Clark County Commission   ✓ = Endorsed

DISTRICT E

✓ “Tick” Segerblom, Incumbent (D)

Jon Rider (R)

Randy Rose (IAP)

Marco Hernandez (NPP)

DISTRICT F

✓ Justin Jones, Incumbent (D)

Drew Johnson (R)

DISTRICT G

✓ Jim Gibson, Incumbent (D)

Billy Mitchell (R)

Jesse James Welsh (L)

Clark County Partisan Offices

COUNTY ASSESSOR

✓ Briana Johnson, Incumbent (D)

Helen “Ms. OS” Oseguera (R)

Brandon Menesini (NPP)

COUNTY CLERK

✓ Lynn Marie Goya, Incumbent (D)

Bill Young (R)

COUNTY RECORDER

✓ Debbie Conway, Incumbent (D)

John Evans (R)

DISTRICT ATTORNEY

✓ Steve Wolfson, Incumbent (D)

Timothy Treffinger (R)

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR

✓ Rita Page Reid (D)

Patsy Brown (R)

Tabatha Aldabbagh (NPP)

TREASURER

✓ J. “Ken” Diaz (D)

Mitchell T. Tracy (R)

JUDGES (NONPARTISAN)

NEVADA COURT OF APPEALS, DEPARTMENT 1

✓ Deborah Westbrook

Rhonda K. Forsberg

NEVADA 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT (CLARK COUNTY) COURT, DEPARTMENT 9

✓ Maria Gall, Incumbent

James Dean Leavitt

NEVADA 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT (CLARK COUNTY) COURT, DEPARTMENT 11

✓ Ellie Roohani, Incumbent

Anna Albertson

NEVADA 8TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT (CLARK COUNTY) COURT, DEPARTMENT 17

✓ Jennifer Schwartz

Adam Ganz

Lindsey D. Moors

FAMILY DIVISION, DEPARTMENT A

✓ Mari Parladé

Kristine Brewer

Lynn Hughes

David Jacks

Stephanie Keels

Robert Kurth

LAS VEGAS JUSTICE COURT DIVISION 6

✓ Jessica Goodey

Bill Gonzalez

LAS VEGAS JUSTICE COURT DIVISION 7

✓ Max Berkley

Amy Wilson

LAS VEGAS JUSTICE COURT DIVISION 9

✓ Joe M. Bonaventure, Incumbent

Danielle “Pieper” Chio

LAS VEGAS JUSTICE COURT DIVISION 10

✓ Cybill Dotson

Noreen Demonte

LAS VEGAS JUSTICE COURT DIVISION 13

✓ Rebecca Saxe

Suzan Baucum, Incumbent

Clark County School DISTRICT (Nonpartisan)

The Stakes: Much like Nevada’s educational system, the board of the Clark County School District is in need of an overhaul. Too often, the current board has been marred by conflict, turmoil, and a lack of professionalism that is unacceptable and unjustified—even during a pandemic. The endorsements below reflect our desire to return to a functioning school board with greater competence, professionalism and empathy.

In particular, we want to highlight Irene Cepeda’s endorsement in this regard. Initially, she voted with the majority in an insane effort to oust CCSD Superintendent Jesus Jara. Upon reflection, however, she backtracked and was a critical vote to keep him on. Cepeda demonstrates a rare and admirable quality in a politician to admit her own mistakes, fix them and then focus on the real needs of the community over the needs of her political career. As a result, she deserves to be returned to the board and is the only incumbent we have endorsed, because the rest need to be rejected for the chaos they presided over.

DISTRICT D

✓ Irene Cepeda, Incumbent

Brenda Zamora

DISTRICT F

✓ Irene Bustamante Adams

Danielle Ford, Incumbent

DISTRICT G

✓ Greg Wieman

Linda Cavazos, Incumbent

Local Municipal Races (Nonpartisan)

HENDERSON CITY COUNCIL, WARD 3

✓ Trish Nash

Carrie Cox

LAS VEGAS CITY COUNCIL, WARD 4

✓ No Endorsement

Francis Allen Palenske

Bob Beers

LAS VEGAS CITY COUNCIL, WARD 6

✓ Nancy Brune

Ray Spencer

NORTH LAS VEGAS MAYOR

✓ Pamela Goynes Brown

Patricia Spearman

Ballot Question 1: Equal Protection [Vote Yes]

Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended by adding a specific guarantee that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this State or any of its cities, counties or other political subdivisions on account of race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, disability, ancestry, or national origin?

This amendment to the Nevada State Constitution is long overdue and seeks to enshrine a constitutional right against discrimination for all Nevadans.

While many of the provisions of this amendment already exist under a patchwork of local, state and federal law, there are gaps in those protections, and their application has been far from predictable or consistent. Moreover, without having those protections enshrined in the Constitution, they can be easily modified or repealed.

We strongly endorse voting “Yes” on Question 1.

Ballot Question 2: Minimum Wage [Vote Yes]

Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended, effective July 1, 2024, to: (1) establish the State’s minimum wage that employers must pay to certain employees at a rate of $12 per hour worked, subject to any applicable increases above that $12 rate provided by federal law or enacted by the Nevada Legislature; (2) remove the existing provisions setting different rates for the minimum wage based on whether the employer offers certain health benefits to such employees; and (3) remove the existing provisions for adjusting the minimum wage based on applicable increases in the cost of living?

Question 2 raises the minimum wage for all Nevadans from $10.50 to $12 and eliminates exceptions that allow certain employers under certain circumstances to pay less than minimum wage. It also provides predictability for employers by setting the minimum wage to a fixed dollar amount without adjustments for cost of living.

This amendment is a win-win for both workers and employers, and we encourage Nevadans to vote “Yes” on Question 2.

Ballot Question 3: Open primaries and ranked-choice voting [Vote No]

Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended to allow all Nevada voters the right to participate in open primary elections to choose candidates for the general election in which all voters may then rank the remaining candidates by preference for the offices of U.S. Senators, U.S. Representatives, Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, State Controller, Attorney General and State Legislators?

This question is really two separate questions packaged together.

The first creates open primaries, which allows any person to participate in a primary election regardless of party affiliation. Proponents argue that closed primaries prevent independents and those with no party preference from participating in primaries. This might encourage extremism and partisanship, by making it more likely that hard-line party loyalists win primaries. Opponents argue that open primaries lead to undemocratic strategic campaigning and voting practices.

Both parties have attempted to abuse the primary process. Most recently, Democratic party leaders in other states were caught funding extremist Republicans to try to eliminate the strongest Republicans from the general election ballot. It’s also true that registered independents made a deliberate choice to step out of the primaries when they registered. They can join the other parties at any time. At this juncture the risks of parties using open primaries to monkey-wrench elections is too great.

Aiming to address some of the same issues around extremism and the lack of options for independents and third-party voters, the second half of the question would allow for ranked-choice voting. In ranked-choice primaries Nevadans could vote for up to five candidates in each race, ranking them in order of preference. Proponents argue that this helps move candidates to the middle and gives third-party candidates a chance to break through. However, we have also seen ranked choice create confusion among voters in other jurisdictions or allow profoundly unqualified candidates to succeed simply because of where their name falls on the list.

We believe the goals of Question 3 might be appropriate at some point, especially if extremism continues to dominate major party politics. But we are not yet ready to endorse Question 3, especially as a package asking two separate questions and with the current risks of election manipulation so high.

Click HERE to subscribe for free to the Weekly Fix, the digital edition of Las Vegas Weekly! Stay up to date with the latest on Las Vegas concerts, shows, restaurants, bars and more, sent directly to your inbox!