HomeMy WebLinkAbout052326 email - AI policy 'updated' versionALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Commissioners,
I appreciate that my comments and the comments of others regarding the initial version of the AI policy, which was presented to the BoCC and the public for the first time at your May
18, 2026, meeting were taking into consideration as part of the process of revising / improving that policy.
I submitted the 41-page “clean” draft (published for the BoCC’s May 26, 2026, meeting packet) to ChatGPT with the instruction to “analyze this document for flaws and usability in a
local government organization”
Attached to this email is ChatGPT’s response. “ChatGPT analysis of AI policy Updated 5.22.2026.docx”
The first “Bottom-Line Recommendation” on the last page of that analysis is that “This document should probably be restructured into: A shorter governing policy (8–12 pages)”
So, I instructed ChatGPT to do exactly that: “restructure the document into your recommended "shorter governing policy (8-12 pages)””
The resulting 11-page document, “Streamlined Local Government Ai Governing Policy.docx” - attached, was prepared solely by ChatGPT using as input only the 41-page “clean” draft published
for the BoCC’s May 26, 2026, meeting.
It’s worth a look before you codify the proposed draft. A condensed version such as the ‘Streamlined’ one might or might not be legally sufficient, but it is certainly much more approachable
and likely to be read, understood, and complied with by the 300+ county employees to whom it will apply.
Small edit:
(7) Prohibited uses….
(b) Use of an AI system on a County-owned computer, server or system that is on
the list of AI systems approved and made available on the County' s web site
is prohibited.
I’m pretty sure that there’s a “not” missing, as in “not on the list”, in the above.
A final note about what AI is used “on a county computer”. The phones and tablets issued to county staff are all “computers”, even though most people don’t think of them that way. Such
mobile devices are particular susceptible to invasion by hostile, unapproved AI ‘bots, and users of those devices will very likely have no idea that they are using unapproved AI.
To address this, I recommend adding “knowing” or “knowingly” to areas of the policy where needed to protect users from being punished for acts beyond their control, such as:
(b) [Knowingly using] an AI system on a County-owned computer, server or system that is [not] on
the list of AI systems approved and made available on the County' s web site is prohibited.
I’m sure there are other places in the document where such improvements are needed before the policy is ready for approval.
Tom Thiersch