• Local government was never intended to function as a political machine. Magistrates are elected to represent the people of their individual districts—to listen to their concerns, advocate for their needs, and work collaboratively for the good of the entire county. While healthy debate and differing viewpoints are part of good governance, those differences should never become an effort to undermine the will of the voters or obstruct the work of the County Judge Executive simply because of personal or political disagreement.

• The Judge Executive is elected countywide to provide leadership, set direction, and execute policy within the authority granted by law. Magistrates serve an essential role in oversight and legislation, but effective local government depends on cooperation, transparency, and mutual respect—not factionalism. When officials remember who they represent and why they were elected, government works as it was intended to work: for the people.

• When a sitting magistrate publicly states that he will resign if I am elected, it speaks volumes about how he views his office. Serving as a magistrate is a commitment to one’s district, not a political statement contingent on who wins an election. Such a stance suggests an intent to obstruct rather than represent, and it runs counter to the cooperative, voter-driven local government our system was designed to uphold.

One of the main reasons is that I, as the County Judge-Executive, was often caught off guard by significant issues—like taxes, salaries, or hiring—being raised without prior notice. In many cases, a group of magistrates would meet and decide to introduce these major topics under "other business." This meant the issue wasn't on the agenda, and I had no opportunity to prepare.

As a result, my response in those moments could come across as defensive or heated. It wasn't about losing my temper for the sake of it; it was about being put on the spot with no time to give a fully informed answer to complex issues. Good governance relies on transparency and preparation, and when those elements are sidestepped, it can lead to understandable frustration.

I think just about anyone who was “set up” meeting after meeting, having significant issues sprung on him/her with no warning, and all on a “live” broadcast so that certain narrative could be drawn would get upset, too.

1. In one instance, a group of magistrates used the threat of a $10,000 fine to pressure me into hiring an individual I had not been given the opportunity to meet or evaluate. That individual had publicly expressed strong opposition to me on social media, yet I was effectively forced to accept the appointment as Fiscal Court Clerk.

   Unfortunately, that decision did not serve the county well. The position did not add value to county operations and later resulted in compliance issues, including improperly indexed meeting minutes that exposed the county to risk. Decisions like this were not driven by what was best for the county, but by an effort to exert control and create obstacles rather than support effective governance.

2. In another instance, two magistrates forced the purchase of a truck for the Solid Waste Department that primarily benefited one of their constituents. The department head had specifically requested a long-bed, double-cab truck to meet operational needs. Those magistrates claimed such trucks were unavailable, despite the fact that I personally located multiple suitable options online.

   The county was ultimately forced to purchase an impractical vehicle that did not meet departmental requirements—so much so that inmates transported in the truck could not fit safely or properly. This was a clear example of politics overriding professional judgment and what was best for the county. Yes, I got frustrated because those 5 magistrates had an agreement obviously to push this through without giving me, the person responsible for that asset ultimately, a chance to provide a better option. More often than not, I found out that a magistrate personally benefited from those sneaky, “behind closed doors” decisions they pushed through.

3. I got frustrated often because of the total bypass of my office by 5 of the 7 magistrates. An important thing that I want to share is that I’ve always kept my door open to the magistrates. I made it clear from day one that I was available to discuss any issue directly and collaborate for the good of the county.

   By law, magistrates are not full-time, day-to-day administrators of county government. Most are not in the office regularly and typically engage primarily through fiscal court meetings. Because of that structure, the system is designed for magistrates to rely on the County Judge Executive’s recommendations, which are informed by daily operations, ongoing issues, and the practical needs of county departments.

   Unfortunately, rather than engaging through that process, some magistrates repeatedly chose to introduce major concerns under “other business.” Doing so avoided advance notice—not only to me as Judge Executive, but also to the public. This approach bypassed transparency, limited meaningful preparation, and undermined thoughtful discussion. Good government depends on openness and clear communication, not surprises that keep both leadership and citizens in the dark.

   This wasn’t about what was best for the county. It was about avoiding collaboration simply because they didn’t like the Judge. And ultimately, that kind of approach doesn’t serve our community well.

