Policy 5.3
Reference: Resolution No. 26.XX
Section 1. Purpose
This policy establishes a comprehensive, yet flexible, governance structure for Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) systems used by, or on behalf of, the City. This policy enables the City to use AI systems for the benefit of the community while safeguarding against potential harms, protecting the privacy of residents, businesses, and visitors, and preserving public trust in City government.
Section 2. Objectives
The key objectives of the AI Policy are to:
2.1 Provide guidance that is clear, easy to follow, and supports decision-making for the staff (full-time, part-time), interns, consultants, contractors, partners, and volunteers who may be purchasing, configuring, developing, operating, or maintaining the City’s AI systems or leveraging AI systems to provide services to the City;
2.2 Ensure that when using AI systems, the City or those operating on its behalf, adhere to the Guiding Principles that represent values with regards to how AI systems are purchased, configured, developed, operated, or maintained;
2.3 Define roles and responsibilities related to the City’s usage of AI systems, scaled to the size and structure of the City organization;
2.4 Establish and maintain processes to assess and manage risks and values presented by AI systems used by the City;
2.5 Align the governance of AI systems with the City’s existing data governance, security, privacy, records, procurement, and personnel practices, including the City’s Cybersecurity Policy;
2.6 Define prohibited uses of AI systems;
2.7 Establish “sunset” procedures to safely retire AI systems that no longer meet the needs of the City;
City Council Policy/Procedure
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy
Exhibit D
Policy 5.3
2.8 Define how AI systems may be used for legitimate City purposes in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal laws and existing City policies, including the California Public Records Act, the Ralph M. Brown Act, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and the automated-decision system regulations adopted under it, and Penal Code section 13663 governing artificial intelligence-assisted law enforcement reports;
2.9 Establish heightened requirements for AI systems used in law enforcement, emergency management, and other public safety functions; and
2.10 Establish clear, practical rules for the everyday use of generative AI tools by City staff.
Section 3. Definitions
For the purposes of this policy, the following definitions apply:
3.1 “AI Administrative Procedures” shall refer to additional procedures promulgated by the City Manager, consistent with and to further implement this Policy.
3.2 “AI Fact Sheet” shall refer to the City’s standard disclosure form, completed by a vendor or by City staff, describing an AI system’s purpose, data, training, testing, limitations, and known risks.
3.3 “AI incident” shall refer to an event in which an AI system causes or contributes to harm, produces a materially inaccurate or discriminatory output that affects a City decision, or results in the unauthorized disclosure, loss, or misuse of City data.
3.4 “AI system” shall refer to any data system, software, hardware, sensor, application, tool, utility, algorithm, or process that operates in whole or in part using artificial intelligence to automatically generate outputs, including, but not limited to, predictions, recommendations, or decisions that augment or replace human decision-making. This includes systems used to automate processes, analyze large datasets, or otherwise generate outputs through the use of AI.
3.5 “Algorithm” shall refer to series of logical steps through which an agent (typically a computer or software program) turns particular inputs into particular outputs.
3.6 “Approved AI Tools List” shall refer to the list of generative AI and other AI tools that the City has evaluated and approved for use, maintained by the AI Program Administrator and published to City staff.
3.7 “Artificial Intelligence” or “AI” to be a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments1 AI systems use machine- and human-based inputs to perceive real and 1 Definition from 15 U.S.C. 9401(3).
Policy 5.3
virtual environments; abstract such perceptions into models through analysis in an automated manner; and use model inference to formulate options for information or action.
3.8 “Automated-decision system” shall refer to a computational process that makes a decision, or facilitates human decision making, regarding a benefit, an entitlement, or an aspect of employment, as further defined in California Code of Regulations, title 2, section 11008.
3.9 “Autonomous Weapons Systems” refer to weapon systems that, once activated, can select, engage, and apply force to targets without human intervention, to use lethal or sub-lethal force.
3.10 “Biometric Identification” to refer to the live identification of an individual using technologies including, but not limited to, facial recognition and iris scanning, without that individual's knowledge or meaningful consent.
3.11 "Cognitive behavioral manipulation" refers to AI-driven tools or algorithms designed to influence or alter an individual's decision-making process or belief system. These systems use psychological, behavioral, or emotional data to create targeted strategies that can manipulate thoughts, feelings, or actions, particularly focusing on vulnerable groups or individuals.
