Kalamazoo County Circuit Court Judge candidates (Top left to right) Joseph Hohler III, Rebecca D’Angelo, Rachel Vinales (bottom left to right) Josh Hilgart, Julie Jensen and Ken Barnard.
KALAMAZOO COUNTY, MI – Six people are running for Kalamazoo County Circuit Court judge in the Aug. 2 primary.
They are running in the Circuit Court primary to get on the nonpartisan November ballot for two open judicial seats. Four candidates, two for each seat, will advance to November’s general election.
The two Circuit Court seats are open after Kalamazoo County Circuit Court judges Alexander Lipsey and Stephen Gorsalitz are retiring after reaching the state-mandated age limit of 70.
The candidates are listed in alphabetical order:
MLive/Kalamazoo Gazette partnered with the nonpartisan League of Women Voters of Michigan to provide candidate information for readers. Each candidate was asked to outline their experiences and visions for court changes listed below. Information on other state, county and local primary races can be found at Vote411.org.
Related: Three candidates vying for Kalamazoo County District Court judge seat
All responses in the voter guide were submitted directly by the candidate and have not been edited by the League of Women Voters, except for necessary cut if a reply exceeded character limitations. Spelling and grammar were not corrected. Publication of candidate statements and opinions is solely in the interest of public service and should NOT be considered as an endorsement. The League never supports or opposes any candidates or political parties.
How have your education, professional experience and interests prepared you to serve on this court?
I have unmatched experience handling major cases in court and will be prepared to run a courtroom on the first day of my term. My experience spans all courts: Family, Probate, Circuit and District Court. I have won jury guilty verdicts for some of the worst crimes we face, with particular focus on criminals who target our children.
Becoming a judge is a calling; a calling to serve. Instead of pursing private interests, as most lawyers and candidates do, I have chosen to serve the public exclusively. For over two decades it has been an honor to open each and every one of my cases by introducing myself: “Ken Barnard, for the People.”
I am actively working in Kalamazoo County as an Assistant Prosecuting Attorney. I work closely with Local and Federal Law Enforcement Agencies, Community Resources; Urban Alliance, the YWCA; DHHS/CPS; Family and Children Services, Bethany Christian Services; and the Gospel Mission. I am committed to bringing justice to victims and fashioning dispositions to best curb the violence and repeat offenders. By working and living in Kalamazoo for the last 16 years, I believe the long term key to reducing recidivism rates within Kalamazoo is to facilitate expectations of excellence within the community by utilizing our local resources.
My formal education focused on philosophy, social science and the law—the human experience. My professional career continued that education as I fought to reduce barriers for those who need it most.
Specifically: I offered direct legal services to the poor and neglected in Kalamazoo and created systemic legal support to the same populations as the founder of Kalamazoo’s holistic public defender office.
As judge, I will balance the dignity of individuals before the court with the laws and legal precedents that fail to address the lived human experiences of those individuals.
In 15 years as a family/juvenile law attorney, I’ve represented children and parents alike, usually of limited means, who were often overlooked by the system. This experience helped when I became a family court referee 2 ½ years ago and began presiding over cases involving underrepresented people. And it is this background, as both a practical attorney, and a hearing official, that has prepared me to literally ‘hit the ground running’ upon election.
At Thomas M. Cooley Law School, I graduated 5th in my 1992 class. My 30 years of practice since then, litigating in courtrooms all over the state, has taught me court procedure, how to manage large volumes of cases efficiently, how to treat others with civility and respect, how to interpret and apply legal principles to evidence, how to reach a conclusion promptly and how to communicate it concisely and clearly, both in written and oral speech. My public service experience has taught me to be even-tempered, but firm, open-minded, but decisive. It has taught me how to be compassionate and understanding while being objective and impartial.
Judges are public servants with a duty to apply the law equitably. I have dedicated my career as a lawyer, and much of my personal life, to public service. I have served as a public defender my entire career – representing many of our community’s most marginalized and vulnerable people – against criminal charges at trial, on appeal, and in post-conviction actions. Outside work, I prioritize volunteering in our local legal community as a leader, teacher, and mentor. I am currently President of the Kalamazoo County Trial Lawyers Association, Faculty for the MIDC Trial Skills Simulation Program, and coach of Kalamazoo Central’s Mock Trial Team.
What have been the most effective methods for improving court procedures? What other methods would you suggest to improve efficiency or make the courts less intimidating to the public?
Missing wages and paying for gas/babysitting is a hardship many working people cannot afford. Return to using Zoom and Youtube as much as possible. Adopt an overdue automated system for filing court documents.
There are many areas where the courts can cooperate to save money and time. For example, one judge instead of two should set bond for persons with cases before District and Circuit Courts.
Drug Court allows participants to receive treatment and overcome addictions. This model should be expanded to address other social problems that we know jail alone will not fix.
The most effective method for improving the court is to listen to the people of the community. Their voice needs to be heard. I often hear frustration with repeat offenders and rehabilitation. The court needs to listen and put into place a plan to address this need. On the bench, I will facilitate a monthly round table inviting 3 community resources to come and present their program. This will inform Judges, Defense Attorneys, Prosecutors, MDOC and Probation of resources that are right here in Kalamazoo. Knowing what is available to assist people in rehabilitation will reduce recidivism, and bring support to our community.
