A follow-up to an earlier post about egregious open records violations by a Tennessee official. The Knox County Sheriff will not appeal a Tennessee court's scathing rebuke but will seek clarification from the court on implementation of it opinion and order.

https://www.facebook.com/kyopengovernment/posts/664821724064553

In Kentucky, the past four years witnessed a significant increase in the number of open records disputes that went to court at the prompting of agency officials dissatisfied with the Kentucky Attorney General's decisions. Many of these cases were settled when the Attorney General was elected Governor — for example, legal disputes involving access to the 2017 actuarial analysis and Braidy Industries investor records.

From an observer's perspective, the trend toward increased open records litigation originated with legal challenges to the Attorney General's decisions favoring access to child fatality records at the Cabinet for Health and Family Services and snowballed with records access disputes involving the University of Louisville and it's Foundation. The University of Kentucky and Western Kentucky University entered the fray not long after, rejecting the Attorney General's decisions and resisting disclosure of records relating to sexual harassment by faculty and staff in the courts.

But, as noted, the Bevin administration's disdain for open records decisions issued by then-Attorney General Andy Beshear resulted in an avalanche of open records litigation.

Will the trend continue under the current gubernatorial administration? If there *is* a decrease in judicial challenges to the OAG's resolution of open records disputes, will universities, school districts, and local officials follow suit and reign in their appeals?

Each case that proceeds to the courts indefinitely postpones public access. It is the public that foots the bill and bears the ultimate cost.