The committee discussed the potential benefits and risks of artificial intelligence in county operations and asked staff to consider whether a countywide policy or guidance is needed. The chair said an AI session at a national conference highlighted use cases such as automating invoice processing (one county reported a 95% accuracy rate and large manual-hour savings) and said county departments currently lack a consistent policy outside emergency management. "It became very clear to me sitting in that room, it could have huge advantages for us, but could also put us in a real bad spot for different things too," the chair said.
Board members recommended a staged approach: identify county functions where AI could safely assist (for example document processing or routine administrative tasks), audit current staff use of AI tools, and adopt departmental or countywide rules that specify permitted uses, data-handling requirements and records retention. Member Newquist noted accuracy concerns and suggested comparing AI error rates to human error rates before deployment. The discussion ended without a formal motion; the committee asked the chief of staff and appropriate departments to return with recommendations about where AI might be piloted and whether a policy or ordinance is warranted.
No binding decision was made; staff will evaluate use cases and return with options.