noted that when individuals associated with secession-focused political efforts participate in election oversight, public confidence may be compromised. Concerns cited include whether decision-makers can remain neutral if they are connected to groups that challenge widely accepted election systems or outcomes (Pierce, 2025b; Askeland, 2025; Anguiano, 2024). Analysts emphasize that even the appearance of partiality may impact trust in the process.

Ideology and Organizational Approach

Public communications from NCS describe a lawful, constitutional process; however, journalists have reported that the movement employs symbolic “state” conventions, oaths, and assertions about federal pathways that are sometimes later clarified or revised (Kallepalli & Holcomb, 2025; Kallepalli, 2025). Coverage has also linked some of the rhetoric to national debates about elections, including calls for hand counts and elevated scrutiny of election staff (Sosa, 2025a; Sosa, 2025b).

Local Developments and Public Controversies

Shasta County has experienced administrative shifts and public debate related to these themes:

• Staff changes in elections — Reports describe personnel turnover and public tensions following Curtis’s appointment, including community concern about qualifications and process (Sosa, 2025b; Sosa, 2025c). 
• Livestreaming proposals — Plans to broadcast ballot processing reportedly prompted questions about logistical and legal feasibility as well as cost (Sosa & LaFever, 2025; Kallepalli, 2025; Askeland, 2025). 
• Certification debates — Coverage notes that some NCS-aligned advocates have encouraged delaying or conditioning certification absent hand counts, paralleling national election-integrity debates (Pierce, 2024a, 2024b, 2024c).  
• Claims of official support — Statements suggesting external validation have been examined by reporters, who have found discrepancies or a lack of confirmation (Kallepalli & Holcomb, 2025; Kallepalli, 2025).

Movement Dynamics and Public Perception

Scholars and journalists describe NCS as fostering a strong in-group identity, including ceremonial elements and alternative governance symbolism (McHardy, 2025). Critics argue this can create adversarial narratives toward established institutions, while supporters frame it as grassroots civic engagement (Sosa, 2025a).

Why Shasta County Voters May Want to Stay Informed

Observers cite several areas of public impact:

• Public-service focus — Administrative turnover and legal questions can divert time and resources from local services such as emergency planning and community programs.  
• Election access and confidence — Policies proposed through distrust-based frameworks may create confusion or discourage volunteer and voter participation (Anguiano, 2024; Sosa, 2025a).  
• Civic environment — Analysts argue that when officials associated with parallel-state efforts shape election policy, civic discussions risk becoming more about political narratives than governance priorities (Pierce, 2025a; Pierce, 2025b; Kallepalli, 2025).

Conclusion

NCS presents itself as a reform movement. Based on news reporting and commentary, its impact in Shasta County has sparked debate over election procedures, administrative stability, and public trust. For voters, maintaining awareness, affirming transparency, and supporting neutral administration of public functions may help ensure that governance remains grounded in law, service delivery, and broad community representation (Anguiano, 2024; Sosa, 2025a; Sosa & LaFever, 2025).

References 

Anguiano, D. (2024, March 28). Rural California county keeps ultra-conservative official who pushed to upend voting system. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/28/california-voters-election-denialism-kevin-crye-recall

Askeland, D. (2025, October 2). The ballot livestream in Shasta County has a hurdle to clear from California. Redding Record Searchlight. https://www.redding.com/story/news/politics/elections/2025/10/02/ballot-livestream-in-shasta-county-has-hurdle-to-clear-from-california/86442457007/

Branson-Potts, H., & Chabria, A. (2021, June 29). Militia member and two others charged in attack on BLM activist. Yahoo News. https://www.yahoo.com/news/militia-member-two-others-charged-173558708.html

CBS News. (2018, January 15). New California declares independence from the rest of the state. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-california-declares-independence-from-rest-of-state/

Kallepalli, N. (2025, September 25). Shasta’s new registrar claims the Secretary of State greenlit his livestream plan. The office says it didn’t. Shasta Scout. https://shastascout.org/shasta-registrar-claims-sos-greenlit-livestream-plan/

Kallepalli, N., & Holcomb, M. (2025, July 21). In one rural county, a push for a “New California State” finds official support. American Community Media. https://americancommunitymedia.org/spotlight-ethnic-media/in-one-rural-county-push-for-new-california-state-finds-official-support/

McHardy, M. (2025, June 19). New California: The group pushing for a breakaway state. Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/new-california-group-pushing-breakaway-state-1922541

New California State. (2025). Leadership & organization. https://www.newcaliforniastate.com/

Pierce, A. (2024a, June 25). Judge dismisses election misconduct case; calls evidence “profoundly lacking.” Shasta Scout. https://shastascout.org/the-lack-of-evidence-was-profound-judge-dismisses-case-alleging-mal-conduct-in-shasta-countys-march-5-primary-election/

Pierce, A. (2024b, December 3). The New California State movement hopes to invalidate Shasta County’s November election results. Shasta Scout. https://shastascout.org/new-california-state-movement-hopes-to-invalidate-shasta-countys-november-election-results/

Pierce, A. (2025c, February 6). Despite controversy, the Shasta Board votes to offer a healthcare consultant role to Chriss Street. Shasta Scout. https://shastascout.org/shasta-county-documents-reveal-chriss-streets-proposed-plan-for-healthcare-consultant-role/

Pierce, A. (2025d, May 13). Clint Curtis has registered to vote at a Shasta Lake address owned by Elections Commissioner Patty Plumb. Shasta Scout. https://shastascout.org/clint-curtis-registered-to-vote-at-shasta-lake-address-owned-by-elections-commissioner-patty-plumb/

Pierce, A. (2024e, October 18). Elections commissioner tells Shasta County officials to “cease and desist.” https://shastascout.org/elections-commissioner-patty-plumb-cease-and-desist/

Shasta County. (n.d.). Featured news & election updates. https://www.shastacounty.gov/community/page/featured-news

Sosa, A. (2025a, May 9). Uproar in conservative California county over new top elections official. SFGATE. https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/shasta-county-new-elections-official-20307552.php

Sosa, A. (2025b, May 14). Shasta County meeting descends into profanities over a new elections official. SFGATE. https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/shasta-county-protests-elections-official-20327505.php

Sosa, A. (2025c, May 30). “Calm anger”: After 17 years, a Shasta elections official was suddenly fired. SFGATE. https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/shasta-county-elections-official-fired-20353061.php

Sosa, A., & LaFever, M. (2025, August 21). A California county turned elections over to a skeptic with a wild plan. SFGATE. https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/shasta-county-livestream-elections-20828076.php

Wreden, M. (2024, October 1). Shasta County election results lawsuit dismissed. Action News Now. https://www.actionnewsnow.com/news/shasta-county-election-results-lawsuit-dismissed/article_657aa676-8028-11ef-b2af-efce9dc03a5e.html