Ethics in Local Government: Considerations for the Use of Generative AI

Julius Suchy | Ethics Committee Member

As local governments increasingly embrace technology to enhance their services, generative AI platforms like ChatGPT have gained traction. These tools can streamline operations, improve communication, and provide data analysis. However, with their growing role comes a range of ethical concerns that local governments must address to ensure responsible use.

This article explores key ethical considerations for using generative AI in local government, highlighting areas such as data privacy, accountability, bias, misinformation, and public transparency.

1. Data Privacy and Confidentiality

One of the primary ethical concerns is the protection of sensitive data. Local governments handle vast amounts of confidential information, from resident data to internal personnel records. Introducing generative AI platforms risks exposing sensitive data if the AI processes personal or confidential information without adequate safeguards.

Governments need strong encryption and clear guidelines to prevent unintended data exposure. Employees should be trained to recognize what data is appropriate to input into AI systems, ensuring confidential or sensitive information is never compromised.

2. Accountability for AI Outputs

Generative AI platforms generate text based on input prompts, which can be useful for drafting documents or analyzing data. However, the accuracy and reliability of these outputs can vary, and AI-generated information may occasionally be incomplete or incorrect. This creates a risk for flawed decision-making if human oversight is not enforced.

It’s critical for local government employees to take responsibility for verifying the outputs generated by AI tools. Overreliance on AI without proper review could lead to misinformation or poor decisions, potentially damaging public trust. Local governments should also maintain transparency when AI-generated content is used in public-facing documents, emphasizing the role of human oversight.

3. Bias and Fairness

AI models are trained on vast datasets, which may include biases based on race, gender, or socioeconomic status. If not properly addressed, these biases can result in unfair or discriminatory outcomes in local government decisions or policies.

To mitigate bias, local governments should prioritize AI systems that are transparent about their training data and implement mechanisms to reduce bias. Regular audits of AI-generated outputs are also essential to ensure fairness and equity are maintained.

4. Misinformation and Public Trust

One significant risk associated with generative AI is the potential to produce misinformation. AI-generated text can sound authoritative, but it may not always be factually accurate. In the context of local government, where public trust and accuracy are paramount, misinformation can have serious consequences.

To prevent the spread of misinformation, local governments must establish protocols for verifying AI-generated content before it’s shared with the public. Educating employees and the public on the limitations of AI will also help manage expectations and ensure that AI tools are used responsibly.

5. Transparency and Public Engagement

Transparency is critical when local governments use AI tools. The public has a right to know when and how AI is being used in decision-making processes. Governments should be open about the role AI plays in shaping policies and encourage public input on the deployment of these technologies.

Public engagement, through consultations or online forums, can help build trust in AI’s use. Additionally, developing an AI ethics policy outlining acceptable AI use and making this policy available to the public will further demonstrate a commitment to ethical practices.

Conclusion

Generative AI holds great promise for local governments, offering opportunities to improve efficiency and decision-making. However, ethical considerations—particularly regarding privacy, accountability, bias, misinformation, and transparency—must be carefully managed to protect public trust.

By developing clear policies, ensuring robust employee training, and engaging with the community, local governments can responsibly harness AI’s potential while upholding the ethical standards that are fundamental to public service.

This article was created by ChatGPT with the following prompt:

I am writing an article for the Michigan Municipal Executives’ newsletter on Ethics in local government. I would like to provide an article on the importance of ethics for the use of generative AI such as ChatGPT for use by local government employees. Can you please provide an article outlining what concerns local governments should have about the use of generative AI in the workplace? Please make the article no longer than 600 words.

This article has not been edited from the ChatGTP version and is a glimpse into how employees who embrace innovation can create efficiencies in their work process. I would encourage you to speak to your staff about their potential use of AI and work to put in policies to ensure there are no ethical issues with your community’s use of AI.

 


Julius Suchy
Member, Ethics Committee
Township Manager, Ada Township

Julius Suchy has served as the Ada Township Manager since September of 2020, serving as its first township manager. Mr. Suchy has seventeen years of local government experience, including the following previous positions: Sparta Village Manager, Dundee Village Manager, Vassar City Manager, and Big Rapids Zoning Administrator. He is a double Laker for Life, graduating from Grand Valley State University with a bachelor’s (2006) and master’s (2008) in public administration.