Indy 2020: The loser of the Iowa Democratic caucus — the apps

Your Nevada 2020 election newsletter. Please read, forward and subscribe.

Good morning, and welcome to Indy 2020, a biweekly newsletter focused on the 2020 presidential election in Nevada. A reminder that email subscribers get early access to this newsletter, so be sure to subscribe and tell your friends. It’ll be peachy.

I pre-wrote some of this newsletter last week — before all the Iowa insanity — and I put in a little boilerplate line in to kick off this section: “A lot has happened since the last newsletter!”

Looking back, this is the understatement of the century from a much more optimistic four-days-ago Megan.

I’m going to get into all the fun (is “fun” the right word?) app drama, the who won the Iowa caucus drama and all the other pre-Nevada caucus drama I can think up in the section below. But before we get there, just a little aside from my travels about the less glamorous side of campaigning.

I was sitting in the terminal at Des Moines Airport yesterday morning — trying to write as much of the first pass of this story as I could before boarding my flight back to Las Vegas — when who should so happen to sit down on the bench across from me but Tom Steyer, in full suit and standard issue red plaid tie. He sat there, looking at his phone, I think, for awhile. 

Every so often someone would come up to him and say hi or ask to take a picture. He talked on the phone at points, but he seemed to start mid-conversation, which made me wonder: Was he just pretending? While we were getting ready to board, Siri loudly announced from a passenger’s phone: “Tom Steyer’s net worth is $1.6 billion.” I looked around. I didn’t see Steyer. The passenger then announced his incredulity that someone worth that much would fly commercial. (To be fair, it is something Steyer promised to do in his campaign to show his commitment on climate change.)

When I was boarding the plane, I passed Steyer, who had a folded up newspaper in his hands with a crossword puzzle on it. I didn’t see him again after I got off. (He was off to an evening rally at Robert O. Gibson Middle School.)

There’s not really a particular point to this story other than to say the guy on your TV and your radio and the billboards, he’s just another person, on a plane, making his way through this world. (Albeit with a billion dollars.)

You know the drill. Email any tips, thoughts, questions, comments and suggestions to Without further ado, a download of the recent 2020 happenings in Nevada (and Iowa.)


The winner of the Iowa Democratic caucus is…? Honestly, who even knows. Do we care? Does it matter? I was so interested to see the profound letdown last night on social media of not knowing who won. I get it. Journalists and operatives have spent months on the ground gearing up for Iowa’s Democratic caucus and then to have it end not with a bang but a whimper? I would feel the same way. But it honestly got me thinking about what we build Iowa up to be. Iowa matters (sorry, to steal a turn of phrase) because we say it matters, as operatives, as journalists, and as interested members of the public. But the sun has now risen and set still without a concrete answer and… we’re okay. The world is still turning. Maybe Iowa is just a tautological proposition.

Okay, for real, the actual winner of the Iowa Democratic caucus is…? We still don’t know! But what we do know is that former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg is leading with about 26.8 percent support, followed by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders at 25.2 percent, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren at 18.4 percent, former Vice President Joe Biden at 15.4 percent, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar at 12.6 percent, tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang at 1.1 percent and billionaire Tom Steyer at 0.3 percent. This is only based on 71 percent of precincts reporting, and the Iowa Democratic Party hasn’t given a timeline for when the rest of the results will be in.

So what does it all mean? It will be interesting to see how Berniementum and Petementum carry forward into New Hampshire and Nevada. Sanders is already polling well here, but Buttigieg has lagged. If his Iowa bump is at least somewhat sustained through New Hampshire, it could help him significantly here. By the same token, it’s looking increasingly likely that Nevada will be the all-important firewall for the former vice president in this race.

Interestingly, though not all that surprisingly, a poll taken by the progressive organization She the People taken between Jan. 21-24 found Biden leading among women of color in Nevada with 24 percent support. He was followed closely by Sanders, with 22 percent. Another 22 percent were undecided. Other candidates received smaller levels of support including Steyer (14 percent), Warren (10 percent) and Yang (5 percent.)

The poll, which was conducted by Anzalone Liszt Grove Research and first reported by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, sampled 393 women of color who were Democrats or left-leaning nonpartisans and were contacted online and through cellphone and landline interview. The margin of error was 4.9 percentage points.

Why does this matter? Because, again, Nevada is the first diverse state to weigh in on the presidential nominating contest, and voters here aren’t just going to rubber stamp whoever just because Iowans and New Hampshirites say so. And when it comes to organizing in communities of color, you can’t just show up one day and ask for someone’s vote the next.