3.12 “Generative AI” shall refer to an AI system that creates new content, including text, images, audio, video, or computer code, in response to a prompt.
3.13 “High-risk AI system” shall refer to an AI system used in connection with public safety, employment, enforcement, permitting, benefits, or the processing of personal information, or that may otherwise materially affect an individual’s rights, opportunities, or access to City services.
3.14 “Output” shall refer to the content an AI system returns in response to a prompt.
3.15 “Prompt” shall refer to the text, file, image, or other input a user provides to an AI system in order to obtain an output.
3.16 "Social Scoring System" refers to artificial intelligence or algorithmic systems that aggregate and interprets an individual's personal data to assign a quantifiable score or rating that ranks them against other individuals and impacts their access to services, opportunities, or societal privileges. These systems are characterized by their use of data related to behavior, preferences, interactions, financial transactions, and other personal attributes which are not directly linked to the application of the score. They can be part of a comprehensive profile that is used to make significant decisions about an individual's rights, opportunities, or social standing.
Additional terms and definitions are provided in the AI Administrative Procedures issued by the City Manager under this Policy.
Policy 5.3
Section 4. Scope
This Policy applies to:
4.1 All AI systems deployed by the City or on the City’s behalf, including AI capabilities that a vendor enables within software the City already licenses;
4.2 Staff (full-time, part-time), interns, consultants, contractors, partners, and volunteers who may be purchasing, configuring, developing, operating, or maintaining the City’s AI systems or who may be leveraging AI systems to provide services to the City;
4.3 Members of the City Council and members of City boards, commissions, and committees, when using AI systems to conduct City business; and
4.4 Use of AI systems for City business through personal accounts or on personal devices.
Section 5. Guiding Principles for Responsible AI Systems These principles describe the City’s values with regards to how AI systems are purchased, configured, developed, operated, or maintained:
5.1 Human-Centered Design: AI systems are developed and deployed with a humancentered approach that evaluates AI powered services for their impact on residents, businesses, and visitors, and that preserves a person’s ability to reach a City employee.
5.2 Security & Safety: AI systems maintain confidentiality, integrity, and availability through safeguards that prevent unauthorized access and use. Implementation of AI systems is reliable and safe, and minimizes risks to individuals, society, and the environment.
5.3 Privacy: Privacy is preserved in all AI systems by safeguarding personally identifiable information (PII) and sensitive data from unauthorized access, disclosure, and manipulation.
5.4 Transparency: The purpose and use of AI systems is proactively communicated and disclosed to the public. An AI system, its data sources, operational model, and policies that govern its use are understandable and documented, and the City maintains a public inventory of the AI systems it uses.
5.5 Equity: AI systems support equitable outcomes for everyone. Bias in AI systems is effectively managed with the intention of reducing harm for anyone impacted by its use.
5.6 Accountability: Roles and responsibilities govern the deployment and maintenance of AI systems, and human oversight ensures adherence to relevant laws and regulations. A City employee remains responsible for every decision and public communication that an AI system informs.
Policy 5.3
5.7 Effectiveness: AI systems are reliable, meet their objectives, and deliver precise and dependable outcomes for the utility and contexts in which they are deployed.
5.8 Workforce Empowerment: Staff are empowered to use AI in their roles through education, training, and collaborations that promote participation and opportunity.
5.9 Fiscal Responsibility: AI systems are adopted only where they deliver value that justifies their full cost, including licensing, staff time, training, integration, and long-term support, consistent with the City’s size and resources.
5.10 Public Trust: The City’s use of AI systems strengthens, and never substitutes for, the accessibility and responsiveness of City government to the people it serves.
Section 6. Roles & Responsibilities
The following roles are responsible for administering and enforcing this Policy. Where a position named below does not exist, is eliminated, or is vacant in the City organization, the City Manager shall designate the City employee who performs the corresponding function.
6.1 The City Council adopts this Policy and any future amendments to it, receives the annual AI report described in Section 12, approves appropriations for AI systems through the budget process, and shall be notified before the City deploys any AI system that collects or analyzes biometric, facial, or location data about members of the public.
