Kootenai County staff to codify AI policy as standalone policy in county manual
Loading...
Summary
Interim HR Director Cecilia Sweet said the Board of County Commissioners previously approved an artificial intelligence policy on July 8 and staff will make it a standalone policy in the county policy manual; legal reviewed the request and raised no objection.
Cecilia Sweet, interim human resources director for Kootenai County, told commissioners on Oct. 14 that the Board of County Commissioners had approved an artificial intelligence policy on July 8 and that staff now plan to place that policy in the county's policy manual as a stand-alone policy.
—For the record, Cecilia Sweet, interim HR director. The purpose of this agenda item is for, to clarify on July 8, at the business meeting, the BOCC approved the artificial intelligence policy and then gave directions to put the policy within the computer use policy,— Sweet said. She added that legal has no objection to having the AI policy separate from the computer use policy and that staff are consolidating BOCC-approved policies into the existing policy manual.
Commissioners expressed no objection to placing the AI policy as its own document. One commissioner noted they had previously been advised by legal to include the AI language within the computer use policy, but that either placement is acceptable so long as the policy is included in the manual. Sweet said the item will likely require a resolution and a new policy number if it is created as a stand-alone policy.
Why it matters: County policies that govern technology use and artificial intelligence can affect county staff workflows, data handling, and compliance obligations. Making the AI policy a distinct entry in the policy manual creates a single point of reference for employees and clarifies where the policy resides within county governance documents.
Discussion at the status meeting did not include detailed changes to the policy language itself; commissioners' questions focused on placement in the manual and whether the usual business-meeting process must be repeated to assign a policy number and adopt a resolution. Sweet said legal had reviewed the change and had no problem with it and that staff will proceed with making the AI policy a standalone policy and routing it for resolution as required.
No formal board vote occurred at the status meeting; staff will return with the formal adoption process and resolution as necessary.
