We will continue to raise the alarm about the importance of an independent open records/open meetings process within the Kentucky Attorney General Office, as opportunity presents, between now and Election Day.

Oregon's public records program recently suffered a devastating blow — not the first of its kind — when the state's first public records advocate resigned under duress. In resigning, Ginger McCall expressed a belief that the office she served must operate independently and without political influence. Her vision for the office, it seems, was not shared by Oregon's Governor — who appointed her — or the governor's staff.

The media and public protest since McCall resigned has been loud and sustained.

Kentucky stands at a crossroad as we elect a new attorney general. Our laws are under legislative attack, and the level of public agency compliance with our laws is at an all time low. The importance of the attorney general's role in shepherding Kentucky's open records and meetings laws for the next four years cannot be overstated.

Demand answers from the candidates for attorney general on these issues: how will the candidate implement his duties under the statutes; what, if any changes does he envision for the attorney general's open records/meetings role; will he pursue litigation initiated in this administration to preserve the open records staff's ability to conduct confidential review of the records to which the agency has denied a requester access; will he defend the open records/meetings laws against legislative attacks should the need arise?

Only when we have answers to these questions can we make an informed decision on Election Day.