About those apps: If you follow me on Twitter — which I hope you do! Because  I tweet excellent content about Pokemon and “Cats” and occasionally politics —  you’re up to speed on the latest with the app drama. But the short tl;dr version this is: Iowa Democrats created an optional caucus reporting app. They apparently did not give their volunteers very much time to get comfortable with the app or much training on how to use it. On top of that, there was a coding error, according to Iowa Democrats, that caused some numbers to be reported incorrectly even though the underlying data was correct. Frustrated with the app, many precinct captains instead called into a hotline to report their results, which they found was jammed and unable to handle the incoming traffic. (There were also some reports that people just didn’t bother to download the app.) And all of that added up to no results from the Iowa Democratic caucus being released until Tuesday afternoon.

All of that matters because Nevada also has an app — two of them actually! Or had. The Nevada State Democratic Party announced on Tuesday that it had terminated its relationship with Shadow Inc., the political technology company that had developed both the Iowa and Nevada apps. Without the Shadow apps, it’s hard to see how the Democrats will be able to find another app-based solution in the next 17 days, which means they’ll have to switch to an entirely paper system (one of the backup methods) or devise some other Option C. Democrats have not given a timeline for when they will announce their new caucus plan.

If you’re curious and missed out on all of this, I wrote all about it here.

Ne-VAY-duh: Sunday seems so long ago, a simpler time. I spent my Sunday morning in the town of Nevada, Iowa (yes, pronounced Ne-VAY-duh) learning about its history and talking to residents about the caucus. If you want something (slightly) more lighthearted, I’d recommend giving this a read.


What happens in Iowa only happens in Iowa: On Sunday afternoon and evening I spent some time talking to Iowans about their first in the nation caucus — spoiler alert, they pretty much are happy with the process — and whether they should be allowed to keep it. (Another spoiler, they do, though some acknowledge the diversity argument.) You can read more here.

Who has caucused in Nevada, and who will caucus this time? This seems like ages ago at this point, but in this weekend deep dive, I took a look at who historically caucusgoers in Nevada are — data suggest many of them are female, older and live in the suburbs, with a significant concentration of caucusgoers in Northern Nevada — and what changes to the caucus process this time around might mean for efforts to make the process the most diverse and accessible yet.

Steyermentum in Nevada: The weekend before the weekend before the Iowa caucus, Steyer was campaigning in Nevada while his opponents were halfway across the country. I took a look at the California billionaire’s play for Nevada and the traction he’s managed to gain with voters on the ground here.

Bloomberg on the Las Vegas debate stage? The Democratic National Committee announced on Friday that it is expanding the criteria for presidential candidates to qualify for the debate stage in Las Vegas next month. They are removing the donor threshold, which has until now kept former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg from the debate stage as he is self-funding his campaign, and adding a new delegate threshold, which will allow candidates to qualify for the stage simply by receiving national delegates out of the Iowa and New Hampshire nominating contests. Details here.

Republicans plan delegate vote for day of Democratic caucus: The Nevada Republican Party plans to vote to pledge its delegates to President Donald Trump on Feb. 22, the day of the Democratic presidential caucus in Nevada. My colleague Riley Snyder has more.

The war of the ads: Several Democratic presidential hopefuls have either gone up with their first TV ads in the last couple of weeks or added additional spots, including digital and radio ads. Sanders released his first TV ads in English and Spanish, Warren’s first TV ad was also in Spanish, and Biden up with his first radio ad in Spanish, as well as a series of new biographical ads. For the latest, check out our campaign ad tracker. Interestingly, Warren recently canceled a flight of ads between Feb. 17 and 23 in Nevada and South Carolina.

More youth turnout in 2020? Turnout rates for 18- and 19-year-old voters in Nevada’s 2018 election were higher than the turnout rate of older millennials. What does that mean for the upcoming election? Indytern Tabitha Mueller has more.


Upcoming candidate visits

  • Buttigieg and Steyer will attend a National Faith Forum at the Mirage being held Feb. 12-14. Buttigieg will join by phone and Steyer will appear in person.
  • Yang will attend a town hall with actor Ken Jeong at the Mosaic on Feb. 13 and a “Bagels and Politicos” event at the Latin Chamber of Commerce on Feb.14.
  • Biden is slated to return to Nevada on Feb. 16 for yet-to-be-announced events.
  • For the latest, check out our presidential candidate tracker.

New endorsements

  • Biden was endorsed by 17 African American community leaders from Nevada, including former Assembly Majority Leader William Horne.
  • Gloria Caoile, a longtime labor and AAPI community leader and former National Political Director for the Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance (APALA), endorsed Warren.
  • Biden was endorsed by 19 community and political leaders, including a Washoe County School District trustee, a North Las Vegas city councilman, and several former elected officials and county party chairs.
  • The fairly new LGBTQ civil rights organization Silver State Equality, which I wrote about last year, has endorsed Buttigieg for president.
  • Steyer received several small business endorsements in Nevada, including from Trina Jiles, owner of Gritz Café.
  • Assemblywomen Selena Torres and Dina Neal endorsed Biden for president.
  • Warren received an endorsement from West Wendover City Councilwoman Kathy Durham, among others.
  • For the latest, check out our presidential endorsement tracker.

