I found out that I get sworn in at the next meeting of the Reno City Council, November 10th at noon at City Hall. (Old FIB building at First and Virginia Streets). With our trip to New York Friday for my husband’s marathon, and not returning until Tuesday, that means I have two days to transition my law work to other attorneys in the office, move out, and “train” for court.  Since there is no time to contact everyone or issue invitations, please consider this your invitation to come watch the “swearing in” if you’d like.  Thanks again to everyone who supported me, helped in the campaign and voted for me.

Thank you to all who supported, encouraged, helped or just cheered me on in this election campaign. It’s been an honor competing to serve you in our community. Win, lose or draw it’s been a wonderful experience and I am so grateful that you put your faith in me.  You are truly wonderful!

There are 2 very important questions on this year's ballot. Question 1 would change how Nevada initially selects its trial and appellate court judges(but not Justice Court or Municipal Court).  Question 2 would create an intermediate appellate court in Nevada.  I personally favor both.

  It is so critical to get MONEY out of the judicial selection process.  People need confidence that their case is decided on its merits, not because a lawyer or party contributed to a judge's campaign. The vote is not taken away--it is postponed. The trade-off is that up-front, a person is appointed by a Judicial Selection process that involves screening, vetting, evaluating and not just by the Governor, but by lawyers--who know who the good and bad ones are--and regular citizens.  Truthfully, most citizens don't know enough about their judges and don't see them in action as lawyers to know if they'd be good judges or not.  I've tried to change that in this election, but still people say "I often don't vote in those races because I don't know anythng about them."  Justice should be impartial, non-partisan, and donation-free.  Once a good person is appointed as a judge, he/she has 2 years to perform and then is evaluated and it is made public before a Retention Election. The judge must receive 55% approval to stay on the Bench. That is a very high standard, more than most winners get in a General Election! It will be a good system, in my opinion, and will improve the quality of our judiciary.  

We need a mid-level appellate court because our Supreme Court is the most busy in the nation--handling more cases per year than any other state. I have a case that has been on appeal for more than 2 years because they are too busy to get to it. Our Supreme Court decides critical issues like "was the dealth penalty sentence appropriate?" as well as "was the driver license properly revoked?  That is ridiculous. An intermediate court will cull out the lesser cases and resolve them, giving the Supreme Court the time to properly and fully evaluate a case that could dictate a person's life or property rights.  This will improve Nevada's justice system, too.

PRANK PHONE CALLS are being placed after midnight in the name of my campaign. We do NOT make phone calls to voters at any time of the day or night. We do not use phone lists, calling rooms or robo-calls. We do not participate in or take polls either. Please take a phone number and make a police report if it happens to you. You can also report it to me here and we'll do the same.  I have filed a report and issued a press release to warn people of this.  There is no room in a civilized election process for this nonsense, although this year seems to be anything but civilized.

I’m not listing endorsements and here’s why. Early on, I started to seek endorsements because it is part of the election process. But the problems soon became apparent. Judges seeking endorsements is troublesome. Like fund-raising, it is unseemly, smacks of undue influence and raises the potential for conflict of interest.  That’s why judges are not allowed to endorse others, as my opponent learned when Nevada’s Standing Committee on Judicial Ethics and Election Practices disciplined him for doing it.  Attorney endorsements are especially problematic.  For example:

• Attorneys have told me they endorsed a judge because he personally telephoned them and they felt “strong-armed” but could not refuse because they appear in his court.
• A law firm told me that they quit endorsing because previously they supported the “wrong guy” and when the other candidate won, that judge made their professional life miserable.
• A lawyer told me she felt compelled to endorse because the candidate owned the building in which she rents her office, thus she felt she had to, or suffer the consequences.
• A law firm endorsed one candidate and a lawyer in that firm supports the opponent but cannot speak up, fearing the repercussions of “office politics.”

Other issues are equally troubling:

• Judges are not allowed to be involved in union politics nor to support or oppose union contracts, so if a judicial candidate earns an endorsement by proclaiming a position one way or the other, that is wrong.
• A professional organization endorsed both candidates despite saying they never do that. Was it a clerical error? Was an endorsement letter improperly obtained by one candidate? Who knows?
• Judicial candidates have spouses with their own careers and professional connections. If an endorsement is granted or denied due to the actions or influence of the spouse, that is wrong.

Yes, it’s safe to give an endorsement to a judge if he never faces an opponent. It shows your involvement in the community and earns you an “atta-boy” with the judge.  But to commit to an endorsement far in advance, before you know if there are more candidates, or to endorse without interviewing all candidates, is not an endorsement; it is nothing more than “good old boy politics.”   As I have said before, I am done with ‘politics as usual.’ Some wonderful people and organizations said I could list them publicly. For that I am grateful. In the end, however, there is only one endorsement that counts, and that is the voter’s.

(click on the thumbnails for full-size photos)