6.2 The City Manager is responsible for the City’s overall use of AI systems and for ensuring that the City’s use of AI systems is consistent with this Policy and the Cybersecurity Policy. The City Manager shall designate the AI Program Administrator and the members of the AI Review Committee, issue and update the AI Administrative Procedures, notify City departments when this Policy or those procedures are updated, may approve exceptions under Section 15, and may at any time inspect the use of AI systems and require a department to alter or cease its use of an AI system or a partner’s use of an AI system on the department’s behalf.
6.3 The AI Program Administrator, as designated by the City Manager, shall coordinate the AI Review required by Section 7, maintains the City’s AI inventory and the Approved AI Tools List, chairs the AI Review Committee, oversees AI training, and prepares the annual AI report to the City Council.
6.4 The Information Technology function is responsible for the security, privacy, access control, logging, and monitoring of AI systems; for evaluating AI tools before they are added to the Approved AI Tools List; for restricting or removing access following a security or privacy incident; and for the enterprise digital privacy and data processing practices required by the City’s Privacy Program found in the Cybersecurity Policy.
6.5 City departments are responsible for following this Policy, the AI Administrative Procedures, and the Cybersecurity Policy, for maintaining a current inventory of the AI systems Policy 5.3
they use, and for confirming their compliance to the AI Program Administrator at least annually.
6.6 Department Directors are responsible for authorizing their staff’s access to approved AI tools, confirming that staff have completed required training, and designating a departmental point of contact for AI matters.
6.7 The City Attorney’s Office is responsible for advising of any legal issues or risks associated with AI systems usage by or on behalf of City departments, for reviewing AI-related contract terms, and for advising on the application of the California Public Records Act, the Ralph M. Brown Act, records retention law, and conflict-of-interest law to AI systems and AIgenerated records.
6.8 The Finance Department is responsible for overseeing the procurement of AI systems in alignment with existing IT procurement and governance processes, for obtaining a completed AI FactSheet from vendors, and for requiring vendors to comply with City policy standards through contractual agreements.
6.9 Human Resources & Risk is responsible for the City’s compliance with employment laws relevant to AI and the Civil Rights Council regulations governing automated-decision systems in employment, for AI-related training and employee acknowledgments, for insurance considerations, and for administering discipline arising from violations of this Policy.
6.10 The Police Chief is responsible for the Police Department’s use of AI systems, including compliance with Penal Code section 13663 and Section 9 of this Policy, and for coordinating with the AI Program Administrator and the City Attorney’s Office before deploying any new law enforcement AI system.
6.11 The AI Review Committee, chaired by the AI Program Administrator and including representatives of the City Attorney’s Office, Human Resources & Risk, Finance, the Police Department, and affected operating departments, reviews proposed AI systems, recommends approval or denial to the City Manager, and reviews this Policy annually.
Section 7. Policy
When purchasing, configuring, developing, operating, or maintaining AI systems, the City will:
7.2 Uphold the Guiding Principles for Responsible AI Systems;
7.2 Conduct an AI Review to assess the potential risk of an AI system before that system is acquired, enabled, or materially changed. The AI Program Administrator is responsible for coordinating the review of AI systems used by the City, with the AI Review Committee, as detailed in the AI Administrative Procedures. The depth of review shall be proportionate to risk: AI systems that may affect individual rights, benefits, enforcement, employment, or public Policy 5.3
safety receive heightened review, while low-risk productivity tools may be approved administratively;
7.3 Obtain technical documentation about AI systems using the AI FactSheet or create equivalent documentation if internally developing the AI system. The Finance Department is responsible for requiring vendors to complete the AI FactSheet;
7.4 Require contractors to comply with the City’s standard AI contract requirements, overseen by the Finance Department, which shall address at a minimum City ownership of City data, a prohibition on the vendor using City data to train models or on selling or sharing City data, security and breach notification, subprocessor disclosure, accessibility, audit rights, and return or secure destruction of City data at the end of the agreement;
7.5 In the event of an incident involving the use of an AI system — including a security or privacy breach, a materially inaccurate or discriminatory output that affected a City decision, or the disclosure of confidential City information to an unapproved AI tool — the City will follow the incident response procedures detailed in the AI Administrative Procedures and the Cybersecurity Policy. Staff must report a suspected AI incident to their supervisor and the AI Program Administrator within one business day. The Information Technology function is responsible for overseeing the security practices of AI systems used by or on behalf of City departments;
7.6 Maintain a written inventory of the AI systems used by or on behalf of the City, publish a plain-language summary of that inventory on the City’s website, and update it at least annually;
7.7 Require every City employee and official granted access to an approved AI tool to complete AI training and acknowledge this policy before access is granted, and annually thereafter; and
7.8 Report to the City Council at least annually, at a public meeting, on the City’s use of AI systems, including systems added or retired, AI incidents, costs, and recommended amendments to this policy.