Surrogate stops

  • Abdul Henderson, a veteran and Steyer’s senior national deputy campaign manager, held a veterans appreciation luncheon for the Nevada Democratic Veterans and Military Families Caucus on Jan. 24
  • Evan Low, Yang’s national campaign co-chair and a California assemblymember, was in Las Vegas on Jan. 24 and 25. He attended a roundtable with AAPI business leaders, a parade celebrating Chinese New Year and an event with the Nevada Democratic Veterans and Military Family Caucus.
  • Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan (and former presidential hopeful) campaigned for Biden in Reno and Carson City on Jan. 25, hosting a caucus training with local firefighters and a Carson City office opening.
  • Warren campaign manager Roger Lau was in Las Vegas on Jan. 25 to kick off an AAPI weekend of action with a canvass launch during an office opening event in Chinatown and host a Lunar New Year celebration.
  • Several surrogates were in town to attend two progressive summits the weekend of Jan. 25 and 26, including former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro (Warren), former Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis (Biden), Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun (Biden), Jane Sanders (wife of Bernie Sanders), and civil rights leader Lamell McMorris (Buttigieg.) Many of the surrogates also attended other events while in town.
  • Actor Danny Glover campaigned for Sanders in Las Vegas on Jan. 25 and 26. He attended a King Week Scholarship Banquet, a church service at Nehemiah Ministries and a Las Vegas community roundtable.
  • Olympian Michelle Kwan campaigned on Jan. 25 in Las Vegas for Biden. She attended the Las Vegas Chinese New Year in Desert Festival Parade, a precinct captain party and potluck in East Las Vegas, and the Summerlin Lunar New Year event.
  • New York State Assemblywoman Catalina Cruz, a Warren surrogate, attended a Spanish-language roundtable with Mi Familia Vota and hosted a Women of Color Mixer in Las Vegas on Friday.
  • Former Secretary of the Interior and Colorado Senator Ken Salazar hosted a canvass kickoff in North Las Vegas, attended a Rural Nevada Democratic Caucus meeting and joined a Native American Caucus Central Committee Meeting on Saturday on behalf of Biden.
  • California Rep. Ami Bera campaigned in Las Vegas on Monday for Biden. He attended a precinct captain training and hosted a “Chai and Chat” event focused on mobilizing the AAPI community.
  • Sam Steyer, son of Tom Steyer, and Axel Adams, Steyer’s national African American outreach director, will be in Las Vegas on Feb. 6 for a Black Men’s Roundtable at Eclipse Theaters.
  • Rep. Dina Titus is slated to campaign for Biden in Northern Nevada on Feb. 8 and 9.

Staffing changes and office openings

  • Klobuchar’s team has brought on a data systems ambassador to manage precinct-level outreach in Clark County. They have also brought on six ambassadors to focus on the campaign’s operations in Washoe County, including marketing and donor engagement.

Other election news

  • On Jan. 22, the Sanders campaign announced that it has knocked on more than 200,000 doors statewide in all 17 counties, held nearly 5,000 canvasses, phone banks, and other direct voter contact events, made more than 2.7 million phone calls to voters, recruited more than 2,500 Caucus Day volunteers and opened 11 offices and brought on more than 110 staff across the state. The campaign promised to knock 300,000 doors in the final month of the campaign before Nevada’s Feb. 22 caucus.
  • The same day, Warren weighed in on Twitter on an immigration-related lawsuit against the city of Las Vegas: “Las Vegas must honor its pledge to stop unconstitutionally detaining immigrants.”
  • Sanders released a new video “Home Health Care Workers Deserve Respect” on Jan. 24, ahead of SEIU Nevada’s Unions for All Summit.
  • A group of educators and students joined a Nevada Educators and Students for Pete group.
  • Biden launched a Nevada Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Leadership Council. The group will be chaired by Ash Mirchandani, a Las Vegas business and community leader, and Doris Bauer, a board member of the National Federation of Filipino American Associations, will be vice chair.
  • The Nevada State Democratic Party and the Young Dems hosted caucus trainings for college students last week in Reno and Las Vegas.
  • The campaign also completed a day of action with volunteers on caucus recruitment over the weekend, reaching 30 percent of their donor base across 15 counties.
  • Chispa Nevada hosted a second Spanish-language caucus training on Tuesday.


Former GOP Assemblyman running for CD4 raises $156,000 in Q4: Jim Marchant, a Republican former assemblyman hoping to take on Democrat Rep. Steven Horsford in Nevada’s 4th Congressional District, has raised more than $156,000 in the last quarter of 2019, putting his cash on hand at a little more than $209,000. My colleague Jacob Solis has more.

