Home subscribe manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue

News
Feb. 04, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

JANE ANN MORRISON: Judges get around pay inequity by serving on library commissions

JANE ANN MORRISON
MORE COLUMNS

The outrage poured in after this past Monday's column. Oh, they weren't so upset that Family Court Judge Sandra Pomrenze was running for a new department in Family Court for political convenience. They were outraged some judges and Supreme Court justices are paid to sit on library commissions as a way to guarantee all are paid the same salary.

I wasn't upset, perhaps because I've known about this ploy since it first passed the Legislature in 2001. (I'm a big believer of equal pay for equal work, especially since I suspected early in my career that single female reporters with cats were not paid as much as married male reporters with kids, despite doing the same job.)

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

Most Popular Stories
  • NORM: Phelps galpal gets exposure on Web
  • NORM: Robin Gibb in airport standoff
  • NORM: Web site shows life of Mazzeo
  • NORM: Britney-LV buzz hard to nail down
  • NORM: Wynn coveted cathedral's land
  • Las Vegas police use saturation strategy to cool 'hot spots' of crime
  • DOUG ELFMAN: Comedian says his arrest a joke
  • 2-year-old boy dies in dog attack
  • Fresh-faced trio wows throng of youthful fans at MGM Grand
  • DOUG ELFMAN: Cab, limo drivers take pulse of tourists



    • The Nevada Constitution says, when raises are approved by the Legislature, state elected officials and state judges can't get them until after they've been elected to a new term. Nevada's founding fathers apparently suspected legislators would approve fat raises to enrich themselves, but judges don't vote on their own raises.

    Nevada is the only state in which judges can't get raises in the middle of their terms, said Supreme Court spokesman Bill Gang. (The prohibition doesn't extend to municipal judges, who all get raises at the same time.)

    Since District Court judges and Supreme Court justices serve terms of six years, what happens is that new judges are paid more than their more experienced peers.

    District Court judges will see their $130,000 a year salary increase to $160,000 starting July 1, and justice salaries jump from $140,000 to $170,000.

    It's a pay inequity for sure. In the late 1990s, some judges were making $42,000 less than their peers. So in 2001 the Legislature finagled a way so justices and judges would get extra pay for serving on two library commissions.

    The commissions were extended by the 2007 Legislature so justices still making $140,000 will receive $30,000 for serving on the Supreme Court Commission on Law Libraries. Judges making $130,000 will get $30,000 for serving on the District Court Commission on Law Libraries.

    If you tally the five Supreme Court and eight Family Court judges statewide who will serve on the commissions, it's a total of $1.5 million for the two-year general fund budget. Everyone was paid the same but certain judges end up doing some extra work for the money.

    The library commissions meet jointly each quarter and are required to file an annual report with the Court Administrator's office.

    Family Court Judge Art Ritchie, who advocated for the bill in 2007, said, "The work of the judges on these commissions is not just a facade to achieve pay equity. These judges have been surveying the law libraries and amended the Supreme Court's role allowing and expanding the ability of law libraries and staff to provide assistance to self-represented litigants."

    Minutes of the hearings on the bill extending the two library commissions included this exchange between state Sen. Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, and state Senate Finance Chairman Bill Raggio, R-Reno:

    "Why not change the constitution rather than circumventing the intent of the law by establishing these commissions?" Titus asked.

    Raggio's reply: "We at the Legislature have tried to change the constitution to get paid for every day we work, and the voters have rejected that change."

    The public won't change the Nevada Constitution for this purpose, so lawmakers play this game as a matter of fairness.

    The game goes away for the Family Court judges when they're all on the same election cycle after the 2014 elections. Since the constitution requires staggering Supreme Court justice terms so they don't all leave at the same time, that library commission is likely to continue.

    After my column ran, one attorney was upset because the library commissions show "how elected officials take care of themselves and could care less about the rules. ... This is so offensive. We have big state budget problems, and the judges have figured a way to get around the state constitution."

    Sure, it's an end run around the state constitution. Sure, they knew the salary when they ran for the job. But as a practical matter, I certainly wouldn't want to be paid $30,000 a year less for the same job.

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



    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:

    Geoffrey John Wells wrote on June 20, 2008 02:17 PM: This is nothing, if you look at what Art Ritchie has done through his Law Libray Commission, he embezzled 14 million Dollars with the help of the County Commission. Here is a link to the breakdown of his illegality and those who helped.

    http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=370222293&blogID=407685286

    I urge you to investigate this matter, it was done at the December 4, 2007 County Commission meeting in plain sight.


    Mr Jenkins wrote on March 03, 2008 07:28 PM: Pomerenz looks like she has been rode hard and put away wet - she needs to sit out a few years and learn the law.


    jackson wrote on February 04, 2008 07:04 PM: Yet, another example of our fine upstanding judiciary.

    Really, how deep is it in the state of Nevada judges chambers?!


    Mr. Justice wrote on February 04, 2008 11:42 AM: Now I know why the Supreme Court sanctions attorneys every chance they get, and the sanction is always a FORCED contribution to the Nevada Supreme Court LAW LIBRARY. They are imposing a fine to pay their own salary.

    How much work do they do for all that money?


    UNLVStud wrote on February 04, 2008 11:10 AM: I agree with Sen. Titus. The Legislature should propose an Amendment to the Constitution and present this argument in front of us. Judges are different than politicians and this pay inequity is a problem. Legislators shouldn't circumvent the problem without first confronting it in a constitutionally correct way.

    Also. I think another reason behind the loop hole is that Sen. Raggio's is going to use this issue as another reason to push his own constitutional amendment regarding Judges. SJR 2 is his pet project to have politicians appoint our Judges based on which lawyer gives them the most money to their campaigns instead of being elected by the people.


    The just us club wrote on February 04, 2008 08:12 AM: These rogue individuals try to exalt themselves when in reality they are the worst.


    remove them wrote on February 04, 2008 08:09 AM: Sandra Pomrenze should go back to work for the Nevada Resort Association or go back to munchkin land if she wants more money. These atorneys know the pay when they beg and fight for the job.

    Art Richie who advocated the bill should spend some time looking at the homes he places children in. I find it repulsive that Art Ritchie would place a child in a home with people with a history of drug use and one party being a felon just because they filed out the forms. No back round check, no nothing.
    He must have been in a hurry to run up north to advocate for more money. He sure did not advocate for the child.

    These money grubbing attorneys just want a power job at the expense of the people they should be protecting and on the tax payers dime.


    ridiculous wrote on February 04, 2008 07:56 AM: The judges are out of control. We elect judges to up hold the law. Yet, these slim ball attorneys that wish to be judges, find every loop hole to circumvent the law and legislate from the bench.

    Old man Raggio is a well connected attorney. He has taken care of his own for many years.


    Judy wrote on February 04, 2008 05:58 AM: Is this double dipping of taxpayers money? This is a prime example of how corrupt the legal system, police and courts are in Nevada.



    Is there anyone out there willing to fight these bozo's?



    You don't see this Massive amounts of abuse and corruption in other states.

    What's wrong with Nevada? Who is policing the police? Who is controlling the judges?




    Judy wrote on February 04, 2008 05:58 AM: Is this double dipping of taxpayers money? This is a prime example of how corrupt the legal system, police and courts are in Nevada.

    Is there anyone out there willing to fight these bozo's?

    You don't see this Massive amounts of abuse and corruption in other states.
    What's wrong with Nevada? Who is policing the police? Who is controlling the judges?


    Read All Comments