Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Engagement Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Vendor pitches TextMyGov messaging service to Wright County supervisors
Summary
A TextMyGov representative gave an overview of an opt-in/text-based notification and information service, highlighting automated FAQs, mass notifications, and options for database import and department-level groups; county officials said they would share the information with department heads and requested pricing estimates.
Landon Beck of TextMyGov presented to the Wright County Board of Supervisors on April 14, describing a text-message–based citizen engagement platform that can send mass notifications, answer common questions by automated replies and accept resident reports by text.
Beck said TextMyGov serves nearly 1,000 government agencies and can support jurisdictions ranging from under 1,000 residents to counties with more than a million. The platform offers two primary features: 1) mass notifications for items such as meeting reminders, tax dates and event notices; and 2) an automated “FAQ” and issue-reporting capability so residents can text keywords (for example, a county-specific keyword) and receive guided replies or links to county website pages.
Beck demonstrated opt-in options used by other counties: residents can text a keyword to a short code to opt in, or the county can import a database (with assistance) and auto-enroll residents, who may opt out by replying STOP. He said auto-enrollment typically yields 40–50% immediate opt-in, with a reported 90% retention rate after auto-enrollment in other jurisdictions. Beck also described customization: separate groups for departments or interests, website widgets for sign-up, and an administrative web portal for county staff to compose messages.
Board members expressed interest but said they would want department heads to weigh in on operational benefits and asked for cost estimates. Beck said he would send pricing information and follow-up materials.
No formal action was taken; board members concluded the presentation and asked staff to circulate Beck’s materials to department heads for consideration.
