"Journalists report when governments aren't forthcoming [in public meetings or with public records], because we think it's part of our job to let the public know. But often that public doesn't seem to care.

"Why is that?

"Maybe it's just easier to dash off an opinion on [a headline grabbing issue] than opine on a more complicated (or less fun) issue.

"Another possible answer: We don't always do a good job explaining why government transparency is important.

"The general principle — that officials acting in your name should be open with you — is simple. But the actual process isn't always.

"State freedom-of-information and open-meeting laws are notoriously convoluted. And they're dry, so sometimes reading about them can make you fall asleep … at least if you're not a nerdy journalist who lives for a good FOIA battle.

"An editorial last week about secrecy at a school system drew one email to me, and no letters to the editor. A column I wrote in May about Riverside County courts' failure to make cases more accessible received … nothing.

"We try to lay out in stories, columns and editorials why it matters when governments are secretive.

"It's not about whether journalists get answers. It's about how your money is being spent; whether your children, your roads and your environment are being safeguarded; and how the people you elect and the staff they hire are making decisions.

"In our minds, it's pretty simple."

In Kentucky, where these laws are under siege by a hostile legislature "it matters when governments are secretive."

It matters because Kentucky's public servants are elected or appointed to serve the public and should not be permitted to breach the public trust — as well as the rule of law — and suffer no ill consequences.

It matters because these same public servants take an oath to uphold the laws of the Commonwealth and because these laws include the open records and open meetings laws.

Lest there be any doubt, in 2016 Kentucky's courts declared: "The Open Records Act is neither an ideal nor a suggestion. It is the law. Public entities must permit inspection of public records as required or risk meaningful punishment for noncompliance. Rigid adherence to this stark principle is the lifeblood of a law which rightly favors disclosure, fosters transparency, and secures the public trust."

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ky-court-of-appeals/1726554.html

Some public servants give lip service to these laws. Some view them as an annoyance that serve no useful purpose. Some openly and publicly mock them. And some brazenly lie about them to advance an agenda to undermine them.

When the open records and open meetings laws are at last a shadow of the robust laws they once were, perhaps then it will matter.