The state's Freedom of Information Act appeal process worked as it was supposed to in a ruling over documents related to the University of Illinois' search for a new president. But the process can be improved.

Most public officials pay lip service to the idea of open and transparent government in Illinois. The reality often is far different. Although there are legitimate reasons to withhold some records from public scrutiny, there are no requirements to do so under the state's Freedom of Information Act.

In fact, the law creates a presumption that all records are public and confirms that if a public body asserts an exemption from disclosure, it has the burden of proving that the record is exempt by clear and convincing evidence.

The ruling by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan's office last week that the University of Illinois improperly denied records to The News-Gazette from its presidential search in 2010 is noteworthy in several respects besides the obvious victory for the public's right to know how the university spends the public's money.

In a case that dates back to April 2010, the attorney general's office said in a binding opinion that the UI must immediately release the disputed documents or ask for a court administrative review within 35 days under the state's Freedom of Information Act.

The attorney general's public access counselor had advised the university in a nonbinding ruling to release the travel records and related documents from the search in a Nov. 17 opinion. The university did not comply, and The News-Gazette filed another FOIA request in January asking for those records, as well as others.

Too often, officials at the UI and other public bodies have the notion that records are proprietary information to be released only grudgingly to the public rather than in the spirit of access that is intended.

In this case, the letter from Madigan and Michael J. Luke, counsel to the attorney general, said the university "has not met its burden of demonstrating that the records" are exempt from the FOIA.

A spokesman said the university has not decided whether to appeal further.

Although the UI claims it is committed to transparency, the record shows a different story. An analysis by the Chicago Tribune this week showed that the attorney general's office has handled more than 70 cases involving the UI since the new law took effect in January 2010, and in 27 cases, the office found the UI could not withhold documents or redact information as it had tried to do.

"The University of Illinois steadfastly refuses to comply fully and completely with (Freedom of Information Act) laws and to supply the public with documents it knows are public," Ann Spillane, the attorney general's chief of staff, told the Tribune.

The News-Gazette's experience shows one of the problems the attorney general's office is having trying to exercise the law it routinely takes months to get an opinion in an appeal of a denial for information. The attorney general's office attributes this to a crushing caseload and has hired more public access counselors this year. The process must be streamlined to ease the frustration requesters often experience.

Also worth noting is that the binding opinion issued in this case is one of only a handful issued by the attorney general's office since it was given the authority by the FOIA rewrite. There have been many cases where the attorney general's office has issued nonbinding opinions that public bodies ignored, cases that did not result in a binding opinion.

This is a tool with real teeth that can be effective in changing the attitudes of government officials toward release of records, but to be effective, the attorney general's office must use it.

Despite the problems, public access advocates consider the new FOIA law a great improvement over the previously toothless measure. The opposition from the Illinois Municipal League and other organizations bears witness, as do the dozens of bills introduced in the Legislature to roll back provisions of the law.

The framework for open and transparent government is in place in Illinois. What needs to change is the culture of secrecy in government. Until government officials embrace the notion that records belong to the people they work for, Illinois and its flagship university will continue to lack any true transparency.