Amended in Committee

Concerns over the potential risks of AI have led MYR, ADM, Agree with the to an overly cautious approach toward emerging DT finding technology. The city risks missing opportunities to harness new technology to improve governance and delivery of services to citizens.

Governance of technology in the city is MYR, ADM, Agree with the hindered because of a federated management DT finding structure across departments. Such hindrance has slowed or impaired the ability of the city to efficiently identify, pilot, test, and deploy emerging technologies.

Procurement of technology in the city is MYR, DT, Agree with the hindered because of a federated management OCA finding structure across departments. This hinders the ability to find and implement useful, scalable AI and emerging technology solutions, and presents risks to enforcing quality, standardization, privacy and interoperability.

The Committee on Information Technology MYR Disagree, wholly The members of the Committee on Information (COIT) is comprised mostly of non-technical Technology are appointed through the leaders and has insufficient authority and administrative code, and represent department influence over departments’ technology plans. leadership to ensure buy-in. However, the As a result, it is falling short of its objective to individuals that routinely attend COIT and relevant streamline ICT policy and roadmapping in San subcommittees are departmental CIOs or other Francisco, which threatens current and emerging technical leads and have the relevant content and technology initiatives alike. expertise to advise on the COIT agenda. The 1 Techs in the City: Government’s Opportunity to Seize the AI Moment FY 2024-2025 Civil Grand Jury Report Committee makes recommendations and can set policy; individual departments appropriately make their own procurement decisions in collaboration with the Mayor's Budget Office and OCA. Techs in the City: Government’s Opportunity to Seize the AI Moment FY 2024-2025 Civil Grand Jury Report Response Response Text Has been Summary regarding implemented action implemented Respondent Will be Timeframe for implementation # Recommendation Assigned by implemented CGJ Requires further Explain scope and parameter of analysis, analysis timeframe (should not exceed 6-months) Will not be Explain thereof implemented