Great interest in the follow-up to the Cincinnati "Gang of Five" report. It reminded me of another quotation from a Kentucky court in an unrelated matter but relevant to the question of penalties.

In Cabinet for Health and Family Services v. Courier Journal and Herald-Leader, the Kentucky Court of Appeals explained its decision to affirm $756,000 in penalties imposed on CHFS for willfully withholding public records as follows:

"The penalty we affirm is a substantial one. Substantial, too, is the legal obligation the Cabinet owed the public and the effort it expended in attempting to escape it. While it will ultimately be the public that bears the expense of this penalty, we maintain that the nominal punishment of an egregious harm to the public's right to know would come at an even greater price."

The same could certainly be said in the case of the "Gang of Five."

Question: Why do people seek public office if they are unwilling to comply with their most basic legal obligations and when will they learn that they are NOT above the law?