Other articles by Howard Fischer:

Low cost to state aim of points-free photo radar tickets Group seeks easing of Arizona law targeting employers of illegal immigrants Appeals court: State can seize wire transfers Backers of tax boost for roads squabble over funds, petitions School vouchers OK for now, but funds aren't there Initiative to scuttle affirmative action faces court challenge New homes could get new warrantiesAz voter initiative would require 10-year new-home warranty Legislature's handiwork: 300 new laws Contention rules floor on last day of session

Health Care
FRONT OFFICE Trades/Construction
Lectra-Serv, Inc
Electricians & Helpers General
Prestige maintenance USA
Custodian Trades/Construction
Pioneer Landscaping
Yard Person/Loader Operator Administrative & Professional
Tucson Symphony
Teleservices Sales/Courtesy Rep Mechanical
Pioneer Landscaping
Diesel Fleet Mechanic Production and Manufacturing
Pioneer Landscaping
Crushing Crew

PHOENIX — Everything on the computer of a public official is not necessarily a public record, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.

In a unanimous decision, the justices rejected arguments by attorneys for The Arizona Republic that people are entitled to see all the e-mails on the computer of former Pinal County Manager Stanley Griffis, even if public resources may have been used to create the documents.

"To hold otherwise would create an absurd result," wrote Chief Justice Ruth McGregor for the court. "Every note made on government-owned paper, located in a government office, written with a government-owned pen, or composed on a government-owned computer would be presumably be a public record."

She said that logic would make a public record of a grocery list written by a government employee and a report card stored in the desk of a government worker.

"The public-records law was never intended to encompass such documents," McGregor said. "The purpose of the law is to open government activity to public scrutiny, not to disclose information about private citizens."

But Wednesday's ruling does contain a partial victory for the newspaper and others who want more access to records: The justices said any dispute over whether specific records are in fact public must be resolved by a judge. And that judge actually has to review the records at issue.

McGregor said that even if a judge concludes specific documents technically are "public records," a court still can withhold them if that is outweighed by privacy, confidentiality or "the best interests of the state."

Griffis was county manager for 16 years before being suspended and subsequently retiring amid an investigation of whether he had used money belonging to the Sheriff's Department to purchase weapons. That probe led to an indictment. In January he pleaded guilty to six felonies including theft, fraud and tax fraud and is awaiting sentencing.

The lawsuit stems from a request for all Griffis' incoming and outgoing e-mails for a two-month period. A trial judge approved, saying that records generated on a public computer "are presumptively open to public inspection."

McGregor said Arizona has a "strong policy of public access." And she said that means those seeking public documents need make just a "minimal showing" that records may be public.

But she said that minimal showing only gets them the right to have a judge examine in chambers the documents at issue to determine if they are public.