Judge’s opponent uses late reply for some ‘wrong’ answers


RE: My opponent’s “late reply” to the Q & A from TheCitizen.com

(Note: For those of you who have requested to watch my interview, Go to www.facebook.com/kathybrownvalencia2020 to see my video.)

For those of you who have read my opponent Huddleston’s “late reply” to the TheCitizen’s Q & A articles, you may have noticed that by being a “late responder,” she gained an advantage that other candidates did not receive because she merely had to counterpoint my article rather than write her own article without knowing what mine contained. Here are some issues raised in her “late reply”:

• She says she can juggle her full-time law practice and the duties of a magistrate as long as her “outstanding paralegal” and her “back-up attorneys” assist her.

She astonishingly states that the four county magistrates “share one full-time role.” She is breathtakingly wrong. No one person could ever handle all the duties and hours of the Magistrate Court. There must be a magistrate on duty every hour of every night, day, weekend, and holiday. Since there are 8,760 hours in a year, that is the equivalent of full-time jobs for more than four people.

While some days are slow, other days are relentlessly busy. The schedule is not predictable and our busiest times are often when the courthouse is closed and the hours are late.

She also mentions municipal court judges as having separate law practices, but that is irrelevant because they do not do what magistrates judges do. Even the one magistrate who maintains a practice will tell you about the limits he has put on his practice so that he is not pulled away from magistrate duties.

I also limit my career interests to keep the county’s needs as my priority. Voters have no reason to take the risk that my inexperienced opponent would be able to juggle responsibilities between her helpers because I am already in place for them.

• My opponent states that I have not been in contact with her; however, she and I have had conversations both in person and by phone when she was a candidate in other campaigns in the past.

During those conversations, she told me a great deal about herself, and she told me that she was NOT related by blood to the Fayette Huddleston family. Perhaps since then, she has visited ancestry.com and found out something different.

Certainly, her motto on her signs seems to allude to a connection of some type. Nevertheless, whatever the connection is or is not, informed voters have much more to consider than the “family tree” angle.

• My opponent seems to be critical of my campaign fund. My campaign is funded by me and me alone. I have accepted NO money from anyone, even though people have offered. I do this to keep my courtroom clear from any possible allegations that I have favored someone because of a donation.

It is not necessary that a judge do this, but not only did I choose this path, my fellow Magistrate Judges White and Dunkelberger did so as well.

Finally, my opponent appears to be a good parent, a hard-worker, and a charitable person. She can “tie shoes,” sanitize an office, and manage a computer that is “so good” that it allows her to receive emails from TheCitizen for her political ads, but mysteriously blocks emails from TheCitizen about deadlines.

She runs an office. I run a courtroom. I am asking voters to keep it that way.

Judge Kathy Brown Valencia

Fayette Magistrate Court, District 2