4. In the first two months of my term as County Judge Executive, at least two of the magistrates openly stated that they intended to make my next four years as difficult as possible. That’s essentially where the challenges began.

   Despite that, I approached my role with a focus on what would benefit the county as a whole. Unfortunately, it became clear that these magistrates were determined not to let any positive initiative succeed if it might reflect well on me. Time and again, I saw good ideas that could have helped the county get voted down—not because they weren’t beneficial, but simply because they didn’t want to see me have any success that the public might appreciate.

   In other words, even when the county could have benefited, these magistrates chose to say no because they didn’t want me to have a win. It was politics over progress, and it stood in the way of the good we could have accomplished together.

5. One of the biggest topics during my term was the introduction of an occupational tax. When I took office, the county had no such tax, and our finances were in truly a ridiculously dire shape. The Treasurer made it clear that without a new revenue source, the state might have to intervene. One magistrate welcomed the State takeover, but didn’t realize that intervention would have taken all of the control out of our hands and could have resulted in a tax higher than 1%, just to dig us out of the hole and sustain bills. It was a tough but necessary step.

   I want to emphasize that my priority was always our county employees. For years, Adair County employees were so underpaid that many had to work second jobs just to make ends meet. It didn’t matter if they were in the road department, the animal shelter, or the Judge’s office—except for the Treasurer, who was well-compensated for working closely with the magistrates, Everyone else struggled. (I don’t blame the Treasurer for taking the raises, I am just sharing the facts - like I always do.)

   By advocating for the occupational tax, I was able to secure a half-percent that at least allowed us to give the sheriff’s department additional deputies, and give most county employees a living wage. My focus has always been to make sure our county workers feel valued and can pay their bills without needing a second job.

   While the magistrates settled on the half-percent and refused to let the funds be placed in a separate, transparent account, I remain committed to transparency and accountability. The bottom line is that I have been the most pro-employee Judge this county has seen in decades, and I’ve fought to ensure that our workers are treated fairly and paid a wage they can live on. I will continue to advocate and take care of the people who take care of our county.

Over the past few years, the fiscal court meetings have been broadcast on Facebook Live by a local newspaper. Initially, this started as a way to ensure people could view meetings when our cable broadcasts were unreliable. Then COVID happened, and more people turned to these online streams to watch the proceedings from home.

Unfortunately, what started as a service to keep people informed has turned into something of a political tool. The Facebook Live broadcasts have been used to showcase arguments, outbursts, and what often looks more like a reality TV show than a serious government meeting. Instead of being a space for genuine public discourse, it’s become a platform where certain individuals—often those who have personal or political disagreements with me—post negative comments and even have positive comments removed.

I believe in transparency and open government, but that means allowing all voices to be heard, not just those with a particular agenda. It’s disappointing that what should be a tool for civic engagement has turned into a one-sided narrative. My hope is that our community can move toward using these platforms for genuine, balanced communication—so that people can truly understand the direction of the county, not just the loudest political voices.

It is no secret that the editor of the media platform broadcasting these meetings does not support me and has openly stated that she does not respect me. That is her right, and I do not require personal respect to do my job. What I do expect—and what the public deserves—is fair, unbiased coverage and a genuine effort to understand the role and responsibilities of the highest elected official in the county. Journalism should serve the public interest, not personal agendas, and a private business should not operate under the guise of a newspaper to advance one-sided narratives. I don’t hold anything against the editor - it’s her business and she makes money based on views. I just don’t agree with her and she doesn’t agree with me - and that’s ok. I hope someday this divide will be reconciled. People who have known me for decades know that I don’t hold grudges and am always ready to move forward, especially if it benefits our community.

This court has repeatedly said 'no' to initiatives that would benefit our youth, and that is a deeply personal and frustrating reality for me. My focus has always been on creating a thriving community for my children, my grandchildren, and now even my great-grandchildren. I want them to at least have the opportunity to stay in Adair County and enjoy the amenities here, rather than traveling elsewhere for parks, sports leagues, and other community activities. Unfortunately, the court’s resistance has meant that our community remains a bedroom community, with residents spending their dollars in neighboring counties instead of enriching our own. I’ve always believed in saying 'yes' to progress and to the future of our youth, and everything I have done and I will continue to do is motivated by the well-being of others, not myself.

