Indianapolis City Council Proposal No.362, 2023

• Authority: Indianapolis, IN
• Parent authority: Local governments
• Jurisdiction: United States
• Collections: U.S. state and local documents
• Most recent activity: Enacted
• Most recent activity date: 2023-12-04

Risk subdomain coverage

Minimal coverage — Brief mention but no specific mitigations, recommendations or governance measures relating to the risk subdomain are described.

• Governance failure
• Lack of transparency or interpretability

All other risk subdomains had no coverage in this document.

Risk Coverage Summary

The document has minimal coverage of risk domains, with only implicit references to governance structures (6.5) and transparency concerns (7.4). As a procedural resolution establishing a study commission, it does not directly address specific AI risks but rather creates a mechanism to study and recommend policies for trustworthy and transparent AI use.

Sector coverage

Good coverage — Comprehensive governance measures or mitigations with clear procedures relating to the sector are explicitly described.

• Public Administration (excl. National Security)

All other sectors had no coverage in this document.

Sectors Summary

This resolution governs AI use within Public Administration (excluding National Security) as it applies to City and County departments and agencies providing services to citizens. The commission will review current AI use across municipal operations and recommend policies for trustworthy and transparent AI usage in government service delivery.

Legislative Status

Other

Legislative Status Summary

This is a procedural council resolution establishing a study commission with no binding regulatory obligations on AI use. It creates an internal governmental process to study and recommend future policies but does not itself impose enforceable requirements on AI developers or deployers.

Actors

Proposer

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Entities: Indianapolis City-County Council
• Summary: The resolution is proposed by the City-County Council of Indianapolis and Marion County, as indicated in the title and the resolving clause.

Target

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor, AI_Deployer
• Entities: City and County departments and agencies; Mayor and elected county officials
• Summary: The study commission will review the City and County's current AI use and recommend policies to the Mayor, elected officials, and City-County Council. City departments and agencies are required to cooperate with the commission.

Enforcer

• Summary: The document does not establish enforcement mechanisms or designate enforcement authorities. It is a procedural resolution creating a study commission to make recommendations, not to enforce compliance.

Monitor

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Entities: Commission on Artificial Intelligence Development
• Summary: The Commission is tasked with reviewing current AI use, gathering information, and monitoring implications of AI technologies for the city, though its role is advisory and time-limited rather than ongoing oversight.

AI Lifecycle Stages

Lifecycle stages covered by the documents, as defined in the OECD Framework for the Classification of AI Systems

• Plan and Design
• Deploy
• Operate and Monitor

AI Lifecycle Summary

The document does not focus on specific AI lifecycle stages but rather establishes a study commission to review current AI use and recommend future policies. It implicitly covers all lifecycle stages through its mandate to review current use and recommend policies for trustworthy and transparent AI usage across city operations.

Technical Scope

Terms relating to technical scope that are mentioned or implicitly referenced in the document

No technical scope terms identified.

Technical Scope Summary

The document uses the general term 'artificial intelligence (AI) and its associated technologies' without defining specific technical categories. It does not distinguish between AI models, systems, or specific types of AI such as generative, predictive, or frontier AI.