Q & A

What is the biggest challenge facing Nevadans living in your district, and how would you tackle it?

While going door to door and meeting my neighbors and constituents, two consistent challenges came to the forefront: the quality of our education in Nevada, and potential tax increases. As assembly woman for District 34 I support the funding of the approved 2015 Nevada State legislation ESA, or Educational Savings Account, also referred to as “school choice.” The ESA program is a comprehensive true school choice program which benefits all children and families. The stumbling blocks to the program are: lack of funding, and the lack of understanding of the program by Nevadans. I would tackle the problem by funding ESA’s and providing an interactive web site.

The second issue is the potential tax increase which comes from SJR14, a proposed Constitutional Amendment to change the way property taxes are assessed in Nevada and would also remove the property tax cap. To tackle this I would stress that governments are already operating at a surplus so there is no need to remove the cap on the property tax; I would fight to retain it. The government wants more money and needs to re-prioritize in regards to its spending, not increase taxes on Nevadans. The resolution will be on the ballot but I also have a lot of faith in my fellow Nevadans: when they get to the polls they will not vote for this cap removal. In addition, many small-business owners would like to see the commerce tax repealed and I would support those efforts.

If you could pass one bill in 2019 legislature, what would it be?

A transparency bill to eliminate redundant and wasteful government programs, perhaps by expanding the Spending and Government Efficiency Commission (SAGE) Committee on Education. SAGE was responsible for coming up with ways to streamline every state agency, recommending structural and operational changes to make government perform better and at a lower cost. The plan, when fully implemented, in New York in 2013 created a savings of more than $1.6 billion.

How do Nevadans citizens benefit by having the legislature be exempt from most of the states public records law?

I support the Nevada, lawmakers' stated purpose of the public-records law,NRS 239 “is to foster democratic principles by providing members of the public with access to inspect and copy public books and records to the extent permitted by law." The legislators further declared: "Any exemption, exception or balancing of interests which limits or restricts access to public books and records by members of the public must be construed narrowly."

 Education and local government officials have lobbied for a change in property tax cap. Should the caps be raised? If so, how should the money be spent? If not, what is the best way for governments to raise money for local programs?

I do not support the removal of the property tax cap. The removal of the property tax cap puts significant financial burden on those who live on a fixed income as well as the lower to middle income families.  No one should be forced out of their home because they can no longer afford the taxes on their property. And, as mentioned earlier, the governments are running at a surplus, leaving no reason to increase taxes or remove the cap; just because there were a few lean years and our property taxes were lower does not justify raising it now. 

I do not support the government looking to the taxpayers’ wallets for funding of programs. I suggest and would encourage the legislature to look at the existing funding of programs that are either irrelevant or ineffective.

The government should focus on growing the economy, which will increase consumption tax revenues.

As your assembly woman I will take the same care of the taxpayers’ money as I do my own: with discretion and prioritization. 

Nevada Question 5, Automatic Voter Registration via DMV Intitiative (2018)
Encouraging more Nevadans to take an active role in their community and voting is a worthy objective.  However, we all know too well that good intentions don’t always lead to good results.

I support governor Sandoval when he says “ IP1 fails this test because it extinguishes a fundamental, individual choice—the right of eligible voters to decide for themselves whether they desire to apply to register to vote—forfeiting this basic decision to state government. … the core freedom of deciding whether one wishes to initiate voter registration belongs to the individual, not the government.”

I will vote no on Question 5

Lawmakers in 2019 will have their first opportunities to tweak the voter- approved marijuana laws.  How would you change the Nevada’s marijuana laws?

This is another example of legislation where we put the cart before the horse.  As your assemblywoman there are a few areas which I see need to be addressed.

We really need to address the marijuana companies’ ability to use financial institutions.  Currently they cannot use FDIC banks, which has created a situation where there are warehouses full of cash –  this is obviously not a good way to do business on so many levels, from accounting to safety and security.

We are lacking the ability to conduct a test that reliably detects cannabis use — let alone intoxication, making it difficult to determine whether a driver is under the influence.

As a state which relies on tourism, we have many tourists coming to our home to partake in all we have to offer, including the use of recreational marijuana; we do not have a legal place for them to participate in this activity.