Section 8. Approved Use of Generative AI by City Staff
Generative AI tools can help City staff draft, summarize, translate, analyze, and write software more efficiently. The following requirements apply whenever City staff, officials, contractors, or volunteers use generative AI in the course of City business:
8.1 Approved tools only. Staff may use only generative AI tools that appear on the City’s Approved AI Tools List, accessed through City-provided accounts. Using a personal account, a personal subscription, or a personal device to process City information through an AI tool is prohibited.
Policy 5.3
8.2 Information that must not be entered. Staff shall not enter into a generative AI tool any information that is confidential, privileged, exempt from disclosure, or otherwise protected, unless the tool has been approved in writing for that category of information. This includes personally identifiable information about residents, employees, or applicants; personnel, medical, and disciplinary records; information subject to the attorney-client privilege or the attorney work product doctrine; closed session materials; law enforcement investigative records and criminal justice information; water, wastewater, and other critical infrastructure security information; credentials, keys, and network configuration data; and draft records that have not been released to the public.
8.3 Human responsibility for output. AI output is a draft, never a finished work product.
The City employee who uses an AI tool is fully responsible for the accuracy, completeness, legality, and tone of the work produced with it, and must independently verify all facts, figures, citations, legal authorities, and quotations before use. Generative AI tools can produce fabricated citations and false statements that appear authoritative.
8.4 No automated final decisions. An AI system shall not be the sole or determinative basis for any decision that materially affects a person’s rights, benefits, property, employment, or liberty, including the issuance or denial of permits and licenses, code enforcement and citation decisions, planning, zoning, and design review determinations, hiring, promotion, discipline, and termination, claims determinations, and enforcement or detention decisions. A qualified City employee must independently review the underlying facts and exercise judgment before such a decision is made.
8.5 Quasi-judicial and legislative proceedings. Staff reports, findings, conditions of approval, and recommendations presented to the City Council, Planning Commission, Design Review Board, or a hearing officer may be prepared with AI assistance, but must be reviewed, verified, and adopted as their own by the responsible City employee, who remains the author of record.
8.6 Public-facing content. AI-generated or AI-assisted content published by the City must be reviewed by a City employee before release. The City shall not publish AI-generated images, audio, or video that a reasonable person could mistake for an authentic depiction of a real person, place, or event, and shall not generate the likeness or voice of any City official, employee, or member of the public without that person’s written consent. Where the City deploys a chatbot or automated assistant for public use, it shall clearly disclose that the user is interacting with an automated system and shall provide a means to reach a City employee.
8.7 Employment uses. Any AI system used to recruit, screen, test, schedule, evaluate, or discipline employees or applicants must be approved in advance by Human Resources & Risk and the City Attorney’s Office, must be subject to bias testing and meaningful human review, and must comply with the Civil Rights Council’s automated-decision system regulations (California Code of Regulations, title 2, section 11008 et seq.), including the requirement to preserve related records for four years.
Policy 5.3
8.8 Language access and accessibility. AI translation and interpretation may be used to improve access to City services, but machine translation of legal notices, public hearing notices, emergency instructions, and other critical communications must be reviewed by a qualified human translator before release. AI-driven public-facing services must remain accessible to people with disabilities.
8.9 Software and operational technology. AI-generated code, scripts, and configurations must be reviewed by qualified staff and tested before deployment to any City production system, and shall not be used in supervisory control and data acquisition or other operational technology systems controlling water, wastewater, or other critical infrastructure without the written approval of the AI Program Administrator and the responsible Department Director.
8.10 Purchasing. Staff shall not purchase, subscribe to, expense, or accept a free trial of an AI tool outside the City’s purchasing policy, including through a procurement card or reimbursement.
8.11 Training and acknowledgment. Before being granted access to an approved AI tool, staff must complete City-provided AI training and sign an acknowledgment of this Policy, and must renew that acknowledgment annually.