Former treasurer raises $565,000 in bid against Lee in CD3: Former Treasurer Dan Schwartz, who is hoping to challenge Democratic Rep. Susie Lee in Nevada’s 3rd Congressional District, announced he has raised more than $565,000 through the end of and has more than $447,000 cash on hand. More from Jacob on that here.


Las Vegas City Council to vote on ordinance that would sidestep firearms confiscation in domestic violence cases, prevent jury trials

Las Vegas City Hall

In response to a recent Nevada Supreme Court ruling giving misdemeanor domestic violence defendants the right to request a jury trial, the City of Las Vegas has proposed a new ordinance that would allow city prosecutors to charge individuals under the municipal code with the misdemeanor crime of “battery which constitutes domestic violence.”

Although public defenders say they are now planning to request jury trials for all their clients accused of misdemeanor domestic violence, local governments across the state are scrambling for ways to comply with the order without clogging their courts. Henderson and North Las Vegas also are considering similar ordinances to work around the new requirement to provide jury trials.

“The Supreme Court's decision created both logistical and jurisdictional dilemmas for the City of Las Vegas and other incorporated cities in Nevada,” Deputy City Attorney Jeff Dorocak said Monday at a “recommending meeting,” where a subcommittee of council members receive public input and decide whether to continue the hearing to a future date or formulate a recommendation to the City Council for passage, rejection or amendment.

“Logistically, the city's municipal court presently has no jury administration, no ability to summon a juror pool and even no jury boxes.” 

The state Supreme Court’s decision stemmed from 2015 legislation prohibiting anyone convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence from possessing a firearm. Last month, the court decided that confiscation of firearms was a serious-enough punishment to elevate misdemeanor domestic violence from a petty offense to a higher-level offense, thus requiring jury trials.

The dilemma is mainly how to handle the expected influx of jury trials, which will now be available to potentially tens of thousands more people each year who are facing charges of misdemeanor domestic violence. According to a 2017 report, law enforcement made more than 21,000 arrests in Clark County for domestic violence crimes.

Dorocak emphasized that the city attorneys who wrote the proposed ordinance based it on the state’s domestic violence laws with one big difference. By defining “battery which constitutes domestic violence,” apart from the federal definition of domestic violence (which the Nevada Supreme Court used in its ruling), the city can forgo the jury trial. 

The plan has attracted critics, including SafeNest, which is the largest domestic violence victim services provider in the state.

“This ordinance does mirror state statute up until it deletes the provisions on weapon confiscation for those convicted of battery domestic violence,” said Strategies 360 lobbyist William Horne on behalf of the company’s client, SafeNest.

Horne added that the bill also circumvents the Supreme Court’s order to give each domestic violence battery defendant a jury trial if they request it.

“If you pass this ordinance, the first time that you do, I believe that defense counsel's going to sue that it's an improper use of the ordinance and we're going to come to a complete standstill and we haven't gotten anything resolved,” Horne said.

Horne and Liz Ortenburger, CEO of SafeNest, urged the council to postpone a vote until they can meet with community stakeholders and possibly request a special session of the Legislature, which meets only in odd-numbered years for 120 days. Domestic violence groups, who supported the original 2015 legislation that allows confiscation of weapons, now fear that the court’s ruling could have unintended consequences such as defendants pleading down to lower offenses and avoiding accountability on domestic violence charges, or ordinances such as the City of Las Vegas has proposed.

“Simply removing one portion of [the law] to make it work logistically for the city is not the right move for victims. And our homicide rate, not only of our victims, but [also] of our [law enforcement] officers, will increase,” Ortenburger said.

Following Ortenburger, three volunteers from Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America commented in opposition to the proposed ordinance, saying it was evading the intent of the 2015 legislation. City of Las Vegas Senior Deputy Attorney Martin Orsinelli responded to the comments by saying that the bill provided an essential first step to convicting domestic violence charges.

“We don't want defendants to have guns. We get it. But don't forget you don't get there unless you get a conviction for domestic violence,” Orsinelli said. “This will allow us to hold defendants accountable until the Legislature does something.”

According to Orsinelli, the City of Las Vegas has been charging people with simple batteries since the Supreme Court decision came down, which are a lower offense than a misdemeanor for domestic violence, because the city court cannot handle the volume of jury trials that would result from filing more serious misdemeanor charges.

Councilman Brian Knudsen requested a 30-day hold on the proposed ordinance, until the City Council could further consult with stakeholders and other agencies affected by the court order. Councilwoman and Mayor Pro Tem Michele Fiore requested to move the item to the City Council meeting on Wednesday for a final vote. 

