UPDATED, 6:35 p.m..

   Sen. Chris Koster defended his controversial fundraising tactics as “perfectly legal” Thursday while his opponents in the campaign for attorney general labeled them blatant efforts to circumvent the law.

   In a forum for the editorial board of The Kansas City Star, Koster said the Missouri law limiting contributions from individuals to a maximum of $1,350 also specifically allows the creation of fundraising committees that accept contributions in excess of that limit.

   He repeated his assertion that the Missouri Ethics Commission staff had assured his campaign that his fundraising methods complied with the law.  

   “Everyone at this table has accepted contributions from legislative district committees,” Koster said. “To suggest that candidates should be restricted only to the individual contribution limit is not in compliance with the law.”

   Koster’s opponents in the Democratic primary, Reps. Margaret Donnelly and Jeff Harris, acknowledged that they accepted limited contributions from political party committees. But they bristled at the suggestion that their fundraising methods matched Koster’s.

   The difference, they said, was that a Koster supporter set up a special committee known as the Economic Growth Council to receive individual contributions worth tens of thousands of dollars and funnel them to Koster’s campaign.

   “I won’t sit here and let him say that what he’s done is what I’m doing, what Jay Nixon is doing or what any other Democrat is doing,” Donnelly said. “The Economic Growth Council was formed for one reason – that is to circumvent the law. The level of coordination (with Koster’s campaign) is unheard of.”

   Harris said a key difference was that large contributions he received from political party committees were independent of his campaign. The large contributions to Koster’s campaign were orchestrated by Koster’s staff, which stretched the intent of the law, Harris said.

   “We need to know what’s right and wrong and not search for the outer limits of what’s legal or ethical,” Harris said.

   Fundraising was the biggest point of contention during the hour-long forum, in which the candidates touted their qualifications, recounted their legislative accomplishments and described how they would try to make public officials more accountable to the public.

   Donnelly said her experience as a budget hawk in the state House, a school board member and a family law lawyer gave her the kind of values and breadth of experience needed to oversee the attorney general’s work on consumer fraud, elder abuse and foster care and adoption.

   Harris touted his experience handling complex litigation at a major law firm before supervising a unit within the attorney general’s office. He said he oversaw the state’s 1998 settlement with the tobacco industry and defended a former governor against a major challenge over organized labor.

   Koster emphasized his two years as an assistant attorney general, his two years at a major law firm and 10 years as the Cass County prosecutor. He said he was the only candidate who has managed a law office and helped turn young lawyers into seasoned litigators.

   All three candidates pledged to work for more open government through strong enforcement of the state’s open meetings and open records law. All three said they would continue the investigation into Gov. Matt Blunt’s handling of public records to determine whether Blunt’s staff destroyed documents to cover up politically damaging activities.

   Donnelly said she would advocate a greater role for the attorney general in enforcing the open records and meetings laws when public officials balk at providing access. The present system, which requires the public to file a lawsuit to obtain access to records, is too costly for the average citizen, she said.

   Harris unveiled a wide-ranging plan to make government more open, including a prohibition on public officials using private e-mail accounts for public business. He also would increase fines against public officials for negligently denying access to public meetings or public records.

   Koster said he would boost training for local officials about the public access to meetings and records. He said he also would push for criminal and civil penalties against public officials who violate the law requiring public records to be retained.