1) Make all court processes transparent and customer friendly;
2) respect litigants with clear guidelines, thoughtful scheduling, and courtroom procedures that reduce friction or confusion; and
3) identify and implement alternative means of holding parties accountable to produce better outcomes than traditional approaches like incarceration.
A courtroom should be a safe environment that does not impose trauma or fear until legally necessary. And even then, when a court must hold people accountable, it can do so in a manner that fosters learning and growth.
(See Kalamazoo’s groundbreaking specialty courts, upon which we can expand.)
As a family court referee, the best ways I’ve found to improve court efficiency and make the court less intimidating is to focus on the little things. This includes providing court forms to unrepresented parties, scheduling hearings in a timely manner, expanding access to court-funded mediation, and simplest of all: running hearings on time. Too often court schedules are treated as ‘suggestions’, leaving the parties feeling disrespected by the court, and helpless in the process. The easiest way to inspire trust and confidence from the parties? Run on time.
Studying similar courts with efficient procedures and implementing those best practices has been effective at improving court procedures. Focusing on another court’s successes can be a valuable resource. However, focusing on one’s own failures is also a critical step toward improvement. Implementation of court satisfaction surveys are an excellent tool for gathering feedback from the court’s users and engaging them in the process. Responding to concerns and committing to improve the process builds trust with the community. Central to a nonthreatening system are: voice, respect, neutrality, understanding, and helpfulness.
Our courts are a tool intended to address human problems, so they are most effective when they are designed to factor in social behavior, emotions, motivations, and flaws. Problem-solving courts, like Drug Treatment Court, are an example of effective court procedures that employ empathy, reduce recidivism, and save taxpayers money. Members of the public often distrust courts as they over-prioritize efficiency at the expense of equitable decisions and fairness, transparency, and compassion. While efficiency is important, we can improve the effectiveness of our court procedures by adequately balancing efficiency against those other principles.
What role should the court play in promoting racial justice?
It is the duty of every judge to promote racial justice. Learning about the differing experiences of people is part of a judge’s necessary homework for the job.
As a judge, I will ensure that bail does not disproportionately affect people of color. That commitment is why I held a forum on bail reform in 2019.
Also, young children must not be dragged to court for discipline that should occur in the home or schools. For cases the court needs to handle, it must address the causes and trauma underlying behavior.
Finally, diversity training should be mandatory. And I will do my part by hiring a diverse staff and appointed legal counsel.
In a system that is often known for being out of touch, the people of Kalamazoo deserve a judge who is passionate about creating lasting change. I am committed to providing knowledgeable, impartial rulings, and building lasting relationships of trust with every resident of Kalamazoo. I believe that everyone deserves the utmost respect, professionalism, clear communication, and ethics. In my courtroom: You will be safe. Your voice will be heard and your case will be efficiently resolved.
A court can “promote racial justice” by noting where it’s absent.
For example, did systemic racism influence interaction between a defendant and law enforcement?
A black youth experiencing over-policing and videos of young unarmed black being killed will probably respond to law enforcement -- even responsible law enforcement -- different than a white person.
Other areas abound: denial to generational wealth due to federal housing policy, denial to fathers due to mass incarceration, denial to education due to funding mechanisms.
A court that notes these factors can incorporate them into more effective and appropriate decisions.
The court should, and at times has, played a leading role in promoting racial justice. After all, it wasn’t a legislature that handed down Brown v. Board of Ed, or Loving v. Virginia; it was the courts. However, pointing to once-in-a-generation decisions and thinking that’s enough ignores the day-to-day work that should be done. This includes, among others, embracing a robust diversity, equity, and inclusion policy, and working to increase access to court services to all members of the community.
Courts have a direct and fundamental responsibility to dispense justice with impartiality, and must critically consider racial equality in doing so. Courts must embrace diversity and inclusion training as well as implicit bias training and seek to increase diversity on the bench and bar. It must strive not just for equal or same treatment of all, but to build an equity framework, which seeks to level the playing field for those facing race, social, or economic challenges by forging strategic community partnerships, by promoting early resolution services, by improving remote court access, and by removing barriers to participation.
Marginalized racial groups, particularly Black Americans, have historically and systematically been treated unfairly by the courts. Systemic disparities are especially evident in criminal sentencing and family court determinations of parental rights. These are areas where judges have substantial discretion. Judges can actively promote racial justice by first acknowledging systemic racial disparities, and then creating a courtroom culture of equal treatment of all parties in all cases, regardless of race. Judges can also promote racial justice by safeguarding the way jurors are selected, so as to ensure juries adequately reflect the community.
Democrats Jen Strebs, Brian Johnson compete for Kalamazoo County commissioner District 2 nomination
Democrats Tami Rey, Michael Seals face off for Kalamazoo County Commission District 1 seat
Michigan absentee ballot requests jump 73% over last midterm primary election
Note to readers: if you purchase something through one of our affiliate links we may earn a commission.
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement, Privacy Policy and Cookie Statement, and Your California Privacy Rights (User Agreement updated 1/1/21. Privacy Policy and Cookie Statement updated 7/1/2022).
© 2022 Advance Local Media LLC. All rights reserved (About Us). The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Advance Local.
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.