The recommending committee voted unanimously to pass the item along for a final vote on Wednesday.

State Republican Party chair did little work for second job as dental board lobbyist, records show

September was a good month for Michael McDonald.

Buoyed by endorsements from President Donald Trump’s inner circle and elected officials statewide, McDonald beat back two challengers to win re-election to a fifth term leading the state’s Republican Party, promising that the “Nevada Republican Party is united and ready to deliver our state to President Trump and electing Republicans down the ballot in 2020.”

But leading the state party isn’t the only job on McDonald’s plate. For the past year, he’s worked as the lobbyist for the Nevada State Board of Dental Examiners, the seventh-largest occupational licensing board in the state — although public records raise questions about his work for the board.

Over the last two decades, McDonald has a history of representing unusual clients as a lobbyist, including a rural constable’s office and the Culinary Workers Union Local 226. But his working relationship with the state dental board, which oversees licenses and regulates dental health professionals, has been more than just unusual from the get-go.

Since he was hired in May 2018 (beating out two established lobbying firms led by former lawmakers), records indicate McDonald has spoken at just one board meeting in that 16 months. Public records requests reveal that his only written correspondence with the board since he was hired has been monthly invoices — a request for $3,428.57 every month. 

Lobbyists and lawmakers reported not interacting or seeing him during the legislative session, and say he was invisible on often-technical bills that substantially affect operations of the dental board. McDonald did not return a text message seeking comment.  

In short, it’s difficult to find any public evidence of work completed by McDonald since he accepted the two-year, $72,000 contract to provide government relations services for the board.

It has elicited questions from lobbyists who represent other state boards, who say that McDonald’s scope of work and practices are at best highly unusual for a state board lobbyist and could invite additional scrutiny of state licensing boards, which have a recent history of butting heads with other state government agencies.

“If I were heading up a regulatory board, and I found out my lobbyist wasn’t there on a regular basis, I would not renew that contract,” said Susan Fisher, a longtime lobbyist who represents three other state boards. “Why hire a lobbyist if they’re not going to be there?”

In spite of the unusual arrangement, staff of the dental board say they have no issue with McDonald, though the board’s executive director, Debra Shaffer-Kugel, declined to answer multiple emailed questions about McDonald’s attendance at board meetings and work for the board during and outside of the legislative session. She instead referred all questions to the board’s general counsel, Melanie Bernstein Chapman, who did not answer specific questions but said the board had no issues with McDonald or his activities as the board’s lobbyist.

“I have not been advised of, nor am I aware of, any concerns of the Board with respect to Mr. McDonald’s representation,” she wrote in an email.

Board meetings

A review of the minutes and audio records of the nine meetings held by the dental board since it agreed to hire McDonald as its lobbyist in May 2018 shows that he only spoke at one meeting, on March 22.

There, McDonald gave a roughly 10-minute review of a handful of bills related to dentistry, largely sticking almost word-for-word to the descriptions written by Legislative Counsel Bureau staff. He skimmed over a bill, SB366, which aimed to open up the practice of dental hygienists to operate in the state, and stayed out of a roughly 10-minute discussion on the bill and how it would affect dental practices statewide. 

At one point during the March meeting, McDonald advised the board on SB156, a bill related to the practice of equine dentistry — a topic area overseen by the state’s veterinary board, not the board of dental examiners.

Outside of that meeting, traces of McDonald’s presence on behalf of the dental board are difficult to pin down. Outside of a pre-session meeting between several health-related occupational boards and an appearance at a court hearing involving the dental board (referenced in meeting minutes), McDonald is not listed as speaking or appearing at any additional board meetings or during any 2019 legislative hearings. According to a records request, McDonald sent just 12 emails over the course of his employment to staff and members of the Board of Dental Examiners; one including a signed copy of the lobbying contract, and 11 invoices sent on a monthly basis.

The Nevada Independent contacted several other lobbyists employed by state boards to ascertain whether or not McDonald’s apparent lack of public-facing activity was out of the ordinary. 

Fisher, who represents the Oriental Medicine, Osteopathic Medicine and Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors, said that it would be “highly unusual” for her not to check in at least weekly with each of the boards during the legislative session, on the status of bills that directly and indirectly affect her boards.

Fisher said she alternated between emails and phone calls depending on the issue, but found it strange for a board to employ a lobbyist who wasn’t physically present at the Legislature during the 120-day session.

“What’s the point of having a lobbyist if they’re not going to be in Carson City during session?” she said. “That’s a silo, and you’ve got to be in the silo.”

Michael Hillerby, a lobbyist for Kaempfer Crowell who represents several boards (Accountancy, Nursing and Pharmacy) said that it was “unusual” in his nearly three-decade career to see an occupational board lobbyist not be physically present during the legislative session. Hillerby, who lobbied on behalf of the dental board several years ago, said that the lobbying role for an occupational board was a little different from other clients, in that they were expected to largely stay out of policy fights and contribute as the “subject matter experts” as to how various proposals would affect the licensure and operation of certain professions.

