Miami‑Dade IT department outlines AI tools, data dashboards and cost‑saving steps; commissioners press on staffing, website access and cybersecurity

Carla Denise Armbrister, acting director of Miami‑Dade County’s Information Technology Department (ITD), and Assistant Director George Elazabal briefed the GET committee on ITD operations, modernization plans and recent cost‑avoidance efforts.

Elazabal described ITD as the county’s “central nervous system” for technology, saying ITD manages about 1,200 application systems and approximately 962 full‑time equivalent positions. He said roughly 97% of ITD’s budget is funded through customer revenue and memoranda of understanding with county departments and partner agencies; less than 1% comes from the direct general fund.

Elazabal highlighted several modernization efforts: renegotiation of countywide master agreements that he said produced “contract savings and/or cost avoidance of just over $4,500,000 over the next five years”; rollout of a county contact center using an AI‑enabled interactive voice response system for Miami‑Dade Water and Sewer Department (WASD); a county “trusted data platform” and more than 1,000 operational dashboards; and the county’s open data portal, which he said “provides access to over 5,000 datasets.”

Commissioners asked whether the AI contact‑center rollout has reduced call hold times and whether it has replaced staff. Elazabal said the WASD implementation is the first AI‑powered rollout and that hold times have been halved in a cited customer example; he deferred direct staffing‑impact questions to the WASD contact center leadership, saying ITD supplies technology rather than setting staffing policy.

Commissioners also pressed ITD on the department’s growth and on public access to county video and meeting materials. Vice Chair Milian Orbis said a resident told her it required several steps to find meeting videos on the county website; commissioners asked ITD to work with the County Communications/CCED team to evaluate the public site’s navigation and consider streamlining. ITD officials acknowledged the comment and said they would explore improvements with CCED and other partners.

Questions about budget reduction targets were raised. Carla Armbrister said ITD was not on the list of departments assigned a uniform 10% general‑fund reduction because ITD is primarily funded by departmental customer revenue; she said ITD is nevertheless pursuing savings from contract renegotiations, retiring legacy applications, and organizational consolidation tied to administrative streamlining.

Commissioners also raised cybersecurity concerns; ITD described an AI vendor security matrix and an AI Council to shape AI strategy and vendor compliance processes. The department plans upcoming items for security, networking and AI to the board.