Days
Hours
Primary Election • May 19, 2026
Days
Hours
“Truth is the strongest argument.”
St. Thomas Aquinas
“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
Our Lord Jesus Christ (John 8:32)
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of error is for good men to remain silent.”
Edmund Burke
“Character is doing the right thing when nobody is watching.”
J.C. Watts
“Courage is not the absence of fear, but the determination to move forward despite it.”
Winston Churchill
Here’s a few different quote options.
The “Issues and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ’s)” menu of this website has two main sub-pages:
To learn about the “Progress, Innovation & Improvements” page click on those words.
This page addresses the “Controversy, Disruption & Drama”. The responses and answers to below are listed in reverse chronological order and answers to these frequently asked questions (FAQs) are in the expanding list below which you can access by clicking the plus (+) sign. Some of the responses include hyperlinks (links) to documentation. Click on each link to review documentation that corroborates and substantiates the truth in these matters and which you will likely not ever see printed in the local Press.
Fair, accurate, assessments should be non-political. It’s basically data collection, math and statistical analysis. The Assessor’s work depends on three interdependent pillars: People, Systems, Data. In 2020, each of these were unstable. The instability was inherited from the prior administration affecting all three pillars. Reforms were needed to stabilize all three. The controversy and disruption were a response, in part, to the reforms.
Controversy erupted in the fall of 2021 (before the 2022 election cycle) when the Chief Deputy (only 5 months into her job) rallied with a core group of appraisers (former colleagues) and formed a plan to unseat me. In April of 2022, the Chief Deputy and the group initiated an executive session with the Commissioners to unseat me and they published their anecdotal complaints in the press threatening they’d quit, which could jeopardize operations. Four years later most still work in the Assessor’s Office; a few have retired.
Change is difficult, especially when people have invested years holding an unstable system together. But the changes were necessary. Reforms meant changes to the core group of employees. It was a culture shock resulting in fear, apprehension, misunderstanding, polarization and resistance through an internal campaign against me.
My inquiries and my proposed reforms, as an outsider, threatened the staff’s “norm.” The tragic passing away of the previous Assessor was a huge loss that shook their world. As an outsider, I was seen as one more change amid many others including rapid growth, public COVID shutdowns, political and national riots and unrest and much uncertainty.
The reforms also meant making processes and methodology changes to enhance uniformity. Over the years, residential property owners have shouldered a greater share in paying property taxes primarily due to legislative changes – but processes and methodology have an impact, too. Housing is no longer affordable. By redressing inequities through process changes and easing the residential tax burden, the reforms were a threat to the interests of some local community leaders who wanted to preserve the status quo.
Things got political. Opposition followed a pattern of attack and discredit taking the hard line against me.
The 2022 internal campaign against me caused tremendous internal disruption in the operations.
Allegations against me were, and are, false. The Commissioners had no evidence whatsoever to support their allegations against me.
As a result, the District Court and Supreme Court found in my favor and reversed the actions of the Commissioners.
First, things have settled down.
The Assessor’s Office is a great place to work, and we have an amazing team.
We have a lot of dedicated, long-term employees (≥ 6+ years) who have the proper skills and competence, and most importantly, their hearts are in the right place. Their experience is valuable in getting the work done and we needed their help to transfer their knowledge on to the newer personnel. Most of these long-term employees are also Baby Boomers with an eye on their deserved retirement in the not-too-distant future.
Next, we have a good mix of newer employees (< 6 years). What these employees bring their willingness to learn from the more experienced while also bringing their technological savvy and offering a willingness to innovate and automate and a fresh look from new perspective and new insights.
We need both the experience and the new perspectives.
From the start, my approach and my intent have been to show respect for the past and especially the dedication of long-term staff, and to balance that with a realism for the present to face the hard issues, while also promoting a vision with optimism and hope for the future. My belief is that this is what will unite us – dedication to our core mission and a vision on how to accomplish that mission.
Looking back, I recognize that my direct approach was not seen by some (especially the long-term employees) in the way that I intended.
In the span of 2.5 short years (i.e., from June 2020 through 2022 – which felt very long), the department has gone through a very difficult and turbulent time of instability. In the heat of that battle, I was direct in my questioning. I asked staff: “What works?” “What doesn’t work?” “What are your needs?” “How can I help?” and the big one, “Why do we do it that way?” In hindsight, I see that these questions can be perceived as threatening.
In the campaign year of 2022, I was open and transparent about operational issues and needed fixes, which was necessary to gain community and Commissioner support to make the needed changes, which required resources and funding. Some employees likely saw such openness and transparency as a betrayal. That was not my intention.
In 2022, after I won the November general election, I apologized to those who were offended, and I maintain that apology even now and without reservation – because I sincerely recognize that change is difficult. But the fact is we were in a difficult situation in 2020-2022, and we needed to act by facing the realities of the current situation.
Project Sympatico is well underway, it will be a huge benefit to the Assessor, to the Treasurer and to the County. It will stabilize all three pillars of the Assessor’s Office -Systems, People and Data. It is Phase 1, of a multi-phased effort.