“It would be odd not to be there to at least be ready to answer questions as to how it impacts you and why it impacts you,” he said.

SB366, the bill creating a new mid-level dental provider type (dental therapists), is a prime example. Although it was initially opposed by the state dental association, the task of implementing the regulations required under the bill falls to the dental board, which also submitted a fiscal note estimating that the first version of the bill would result in close to $300,000 in lost annual fee revenue (The Governor’s Office of Finance wrote that the board did not provide a spreadsheet with their calculations and ultimately concluded that the board’s estimated financial impact was not “reasonable.”)

The initial version of the bill would have created a separate dental hygienists board, removing that profession from the purview (and fees) of the state dental board — a change that would have major implications for the board.

McDonald was not present — at least, he did not sign his name on sign-in sheets reflected in board meetings — at any committee meeting where SB366 was discussed. Dental board Executive Director Debra Shaffer-Kugel attended and testified in the neutral position during the first hearing of the bill on March 29, but no representative from the dental board or McDonald attending any of the subsequent six committee meetings where the bill was heard or voted on — even after three substantial amendments overhauled major portions of the bill. 

Democratic Sen. Julia Ratti, the bill’s sponsor, told a reporter during the legislative session that she had no interaction with McDonald on the bill or on any subject. Nevada Dental Association lobbyist Chris Ferrari said he spoke with Chapman, the board’s general counsel, at the state of the session but otherwise did not interact with McDonald or anyone else from the dental board on the bill. 

“It’s unusual to have such a big bill and not have a lobbyist there,” said Neena Laxalt, a lobbyist for the Nevada Dental Hygienist Association and several other boards.

Members of the dental board discussed the bill in depth during meetings in May and July of 2019, neither of which McDonald attended. Minutes from the board’s July 19 meeting show McDonald was absent; the board’s executive director said he was “ill.” A week later he was in Charlotte, North Carolina for a Republican National Committee event.

In an email, dental board general counsel Chapman said that the board was not directly asked for its position on the bill, did not introduce any legislation during the session and was committed to implementing regulations for any bills in its purview that were approved by state lawmakers.

“SB 366 was not the Board’s bill and, to my knowledge, the Board was never asked for, nor did it take a position for or against the bill but Mr. McDonald or a member of his staff did appear at the various hearings regarding the bill,” Chapman wrote in an email.

Boards and Commissions

As with contractors, nurses, private investigators and social workers, dentists in Nevada are overseen by one of Nevada’s occupational licensing boards. Dentistry is one of 50 occupations, professions or businesses overseen by 31 state boards.

Boards operate as a kind of quasi-governmental agency — board members come from the profession itself, but are appointed by the governor to serve three or four year terms. The boards don’t receive funds directly from the state, but are instead fully funded through licensure fees (registration, license renewal, etc.).  

Boards serve a variety of roles, including investigating complaints, disciplining licensees and helping write regulations that affect their industry. Although the governor appoints — and can, in limited circumstances, remove — board members, most oversight of boards comes from the legislative branch, which both creates the scope and abilities of the boards through legislation and oversees them through an interim subcommittee

Boards also vary in size and activity; the state Contractors Board reported more than $7 million in expenditures in 2018, while many smaller boards such as Athletic Trainers, Oriental Medicine and Landscape Architecture made it through the 2018 fiscal year with a budget under $100,000.

But unlike other state agencies, occupational boards (such as school districts and municipalities) have the budgetary freedom to hire lobbyists to represent them in front of the state Legislature and during the interim period between legislative sessions.

A previous Nevada Independent analysis of lobbying efforts by state boards and commissions found that at least 21 boards had hired a lobbyist in 2018, spending in total more than $577,000 for outside lobbying and public relations. Contracts varied widely in length and scope; the median amount spent by the boards was $21,000, though some were for less than $2,000, while on the other end of the spectrum, other more prominent boards inked six-figure lobbying and public relations contracts.

Lobbyists for state boards say they perform a necessary function for the agencies without requiring full-time staff or appointed board members spending time and resources at the Legislature. Some conservative leaning groups have criticized the arrangement, stating that hiring lobbyists allows boards to consolidate power and limit competition. At least 10 states have placed some limits on the ability of state agencies to hire lobbyists.


Though he has no apparent experience in health care or dental work, McDonald beat out two other lobbying firms (one run by former Democratic Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins and the other by former Democratic Assemblyman William Horne) to win the lobbying contract for the dental board in May 2018. In a previous email, Chapman said his position as head of the state Republican Party “was not discussed or considered as part of this process and was not a factor in the discussion or deliberation resulting in the decision to contract with him.”