Section 9. Public Safety and Emergency Services
AI systems used in law enforcement and emergency response carry heightened risk to individual rights and to life safety. The following requirements apply in addition to the balance of this Policy:
9.1 AI-assisted law enforcement reports. Consistent with Penal Code section 13663, if the Police Department uses AI to draft any portion of a report, the report shall disclose on each page that it was written in whole or in part using artificial intelligence; the officer shall review, correct, and certify the report; the Department shall retain the first AI-generated draft for as long as the final report is retained; and the Department shall maintain an audit trail identifying each use of the AI system and any audio or video record it processed. AI shall not be used to draft reports of officer-involved shootings, in-custody deaths, or use-of-force incidents requiring investigation, except with the written approval of the Police Chief.
9.2 Vendor limits on law enforcement data. A vendor of an AI system used by the Police Department shall not sell, share, or use Department data for any purpose other than providing the service to the Department, except as required by court order, and shall access Department data only as necessary for troubleshooting, bias mitigation, accuracy improvement, or system refinement.
9.3 Facial recognition. Facial recognition shall not be used for real-time or covert identification of members of the public and shall not be applied to footage from officer bodyworn cameras. Where facial recognition is used in a lawful investigation, a possible match is Policy 5.3
an investigative lead only, must be independently corroborated, and shall never be the sole basis for an arrest, detention, search, or identification of a suspect.
9.4 Predictive policing. The City shall not use AI systems to predict the likelihood that a specific individual will commit or be the victim of a crime, or to direct enforcement toward an individual on that basis.
9.5 Automated license plate readers. Automated license plate reader systems, including AI analytics applied to their data, shall be operated in accordance with Civil Code section 1798.90.5 et seq. and a written usage and privacy policy. Data shall be retained no longer than necessary, access shall be logged and audited, and the data shall not be sold or shared with outof-state or federal agencies except as expressly permitted by California law. An alert shall be visually confirmed by an officer before any enforcement action is taken.
9.6 Aerial and video systems. AI analytics applied to unmanned aircraft, fixed cameras, or video management systems shall be reviewed by the AI Review Committee and the City Attorney’s Office, and the City Council shall be notified before deployment. Nothing in this section alters the City’s obligations for a military equipment use policy under Government Code section 7070 et seq.
9.7 Wildfire and hazard detection. The City supports the use of AI-assisted wildfire, smoke, and hazard detection to protect Laguna Beach’s canyon and hillside neighborhoods. A qualified City employee or responsible mutual aid agency must verify an AI detection before an evacuation order, public alert, or emergency notification is issued. AI systems shall not autonomously issue public emergency alerts or evacuation orders.
9.8 Dispatch, fire, and marine safety. AI tools may assist dispatchers, fire personnel, and marine safety officers with call triage, translation, drowning and rip current detection, and situational awareness, but shall not replace the professional judgment of the responder or dispatcher, who retains authority over the response.
9.9 Recorded media. AI analysis of body-worn camera, in-car camera, or interview recordings shall be limited to purposes authorized by the Police Chief in written Department policy, shall be logged, and shall not be used for generalized monitoring of officer conduct in a manner inconsistent with any applicable memorandum of understanding or with the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (Government Code section 3300 et seq.).
Section 10. Prohibited Uses
The use of certain AI systems is prohibited due to the sensitive nature of the information processed and severe potential risk. The City, and those acting on its behalf, shall not use AI systems for the following purposes:
10.1 Real-time and covert biometric identification.
Policy 5.3
10.2 Classification of human facial or body movements into certain emotions or sentiment with the use of computer vision techniques or emotion analysis. (e.g., positive, negative, neutral, happy, angry, nervous).
10.3 Fully automated decisions that do not require any meaningful human oversight but substantially impact individuals.
10.4 Social scoring, or the use of AI systems to track and classify individuals based on their behaviors, socioeconomic status, or personal characteristics.
10.5 Cognitive behavioral manipulation of people or specific vulnerable groups.
10.6 Autonomous weapons systems.
10.7 Predictive policing that targets, scores, or profiles specific individuals.
10.8 Surveillance, profiling, or evaluation of individuals based on their exercise of rights protected by the First Amendment, or based on race, religion, national origin, immigration status, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or any other protected characteristic.
10.9 Monitoring of employees’ lawful union activity or other protected concerted activity.
10.10 Creation of synthetic images, audio, or video depicting a real person or event that is presented as authentic, or that could deceive the public about the actions or statements of a City official or employee.
