Project:Transparency Hub/Austin

Notes and links from a meeting at the City of Austin to discuss new possibilities for the city Web site, May 16, 2009.

For during the meeting, it will be easier if you

Attendees

 * Jon Lebkowsky- [mailto:Joul@socialwebstrategies.com jonl@socialwebstrategies.com]
 * Charles Knickerbocker- [mailto:Cknicker@samepageresults.com cknicker@samepageresults.com]
 * Gene Crick- [mailto:Gcrick@main.org gcrick@main.org]
 * PJ Abrams - [mailto:P.abrams@its.utexas.edu p.abrams@its.utexas.edu]
 * Chip Rosenthal - [mailto:Chip@unicom.com chip@unicom.com]
 * Sharron Rush Knowbility - [mailto:Srush@knowbility.org srush@knowbility.org]
 * Sue Soy. Librarian, archivist, community volunteer. - [mailto:Ssoy@ischool.utexas.edu ssoy@ischool.utexas.edu]
 * Kedron Touvell- [mailto:Me@kedrontouvell.com me@kedrontouvell.com]
 * Gregory Foster- [mailto:Gf-justice@entersection.org gf-justice@entersection.org]
 * William Hurley (Whurley) OpenAustin - [mailto:Whurley@ieee.org whurley@ieee.org]
 * Bianca Taulman. Information services developer, Lance Armstrong Foundation. Bringing technology to non-profits. [mailto:Bianca.taulman@gmail.com bianca.taulman@gmail.com]
 * Gary Chapman. LBJ School. 21st Century Project. Strategic Technology Advisory Board, University of Texas. Austin Freenet. Computer Technology Professionals for Social Responsibility. [mailto:Gary.chapman@mail.utexas.edu gary.chapman@mail.utexas.edu]
 * Dustin Linear. Council for Competitive Government. Downtown Commission. Library Commission. [mailto:Dlanier@gmail.com dlanier@gmail.com]
 * Rich Vazquez. EFF Austin. [mailto:Rich.vazquez@gmail.com rich.vazquez@gmail.com]
 * Conor Kenny [mailto:Ckenny@connorkenny.net ckenny@conorkenny.net]
 * Juan Garcia, New media producer, UT. [mailto:Juangarcia@mail.utexas.edu juangarcia@mail.utexas.edu]
 * Matt Esquibel. City of Austin web team - [mailto:Matthew.esquibel@ci.austin.tx.us matthew.esquibel@ci.austin.tx.us]
 * David J. Neff Non-profit technologist, filmaker, Cancer Society. [mailto:Dneff22@gmail.com dneff22@gmail.com]
 * Charles Purma. City of Austin - [mailto:Charles.purmaiii@ci.austin.tx.us charles.purmaiii@ci.austin.tx.us]
 * Linda Pounds Adams. Deputy for Communications Technology Management, City of Austin [mailto:Linda.pounds-adams@ci.austin.tx.us linda.pounds-adams@ci.austin.tx.us]
 * Sonja Rainey- [mailto:Sonja@sonjaraineydesign.com sonja@sonjaraineydesign.com]
 * Silona Bonewald. League of Technical Voters. Citability.org [mailto:Silona@silona.com silona@silona.com]

How does the City move into the era of open, participatory government?

 * RFP – Document and Process
 * Leverage local talent and skills with City processes and policies
 * Have to bid without knowing the complete scope and set of requirements
 * Public outreach and visibility throughout process (esp. with development of RFP)
 * Public also needs to make effort to stay involved and inform others and hold City accountable
 * What are other ways to reach people other than town halls, etc…? This is a serious challenge.
 * Method of executing on requirements needs to be appropriate to context
 * Put in base architecture, then break into smaller initiatives and get public help
 * Putting data out in open – open APIs
 * Focus on maintainability for staff
 * Less PDFs
 * “Internet of things”
 * Legacy data must be there and easily accessible for historical and archivist purposes
 * Build out tool set (esp open source), then let people build what they want – this is different than the enterprise driven approach
 * Will let public get involved and contribute and get faster adoption rate
 * Seamless aggregated info delivery (ex: info on schools, even though it is not a City function)
 * User should not have to know who does what
 * Machine consumable open data, open APIs
 * Manage expectations and make boundaries clear up front
 * Who owns it? Who maintains it?

Beware of World Wide Woodstock


 * Consult more youth
 * Reach out to school districts
 * Helps develop civic-mindedness and foster our creative class

What examples can you point to that have “done it right”?

 * City of Melbourne strategic plan site
 * Mark Elliot – “from collaboration to participation”
 * 35 corridor to Round Rock
 * We did our outreach and requirements right
 * Apps for Democracy/Apps for America
 * Children’s Optimal Health Agency
 * Refresh Cities
 * Global Cities Dialogue
 * FreePress
 * EU Project in Portugal to develop transactional web sites for tiny towns in an easy way

What would success look like and how would we measure it?

 * Large scale mock up and architecture spec in open forum
 * Accessibility – how readily available (to all users and technology) is info?
 * Measure would be how much input we get from users who may not usually have access or be involved
 * Different media apps
 * Fungible data – not platform specific
 * High priority on public safety and critical services

Next steps? Ideas?

 * Guidance from new leadership
 * RFP still under Council review
 * Recommendation from staff is to re-bid without specific tools and technology restrictions – but this is not official decision
 * Don’t make them bid on both requirements and building – don’t have “fox build the henhouse”. Those that gather requirements should verify the requirements throughout project, but not be actually building
 * You know you did the requirements right if the project CAN be parsed out to different vendors
 * Application and System Portfolio Management enterprise-wide
 * SOA
 * Public hearings before Council – send to Council with recommendations
 * Managed Crowdsourcing (OpenAustin, Development Camps)
 * Do site cheaper and take left over funds to devote to critical services
 * Make it easier to do things through the normal channels/processes
 * “Input Group” to regularly offer review and feedback and gather info for us
 * Large scale mock up and architecture spec in open forum
 * Wiki of interesting ideas
 * Is Commission set-up the right format – more of a camp?
 * Consult more youth
 * Get participation from around the world (like Melbourne strategic plan)
 * Leverage large population of local non-profits
 * Reach out to targeted groups (youth, new residents, etc…)
 * Contests
 * If data is there, they will build
 * Source forage repository for other Cities and orgs – Create an open source City server – become the nexus for US Cities
 * “Make data available and see what happens” – see what we have and then determine what we need – like Apps for Democracy
 * Figure out where to put all this stuff that is already out there and being developed – what is vehicle for making it available and useful?
 * Develop a new site on the side as a sandbox – ‘child may consume parent’
 * Would at least get us our prototype that we could take to vendor and have them build it
 * Being able to “show” is most valuable
 * Identify low hanging fruits of data that can be exposed
 * Way to let people know there is new data available
 * Governance structure within City
 * Internal poll within City of how process could be more inclusive

Links and notes

 * Future of Melbourne
 * "From Consultation to Participation," paper on process behind Future of Melbourne.


 * Portland Online
 * Apps for Democracy
 * Free Press discussions on rewrite of the Federal Communications Act (link?)
 * Paris Global Cities Dialog (link?)