According to registration records, his past lobbying experience includes representing the Nevada Republican Party in 2017, and several clients in 2015 including trial lawyer Glen Lerner, the Laughlin Constable’s office, the Armenian American Cultural Society of Las Vegas and the Southern Nevada Rural Constable’s Alliance. He also appeared as a lobbyist for the Culinary Workers Union Local 226 in 2012.

In 2015, McDonald was also briefly employed in another state government-related job; working for the Nevada State Treasurer’s Office as a senior deputy treasurer, but resigned within three months of taking the position amid criticism that he was hired given his close relationship with then-state Treasurer Dan Schwartz, previously a finance director for the state Republican Party.

A former Las Vegas Metropolitan police officer, McDonald got his start in Nevada’s political world by winning election to the Las Vegas City Council in 1995. His momentum stalled amid ethics and tax investigations (McDonald was never charged with a crime and later said he had been “wrongfully accused”) and contributed to his defeat in a 2003 municipal election.

His path back to relevancy began in 2012 when he was elected chair of the state Republican Party, and he later won contentious re-election campaigns in 2013 and 2015 against party establishment-backed candidates. He’s cultivated a close relationship with President Donald Trump, including getting the then-candidate to appear at a 2016 fundraiser for the party in Lake Tahoe.

His company that received the lobbying contract, Alpha-Omega Strategies, has played a role in several non-lobbying related business interests. The company was incorporated in 1998, initially operating as a “consulting” firm for private investigations, and later received approval from the Las Vegas City Council to operate a senior housing and retail center in Northwest Las Vegas.

Reaction and opposition

The hiring of McDonald has done little to quell the often tempestuous relationship between the board, vocal critics in the dental community and state government. 

McDonald was notably not present at a June meeting of the Executive Branch Audit Committee — composed of Gov. Steve Sisolak and other statewide elected “constitutional” officers (lieutenant governor, secretary of state, attorney general, treasurer and controller) — where an at-times scathing audit into the dental board was publicly presented for the first time.

The audit found that at least three board members, including board President Yvonne Bethea, may have violated state ethics law between 2015 and 2018 by failing to disclose familial or professional relationship prior to casting votes, and raised questions about the board’s use of Disciplinary Screening Officers to broadly screen complaints made to the board.

Sisolak, who found the audit to be “very concerning,” at one point in the meeting asked if the board’s lobbyist — McDonald — was present.

He wasn’t. 

Only Chapman, the board’s general counsel, appeared that day and took questions from the audit committee.

The 2019 audit was itself preceded by a 2016 audit, this one from legislative branch auditors who found the board had overcharged almost half of licensees under investigation, and allowed some offenders to make charitable donations in lieu of fine in contrast to state law. 

Not unlike McDonald himself, the board has been a lightning rod for controversy. Former Gov. Brian Sandoval even asked the board to tackle the patient complaint process, saying “I’ve never seen that happen before with people as upset as they are with … the board of dental examiners.”

Correction: Updated at 1:55 p.m. on Oct. 7, 2019 to reflect that the Nevada Dental Association initally opposed, and did not support, SB366.

Nevada GOP chair McDonald hired as dental board lobbyist despite lack of experience in field

Despite his lack of experience in health care issues or occupational boards, Nevada Republican Party Chairman Michael McDonald has been hired as the Nevada State Board of Dental Examiners’ lobbyist and legislative liaison as part of a two-year, $72,000 contract.

Although most boards and commissions contract with full-time, professional lobbyists, the dental examiners board elected to hire McDonald in late 2018 to be their sole lobbyist during the state’s 120-day legislative session and during the interim period between legislative sessions. But it remains unclear how McDonald, a rare presence in the legislative building and close ally of President Donald Trump, has represented the board in a session controlled by Democrats where key lawmakers and lobbyists for related entities say they haven’t interacted with him on any issues, even those affecting the dental board.

McDonald did not return a call or text message seeking comment on the contract or his work with the board.

McDonald — who does not list any other clients on the legislative lobbyist registry — was hired by the board during its May 11, 2018 meeting, where board members elected to hire him over lobbying firms run by former Assembly members Richard Perkins and William Horne (who was hired to lobby for the board during the 2017 legislative session).

In his one-page application letter, McDonald wrote that he would be involved in “all facets of the legislative process” including bill tracking, client communications and interim activities between sessions. His application included only a copy of his business's registration with the Secretary of State, while applications submitted by rival applicants Perkins Company and Horne Duarte contained slightly more in-depth information on their lobbying efforts and organizational structure.

According to minutes of the meeting, McDonald was the only applicant to appear in person, and after a short discussion was approved unanimously (with one abstention) by the board, which is the seventh-largest in the state in terms of annual revenues.

