Kevin F. Mark

Born: January 4, 1953

Education:

• Mankato State University, B.A., 1975;
• Marquette University, J.D., 1979
  

Employment:

• Holst, Vogel, Erdmann & Vogel, associate and partner, 1979-1995;
• sole practioner, 1995-2002
  

Bar admission: Wisconsin and Minnesota – state and federal, 1979

Appointment/election to bench: Appointed by Gov. Ventura, Jan. 2003

Bar activities: member of state and local bar associations; CLE teaching at local level

Civic activities: volunteer activities through YMCA, Unted Way (campaign chair), First Lutheran Church, Red Wing Kiwanis, Red Wing School Board 1985-2003 (last 10 years as Chair)

Personal: married to Cyd Mark; daughters Kendall, Chloe and Elle

Hobbies: volleyball and basketball in winter months; golf and gardening in the outdoors

Campaign website: www.judgemark.org

Candidacy Questions:

1. Why did you originally apply (or run) for a position as a judge?
I decided to merge my legal skills and experience with my civic skills and experience from numerous boards and volunteer activities.

2. Why should voters select you rather than your opponent(s) in the upcoming election?
I know nothing about my opponent. I have 25 years of courtroom experience primarily civil, but also some criminal work prior to taking the bench. I’m also experienced at presiding over oftimes contentious settings based on 10 years of chairing the Red Wing School Board and nearly 2 years on the bench.

3. What are the major issues facing the court on which you wish to serve? How can these realistically be addressed?
The court system, similar to other public agencies, faces increased demands with limited resources. There are few compromises or short cuts when addressing due process requirements and rightful expectations. Added to this challenge is the increasing presence of minorities and diversity in the judicial system. Judges are the gate-keepers, insuring that all individuals are treated equally and fairly. When issues such as public defender funding become critical, judges need to communicate to the public and legislators the significance of the problem.

4. What are some of your accomplishments during your tenure as a judge of which you are most proud?
Having served just short of two years on the bench, I can’t point to a single act or decision. The respect of those with whom I work, those that work regularly with in the system, to the extent I have gained it, is my greatest accomplishment to date.

5. Do you believe it is good policy to discuss disputed legal and political issues during judicial campaigns? If so, what issues do you plan to discuss and why? If not, why shouldn't such issues be discussed?
No. Having taken a pledge to be impartial to all, and to avoid situations wherein I would be forced to recuse myself, discussing my personal views on legal and political issues is something I will avoid to the greatest extent possible. I want to be an advocate for the system of justice.

6. What else, if anything, would you like voters to know about your candidacy that you have not discussed so far?
Though impractical and unrealistic, I would defer judgment on my qualifications for this position to those who work alongside me or have appeared before me. Advertisements, sound bites and political endorsements provide little meaningful information on whether I deserve to retain my position on the bench.