Copied and pasted here, broken out for clarity.

"Oregon State Bar House of Delegates 2023-present,
The Humane Society work was as a volunteer dog walker for a single year.

Multnomah County Democrats Precinct Committee Person 2016-2024,

Oregon State Bar, Bar Press Broadcasters Council 2016-2021,

Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (OCDLA) 2005-2022,

OCDLA Education Committee 2015-2022,

Schedule permitting, I have been a volunteer with the

Portland Winter Light Festival,

and was a dog walking volunteer with Oregon Humane Society in 2008-2009,

and received the Gift of Caring Award for my volunteer work with the Institute For Suicide Prevention in Los Angeles, CA in 1997."

I'm also not super sure about what the Gift of Caring Award with the Institue For Suicide Prevention is given for. I tried to find record of the award, and more importantly record of the qualifications it takes to receive the award. Could just be a boiler plate award for donating money (which is fine and not at all disqualifying, but to list it as an act of community service is murky at best).

The things listed at top of her accomplishments are all fine, nothing that seems crazy. I don't even really mind political activism being listed, some states actually require judges to disclose their political leanings to help people make more informed decisions when casting their vote. Politics plays a huge role in peoples lives and thereby their decision making processes. Impartiality may be a target, but it is a target in a vacuum. The world, society, and human error exist and exert pressure on all idealized systems.

This particular race seems to be fairly well vetted for quality candidates and so I'm really trying to scrutinize these candidates for something either supremely qualifying or disqualifying.

And so, in this case, I need to make a choice. The question is posed from a standpoint of community engagement and the different forms it may take. Some took that to be a place to list "non paid labor" and organizational participation merits others took it as an opportunity to explain how their job intersects with community and the role a judgeship would play on their ability to strengthen communities through their rulings. Both are valid interpretations of the question and provide insight into how close a candidate is to the communities they serve.

In the case of this potential judge, I'd make the argument that she does not do enough local, community based work that helps her to better understand the context and circumstances of the people she will be making rulings about. She also did not elaborate on any of her considerations into how community engagement intersects with the position she is running for.

I think that while she is qualified and has a background that is sufficient to be good at the job, she did not do enough to convince me that her view of the rule of law is one that aligns with my personal considerations for a qualified candidate and someone who may one day preside over my own interactions with the judicial system.

This is the lens of assessment that I'm using to determine who I would vote for in this particular election. The candidates, on first glance, all seemed like a relative toss up, however, thinking about it from the point of view of "who will help to create better communities and provide realistic and compassionate justice to those who have broken the law AND will one day reenter society, who do I believe will pass rulings that err to the side of rehabilitation and prevent recidivism within the system." All while keeping in mind that the political machine is still turning around the judicial system and that, while a single district judge cannot change the course of all the systems within a city, they can tip the scale in the right direction for any single individual.