I am running for re-election to finish the work of stabilizing all three pillars of the Assessor’s Office. I respectfully ask for your vote on May 19, 2026.
Like many organizations that record calls “for quality and protection purposes,” I made audio recordings for accuracy and documentation — never with malicious intent and never to harm anyone. The recordings were simply a reliable form of note-taking and were never used to gain advantage or attack any person. Nothing negative resulted from them.
When I became Assessor in 2020, the office faced serious instability — missing files, no written procedures, inconsistent information, and a tense working environment. After my written notes disappeared and I was warned that false allegations might be made against me, I began recording meetings as a matter of necessity and self-defense so that the truth would be preserved.
Idaho law allows one-party consent recordings, and in public buildings where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. My actions were lawful and defensive. The District Court and Idaho Supreme Couty ultimately confirmed that my position was justified. There was never any misuse of the recordings.
These recordings protected accuracy and accountability in a toxic and hostile environment where the Commissioners abused their discretion. The recordings harmed no one, produced no adverse actions, and were released only in limited redacted form in response to public record requests.
I regret any concerns or loss of trust that the recordings caused, but the recordings were made in good faith to protect the truth and ensure fairness. Today, we continue moving forward and rebuilding trust. Three employees who resigned have asked to come back and are now again working on our team.
You are now caught up on this FAQ topic.
You don’t need to read any further, unless you want to. If so, take a deeper dive by clicking the next plus sign (+) below to expand the topic to read further and then click the links provided below.
Organizations use recordings for quality and protection purposes, a use that has become common practice. Those are the same reasons that I made audio recordings, and they have never been used against anyone, or for any other reason, other than as my notes. They’ve not been released except for redacted copies released to a handful of employees who made public record requests.
I am sincerely sorry for any loss of trust caused by the recordings. It was never my intention to erode trust among the many good-willed employees who work hard every day. Only those who’ve experienced similar challenges can understand why I took the steps I did.
When I became Assessor in the turbulence of 2020, the office environment felt closed off and resistant to change. All three pillars (People, Systems and Data) that make up the operations of the Assessor’s Office were unstable.
From day one, the transition was not smooth. The Assessor’s files had been removed from the office; all file drawers were empty. There were no written operating procedures to guide me through the complex operations. Staff told me that the Assessor’s files were in storage; when I asked to see them, I was then told they were missing. The files have never been recovered.
I met, one-on-one, with the employees and other county personnel to learn the operations (none were recorded). Some were hesitant to speak; some said they would disavow some of what they had revealed to me if anyone ever asked them about it. Most complained about the computer system. The staff seemed to exhibit a stance duty combined with a self-defensive posture that seemed fearful of repercussion if they opened up and spoke honestly. More than a few mentioned scrupulous concerns about any possible exposure to ethical violation through no fault of their own because they had been doing the best that they could with the limited resources that they had. The discussions yielded inconsistent information. Some said that no documentation existed. Others acknowledged that some documentation did exist, but it had not been updated in years, because laws can change year-to-year and the workload did not allow for updated documentation. I believed that to be true. I took copious notes, but inconsistencies in processes and terminology did not match-up with state law and the software maker’s documentation, making it difficult to reconcile.
When my notes vanished from my office, I began locking my office door. I started making recordings for my notes and quality purposes, not suspecting they’d be deemed a public record. Later, I was tipped off before the two executive sessions, so, I recorded each as a matter of necessity in self-defense because I was denied legal counsel and the tip-off revealed that I would face false allegations it would be illegally demanded that I resign and end my campaign. Commissioners, as a governing body, are prohibited from disclosing; executive session information; I’m not a commissioner and the prohibition applies only to commissioners. Furthermore, an executive session cannot be used to conceal illegal or illicit activity. Finally, I was in a position adverse to the Commissioners and I have the right to a reasonable defense, especially against false allegations.
In Idaho, there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy for actions or events that occur in public view. Idaho is a “one-party consent” state and that means a conversation in a public building can be recorded as long as one person involved in the conversation agrees to it.
The recordings were never used to leverage advantage over any person. At worst, the recordings served as a counterbalance of defensive necessity against Commissioner abuses (as confirmed by one District Court judge and three Idaho Supreme Court judges).
The Commissioners held a December 28, 2023, public meeting seemingly to cast suspicion and discredit me by suggesting the recordings created liability. My County attorney said he would be present in the meeting to answer my legal questions that were still pending. Because my County attorney was not present, I asked if I had representation. Stanley Mortensen said I should ask my legal questions publicly (generally not done publicly due to attorney-client privilege). I chose not to ask my question publicly; however, later after the Supreme Court decision, I did ask my questions in April of 2025. Mortensen refused to answer.
If there was any County liability, then it was dramatically expanded by holding a public meeting, instead of a separate executive session, for the Treasurer and Commissioners to make inquiry. No action occurred as a result of the audio recordings.
On a positive note, three employees who previously resigned have had the confidence to return and are back working. The actual record shows no misuse of the audio recordings. I will continue working to restore and rebuild any lost trust.