Arizona law requires all officers and public bodies to maintain records reasonably necessary to provide an accurate accounting of their official activities and of any government funded activities, and the Ombudsman Citizens' Aide, which oversees public access in the state, puts the test for openness in one sentence on its public records page: any record in the custody of an Arizona government entity that has a substantial nexus to government activity is considered a public record and is presumed to be subject to disclosure, citing Griffis v. Pinal County. Two separate rights follow. Under A.R.S. 39-121 the public has a right to inspect public records, meaning to view them in person, and under A.R.S. 39-121.01 the public has a right to obtain copies, subject to reasonable copy fees. The law itself runs from A.R.S. 39-121 through 39-161, with the records management requirements that sit behind it at A.R.S. 41-151 and following.
Finding the right person is easier here than in most states, because A.R.S. 39-171 requires entities subject to the law to publish on their websites the name, telephone number and email address of an employee or department authorised and able to provide the information requested, or able to forward the request to someone who can. The scope of the law is also clear: it applies to state agencies and to political subdivisions of the state, including counties, cities, schools, fire districts and water districts, while the federal Freedom of Information Act applies to federal agencies and contains provisions Arizona law does not. For Arizona records held locally, see the Arizona county pages.
- Substantial nexus: a record in government custody with a substantial nexus to government activity is presumed public, rather than having to fit a list.
- No writing required: a non commercial request need not be in writing, although a written request to the head of the body is the answer to an oral refusal.
- Promptly, not by a date: the custodian must furnish records promptly, with what counts as prompt judged by what is reasonable in the circumstances.
- An ombudsman with teeth: the Citizens' Aide can investigate, take testimony, issue subpoenas, hold hearings, make recommendations and report misconduct.
Written by SearchSystems.net from Arizona's own systems: the Arizona Ombudsman Citizens' Aide public records law page, the Ombudsman's how to request public records page, the Ombudsman's 2025 public records law booklet, the Ombudsman's frequently asked questions for journalists, the Ombudsman's public access training page, the Ombudsman's public access newsletters, each read on October 14, 2026 by the SearchSystems editorial team.
Seven steps, as the state describes them
The Ombudsman publishes a seven step guide that doubles as a statement of what the law requires. Decide what records you want, remembering that the request is for specific documents rather than general information, and make it as specific as possible. Work out who has custody, directing the request to the public officer who holds the records, checking the agency website for a form or contacting the body directly, with the state library's guide available for tracing unusual record types.
Research what is already published before asking. Make the request, noting that the law no longer requires a written request for non commercial matters, although where an oral request is denied the next step is a written request to the head of the public body, drafted narrowly and identifying the documents as precisely as possible. Wait for a response, because the custodian is obliged to furnish the records promptly, with prompt meaning what is reasonable in the circumstances and some requests legitimately taking longer where material must be reviewed and parts deleted; the Ombudsman suggests asking for an expected turnaround if the form does not state one, and telephoning after a week to confirm the request was received and processed.
If the request is denied, consider the Ombudsman before appealing by special action in the superior court. And if that fails, a denial of access may be pursued in the Court of Appeals or the Arizona Supreme Court in the right circumstances.
The format question, and metadata
Arizona answers the format question with a qualified yes. The law requires agencies to produce records in the format in which they are kept, but an agency may have an argument for producing them in a different format in order to protect confidential information, and the Ombudsman gives the example that nothing prohibits producing a document as a portable document file after redacting a record that was not originally in that format.
One rule survives whatever format is used: the metadata from any original electronic document must be disclosed on request. For a requester working with spreadsheets, databases or email, that single sentence is often the most valuable part of Arizona practice, because metadata is what shows when a document was created and by whom.
Who must list what they withheld
Arizona splits its agencies on this point. Counties, cities, schools and special districts are not required to provide an index of redacted or withheld records, although the Ombudsman says agencies should provide grounds for withholding any confidential records. State agencies, as defined in A.R.S. 41-1001, are required to provide an index of redacted or withheld records on request, under A.R.S. 39-121.01(D)(2), and the Ombudsman notes candidly that there is no legal guidance on the level of detail that provision requires.
A requester dealing with a state agency should therefore ask for the index explicitly, while one dealing with a city or school district should ask for the grounds and expect less.
The ombudsman that sits between you and the court
Arizona's Ombudsman Citizens' Aide is a legislative agency, independent of both the Governor and the Attorney General and answerable to the Legislature. It takes and investigates complaints about the administrative acts of state agencies, and for public records and open meeting law complaints its reach extends to local government, including counties, municipalities, special taxing districts and school districts. The powers listed in the Ombudsman's own guidance are the reason it is worth using before litigation: it is statutorily authorised to investigate complaints relating to public access laws, request testimony or evidence, issue subpoenas, conduct hearings, make recommendations and report misconduct.
It also educates both sides, producing the comprehensive public records law booklet, now in its 2025 June edition, a newsletter called The Public Record covering both access laws, separate questions pages for the general public and for journalists, best practice guidance for custodians, and in person, live virtual and video training for government entities, officials and other groups on request. Inquiries from officials and the public are kept confidential on request, which makes it a safe first call for someone unsure whether an agency has behaved properly.
Where the detail lives
Beyond the statutes themselves, Arizona publishes a usable library. The Ombudsman's booklet is the plain language treatment of the law. Chapter 6 of the Arizona Agency Handbook covers public records for state agencies, with the index of records made confidential by statute in its appendices. Attorney General opinions are published from 1999 onwards with an older collection before that, including an opinion specifically on charging copying fees under the public records law.
The State Library, Archives and Public Records publishes the retention schedules that determine how long records survive, along with guidance on how and where to find various Arizona records. Together those tell a requester two things that matter before asking: whether the record still exists, and whether a statute has made it confidential.
Reading an Arizona response
Because the standard is promptness rather than a day count, the useful questions are about process. Did the agency publish a contact under A.R.S. 39-171, and did the request go to that person. Was the refusal oral, in which case a written request to the head of the body is the next move. Is the agency a state agency, in which case an index of withheld records can be demanded, or a local one, where grounds should still be given.
Was the record produced in the format it is kept in, and was the metadata supplied where it was asked for. And where none of that gets anywhere, the Ombudsman comes before the superior court, because it costs nothing and it can compel evidence.
Questions about public records requests in Arizona
Related Arizona records
Arizona's other public records guides on this site are the Arizona background check guide for the Department of Public Safety criminal history service, the Arizona court records guide for the public access case lookup, the Arizona arrest records guide for what a booking makes public, and the Arizona county pages for every county office.