Quantcast
MobileRJ | RSS Twitter Twitter FacebookFacebook E-mail Alerts
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

sponsored by
News
Jan. 28, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

JANE ANN MORRISON: Judges playing musical chairs could leave taxpayers, voters standing

JANE ANN MORRISON
MORE COLUMNS

It's not unusual for judges to run midterm for a higher court, guaranteeing that even if they lose, they still have a black robe and a steady paycheck.

Personally, I think it's chicken poop that politicians run midterm because it gives them an unfair fundraising advantage over their opponents. They can shake down donors who know they're going to be dealing with this candidate one way or another. But the law allows it, and it's a system that's not going to change, so enough of my complaining.

Most Popular Stories
  • NORM: When live news shots turn bad
  • NORM: Terry Fator, wife ending marriage
  • NORM: Blaze breaks out during magic act
  • NORM: Jackson worked on album at Palms
  • Ex-Ensign aide details wife's affair
  • NORM: Jacksons set up LV memorial area
  • Ensign wrote lover a letter, saying their affair was a 'sin'
  • LV area residential real estate sales reach record in June
  • Coroner says sexual assault suspect killed by police was shot in back
  • Official: Fatal gunshot in back




    • But Family Court Judge Sandra Pomrenze did something unusual Jan. 7. She filed to run for another newly created department in the same court. So what's with that?

    At first, I thought she was just trying to snag a $30,000-a-year raise, which seemed mercenary. She makes $130,000 a year now in Department D. If she wins in Department P, she can earn $160,000. (In Nevada, elected officials don't get raises until after their next election.)

    However, the $30,000 she gets for the heavy lifting she does on the Nevada Library Commission takes care of the pay inequity. So it's not the money, honey.

    It's about convenience and facing the voters less frequently.

    The ramification of her action, however, is that if she wins, her old seat isn't filled by voters, but by Gov. Jim Gibbons.

    This isn't easy to follow, but there are six Family Court judges in Clark County who run in what they call "off years." The Legislature wants all the District Court judges to be on the same election cycle, so the six Family Court judges elected four years ago will be running in 2010 for four-year terms before they land on the same election cycle as the majority of judges.

    Pomrenze is running for a new seat because she believes there are political advantages. When she's one of six running in an off year, Pomrenze said, "You're alone out there, and it's tough to raise money. And potentially you're a greater target."

    By running now, she's guaranteed a judgeship either way. In two years, the risk is greater.

    Her only opponent, longtime Las Vegas attorney Jack Howard, sees it differently, saying, "I believe it's manipulating the system." And it will be part of his campaign against her because "it's kind of contrary to judicial ethics."

    Howard said there's a need for an opinion whether what the judge is doing is ethical.

    "I'm disturbed he'd take the low road and try to question my ethics, especially when there are no ethical rules I violated," said Pomrenze, 58, a Republican.

    Howard, 60, is a Democrat. Judicial races are nonpartisan. He tried to persuade Pomrenze to withdraw from the race.

    "He wanted me to walk from a race so he could walk in," the furious judge said. "I'm disappointed I'm already getting attacked and the ink isn't dry on the filing papers."

    A byproduct of Pomrenze's decision is that, if she wins, her old seat will be filled not by voters, but by a Republican governor following a merit-selection process.

    The Legislature created five new Family Court judgeships in Clark County because of the heavy caseload. Since the process for a gubernatorial appointment takes about three months, Pomrenze's decision to make the change for her convenience does affect the public, because her seat will be vacant for that time.

    What if all six Family Court judges elected in 2004 had decided to do this? At least one or two considered it, but she's the only one who did it.

    Family Court Judge Stefany Miley is running for District Court midterm, and, if she wins, her old seat will also be filled by a gubernatorial appointee, another three months in which a judge isn't available to do the job she was first elected to do because she wanted to move up.

    Family Court judges are the ones you are most likely to meet. They're dealing with divorce, alimony and child support. They break our hearts and decide our finances. During her four years on the bench, Pomrenze built a reputation as a solid judge. Even Howard has nothing bad to say about her job performance.

    Finishing what you start should mean something and should outweigh political calculations about what's the best move to guarantee judges have jobs.

    Jane Ann Morrison's column appears Monday, Thursday and Saturday. E-mail her at Jane@reviewjournal.com or call (702) 383-0275.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 11 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    bored now wrote on January 30, 2008 12:39 AM: Damn, Kathy Hardcastle is such an excellent leader... NOT.

    The judicary is in a shambles.

    Judges do what they want. They are not accountable unless Hardcastle does not like you.. Those she does not like are crushed like bugs and disposed of.

    These crooked Judges need to be all dumped.

    Halverson is just the tip of the iceberg. She is their smoke screen. So all this wheeling and dealing can be going on while the publics attention is elsewhere.

    Oh, and Morrison.. you are a horrible columist. Time to retire your tired arse.



    Mamamia wrote on January 28, 2008 09:03 PM: Yadda yadda, blah blah to all the judges. The worst thing an old time judge could say to people was "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". Now, these so-savvy judges expect us peasants to be Rhodes Scholars in order to understand their reasoning just to keep earning more than they'll ever be worth. We all should attend law school to learn to side-step the laws and statutes too, just to make sure we're "ethical".


    nevada wrote on January 28, 2008 02:11 PM: Dont miss today's breaking news. Not one but TWO judicial nuggets to last a day or two.


    Kristin wrote on January 28, 2008 10:33 AM: Pomrenze "is disturbed..." Another queen of smoke and mirrors. We need to clean up our judiciary.

    Is her girlfriend Kathy Hardcastle going to campaign for her again? See ethics complaint.


    Jeff wrote on January 28, 2008 10:22 AM: Pomrenze can not fill her current obligation. I hope the voters are fed up enough to get her out of there all together. SANDRA, DON'T CLIMB ON OUR DIME.


    CK wrote on January 28, 2008 09:58 AM: There was an ethic complaint filed against her in her last campaign. Can't take spots off a leopard. She is very well connected. She must feel invincible.


    Vote her out wrote on January 28, 2008 09:54 AM: Sandra Pomrenze is in this for her own gain. To heck with the voters. To heck with the folks that end up in front of her. It is all about Sandra and her political ambitions. What will Sandra do to satisfy her ambitions?

    I for one will vote for Mr Howard. Then I will vote against Pomrenze when her current seat comes up for election. The voters deserve better than manipulating, self serving calculating, politicians that sell themselves to the voting public as caring judges.

    The only difference between actors and politicians is actors are good looking. The rest become politicians.
    Looks like Sandra could be up for an Oscar.


    TrinEHtee wrote on January 28, 2008 08:33 AM: :(


    trinEHtee wrote on January 28, 2008 08:32 AM: "By running now, she's guaranteed a judgeship either way. In two years, the risk is greater."
    Read the whole article again and again people, it just shows you how unethical the system they designed really is.
    The ramification of her action, however, is that if she wins, her old seat isn't filled by voters, but by Gov. Jim Gibbons.
    There are a few of us that know these seats aren't filled by the voters, they do manipulate the system and put a team of "players" on the benches.
    I rest knowing that they all will be judged one day by the highest form, one that gave them life-God.


    GJ wrote on January 28, 2008 07:52 AM: Another good spot for Judge Halverson.


    Read All Comments