10.11 Entry of confidential, privileged, personally identifiable, or otherwise protected City information into an AI tool that has not been approved for that category of information.
10.12 Determination of a person’s immigration status, or assistance with federal immigration enforcement, except as required by law and consistent with Government Code section 7284 et seq.
10.13 Any use of an AI system intended to circumvent the Ralph M. Brown Act, the California Public Records Act, or the City’s records retention obligations.
Section 11. Transparency and Public Notice
11.1 The City will maintain, and publish on its website, a plain-language inventory of the AI systems it uses, describing each system’s purpose, the responsible department, the categories of data it uses, and whether it informs decisions about individuals. The inventory will be updated at least annually.
Policy 5.3
11.2 Where the City uses an AI system to interact with the public, including chatbots, automated telephone assistants, and automated correspondence, the City will clearly disclose that the interaction is automated and will provide a means to reach a City employee.
11.3 The AI Program Administrator will provide the City Council with an annual report on the City’s use of AI systems, presented at a public meeting, covering systems added or retired, the results of annual department compliance confirmations, AI incidents, costs, and recommended amendments to this policy.
11.4 A member of the public who believes they have been adversely affected by the City’s use of an AI system may submit a concern to the City Manager’s Office, which will acknowledge the concern and respond within a reasonable time.
Section 12. Policy Enforcement
12.1 All employees and agents of the City, whether permanent or temporary, and all elected and appointed officials, interns, volunteers, contractors, consultants, vendors, and other third parties operating AI systems on behalf of the City are required to abide by this Policy and the AI Administrative Procedures.
12.2 Nothing in this policy is intended to conflict with or supersede any applicable memorandum of understanding between the City and a recognized employee organization, or any right afforded by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (Government Code section 3500 et seq.) or the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (Government Code section 3300 et seq.). The City will satisfy its meet-and-confer obligations before implementing an AI system that has a material effect on matters within the scope of representation.
12.3 This policy is an internal administrative policy of the City. It is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the City or its officials, officers, employees, or agents.
12.4 If any provision of this policy conflicts with federal or state law or with the terms of an existing contract, the law or contract controls and the remainder of this policy remains in effect.
Section 13. Violations of the AI Policy
Violations of any section of the AI Policy, including failure to comply with the AI Administrative Procedures, may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination, consistent with the City’s personnel rules and any applicable memorandum of understanding. Violations made by a third party while operating an AI system on behalf of the City may result in a breach of contract and/or pursuit of damages. Infractions that violate local, state, federal or international law may be remanded to the proper authorities.
Section 14. Exceptions
Policy 5.3
Staff, as described in the scope of this Policy, must adhere to all controls outlined in this Policy unless a specific documented exception is explicitly granted by the City Manager or designee.
Policy violations that have not been formally documented as an exception will be treated as a security incident in accordance with City policy. City staff or Departments may encounter emergency situations, including a proclaimed local emergency, that necessitate the immediate use of AI tools or technologies. In these circumstances, each incident use case must obtain documented approval from the City Manager, or designee, during an activated emergency, prior to use. In such situations, the Department must submit the approved use case to the AI Program Administrator for review within 30 days of the incident, and any such emergency use shall be included in the next annual AI report to the City Council.
Section 15. Restricted Platform Alternatives
15.1 In the event that the City restricts access to certain AI platforms, whenever practicable the City will provide a URL redirect to a City intranet page that will provide the employee with alternative AI platforms which have been vetted and approved by the City for use. The purpose of this provision is to help prevent the exfiltration of City data to personal accounts or personal devices, which would violate the City’s acceptable use, privacy, and information security practices. This approach allows employees to choose among various platforms which meet applicable privacy and security standards established by the City to facilitate productivity.
15.2 The Information Technology function will perform regular assessments of AI platforms and will regularly monitor such platforms so that the City can restrict and remove access in the event of a security or privacy incident.
Section 16. Policy Review and Amendment
The AI Program Administrator, in consultation with the AI Review Committee and the City Attorney’s Office, will review this policy at least annually and whenever a change in federal or state law materially affects it, and will present recommended amendments to the City Council for adoption. The City Manager may issue and update the AI Administrative Procedures consistent with this policy, including the Approved AI Tools List, the AI FactSheet, the AI Review process, the incident response procedure, and required training, without further City Council action.
Adopted: [update with CC adoption date]