In an email, board attorney Melanie Bernstein Chapman said the board was authorized under state law to hire legislative consultants and that the board required the “special skills, expertise and knowledge of an experienced legislative liaison” to ensure it would “achieve optimal results for the citizens it serves.”

“Mr. McDonald was ultimately chosen due to his long history with Nevada and its citizens, as well as the responses to questions he was asked at the time the proposals were considered,” Bernstein Chapman said in an email. “His position as the chairman of the Nevada Republican Party was not discussed or considered as part of this process and was not a factor in the discussion or deliberation resulting in the decision to contract with him.”

Several board members including President Yvonne Bethea did not return calls from The Nevada Independent as to why they selected McDonald for the contract.

The contract runs for nearly two years, and is worth $72,000 in total, or roughly $3,430 per month. It was approved unanimously by members of the Board of Examiners — which consists of the governor, attorney general and secretary of state — in October 2018. All three of those office-holders were members of the Republican Party.

The approved contract states the dental board “requires the availability, expertise and knowledge that can be uniquely performed by the Contractor.”

Despite his status as the sole registered lobbyist for the board, it’s unclear whether McDonald has played any role in debate over bills that would have a major impact on the function and operation of the dental examiners board. Democratic Sen. Julia Ratti said she had not seen or interacted with McDonald on her bill SB366, which as originally drafted would have removed dental hygienists from the oversight and purview of the dental examiners board and licensed them under a different board.

Ratti added that she had primarily worked with the state’s dental association on the bill, adding that she wouldn’t be able to recognize McDonald if she saw him. It also remains uncertain how McDonald — who called legislative Democrats “frauds that have no clue what it takes to run our state” in a February statement — would be able to successfully nurture relationships and work with the Democrat-controlled Legislature on bills affecting the board.

Chris Ferrari, a lobbyist for the state dental association, said he had not interacted with McDonald on Ratti’s bill or any other bill this legislative session, but said it wasn’t atypical for a state board lobbyist to not play an active or advocacy role in pending legislation.

“Some boards tend to be a little more outspoken and get into what might be considered advocacy, while others have just sat back and taken questions,” he said.

Still, Ferrari said he had regularly checked in with the board’s former lobbyist, William Horne, during the 2017 legislative session to share a “collegial perspective on issues” that could affect the dental board and industry.

It’s unclear how much time McDonald has physically spent at the Legislature, outside of a Nevada Republican Party rally against a gun control bill held outside the legislative building in early April. He was scheduled to give a legislative update during the Dental Board’s last meeting on March 22, according to a copy of the meeting agenda.

The board itself has recently faced scrutiny from state lawmakers amid a 2016 audit report that found the board had overcharged almost half of licensees subject to investigation, and allowed some offenders to make charitable donations in lieu of fine which isn’t allowed under state law.

Leading the Republican party has been a way back into the political limelight for McDonald, a former Las Vegas police officer who was elected at age 30 to the Las Vegas City Council in 1995, but saw his momentum stall amid ethics investigations and a federal tax investigation that contributed to his defeat in the 2003 municipal election.

McDonald was elected chair of the Nevada Republican Party in 2012, winning contentious re-election campaigns in 2013 and 2015 against party establishment-backed candidates. He’s cultivated a close relationship with President Donald Trump, including getting the then-candidate to appear at a 2016 fundraiser for the party in Lake Tahoe, and was in turn heartily endorsed by Trump’s campaign ahead of the 2020 election cycle.

In the past, McDonald has worked as a lobbyist but never for an occupational board or health-related organization. According to registration records, he lobbied for the Nevada Republican Party in 2017, and for several clients in 2015 including trial lawyer Glen Lerner, the Laughlin Constable’s office, the Armenian American Cultural Society of Las Vegas and the Southern Nevada Rural Constable's Alliance. He also appeared as a lobbyist for the Culinary Workers Union Local 226 in 2012.

His company that received the lobbying contract — Alpha-Omega Strategies — was incorporated in 1998, and has been involved in a multitude of business interests. He told the Las Vegas Sun in 1999 that the business was operating essentially as a “consulting” firm for private investigations (without a license). In 2008, the same company received approval and financial assistance from the Las Vegas City Council to develop senior housing and a retail center in Northwest Las Vegas.

The company was also used by McDonald to cash monthly checks from the law firm of Patti and Sgro during his time on the Las Vegas City Council, highlighted as part of a wide-ranging tax fraud investigation (McDonald was never charged in the case, and later said he had been “wrongfully accused”).

McDonald was also briefly employed in the Nevada State Treasurer’s Office as a senior deputy treasurer, but resigned within three months of taking the position amid criticism that he was hired on given his close relationship with then-state Treasurer Dan Schwartz, previously a finance director for the state Republican Party.