As the County Judge-Executive, I’ve always been dedicated to enhancing the Jim Blair Center for our community - especially our youth and the generations to come. While the $500,000 playground was a welcome addition funded by free COVID dollars, the initial oversight of not including restrooms severely limited its usability. Eventually, restrooms were constructed, but it came at a steep price. The fiscal court approved a $130,000 concrete-block structure, despite my proposal for a more cost-effective metal building with the same amenities for $60,000 to $70,000. It was disheartening - and yes, frustrating - to see how this court’s decisions often favored connections and political alliances over genuine fiscal responsibility.

Moreover, the lack of proper parking and the underutilization of the JBC Community building, which could be a valuable resource for events, were also missed opportunities. When I sought to expand the park by acquiring adjacent land, I found private donors and resources willing to support the effort. Yet, the fiscal court’s refusal, driven by personal agendas, prevented us from seizing that opportunity. It was a frustrating and disappointing experience, to say the least, highlighting how political interests can often times stand in the way of real progress for the community.

I want to highlight that the most important vote you’ll cast in the primary election on May 19th, 2026, is for your magistrate, not just for the county judge-executive. The majority of a Fiscal Court - in our case, 4 men - decide the direction of this county. 4 MEN. Let that sink in….4 people decide what happens and doesn’t happen in Adair County.

While every county must have a chief executive officer - the CJE - the real influence in Adair County has come from the magistrates. Over the past few years, it’s become clear that the magistrates hold the real power, and that’s why your vote for them is so impactful.

For the past couple of years, I’ve said that if nothing else comes from my term, I hope people walk away with a clearer understanding of just how powerful their magisterial vote truly is—and how critical it is to the health and future of our community.

Today, several magistrates want to place the blame for nearly every challenge on me. But the reality is simple: nothing happens in this county unless a majority of the fiscal court votes for it—and just as importantly, nothing changes when they choose not to act. Many of these same magistrates have served multiple terms, so it’s fair to ask how long-standing financial issues or the ongoing jail situation can suddenly be laid solely at my feet.

Early in my term, I advocated for a new home incarceration system, for example, that would have cost the county virtually nothing and had the potential to reduce our jail population. That effort was not supported. Time and again, meaningful solutions were met with inaction and unwillingness to support anything I wanted to try —not because my ideas wouldn’t help situations, but because doing nothing was easier. Real solutions require effort. They require hiring, investment, and sometimes the courage to make decisions that may not be immediately popular.

Change can be hard. But doing the right thing for our community shouldn’t be.

The county judge executive must implement the court’s will, and too often, that will has been mired in politics and stagnation.

But there’s hope. I believe that, come the 2026 elections, we can shape a fiscal court that shares a vision of progress and openness. Your vote for magistrate is your opportunity to demand that your representatives truly reflect your desires for our community and not just form political alliances that work against progress.

We have the power to bring about change and to ensure that our county’s future is bright and vibrant. Let’s work together to ensure that the next court values collaboration and open dialogue. Together, we can turn the tide and make Adair County a place where everyone wants to stay and thrive.

During the last campaign, many people asked me, “Will you be able to work with the magistrates?” I answered honestly and confidently, “Yes.” I believed then—and still believe—that collaboration is essential to good local government.

Unfortunately, it was not a lack of willingness on my part that stood in the way. Instead, a group of magistrates chose not only to refuse to work with me, but to band together in ways that effectively blocked progress—particularly when that progress might reflect positively on my leadership. With the help of biased media coverage, an ugly and censored comment section, and a small but vocal group of supporters who consistently brought negativity into meetings, the focus shifted away from serving the county and toward political opposition for the sake of 5 men.

What was missing was vision. Decisions were made meeting to meeting, without consideration for where Adair County could be in five or ten years. I believe our community deserves better than that. We deserve leaders who can look ahead, work together, and put people before politics.

Let’s change that.

Re-Elect Larry Russell Bryant for County Judge-Executive and vote for the magistrate that will represent YOUR DISTRICT well, leaving politics in the dust!