Tim Wyatt details York County AI use cases and seeks FY27 IT budget increases
Loading...
Summary
Tim Wyatt, the county IT lead, told the Board of Supervisors about AI projects—from chatbots to sewer‑footage analysis—requested two IT hires and described an approximately $500,000 net increase in the IT budget driven largely by software price hikes and vendor changes.
Tim Wyatt, the county’s information‑technology lead, told the Board of Supervisors on March 26 that York County is deploying artificial intelligence across a range of services and is seeking targeted budget increases and two new IT positions for FY27.
Wyatt opened with a department overview, noting the IT team supports roughly 1,254 people and more than 4,000 devices and processes about 7,000 annual break‑fix tickets. He said the county has been ranked among the nation’s top localities for digital services and cited regional and national collaborations that inform local implementations.
Why it matters: Wyatt tied AI deployments to specific citizen services and operational savings. He said generative tools and Office 365 features speed staff work, a website chatbot answers citizen questions 24/7 with staff review, and a sewer‑inspection vendor named Pipedade uses AI to scan drone footage to flag cracks and prioritize repairs—capabilities Wyatt said the county could not meet with existing staff alone.
Wyatt emphasized guardrails and human oversight. "AI amplifies people. It makes good people great, but it also can make bad people terrible," he said, urging training and policies that prohibit sharing sensitive data with AI. He added the county treats AI outputs like work produced by an employee and requires staff review before information is passed up the chain.
On cybersecurity, Wyatt warned that threat actors also use AI and said the county must adopt defensive AI tools while monitoring state and federal legislation that could affect local programs.
Budget implications and requests: Wyatt described an expected net IT budget increase he summarized as roughly $500,000 (about a 16% increase for the IT department). He attributed most of that rise to industrywide software price inflation (he cited a general 7.5% increase), vendor consolidations that raised renewal costs, and equipment end‑of‑support replacements. He said the department pursues multiyear renewals and vendor negotiations to limit costs.
Specific enhancement requests included a UKG time‑management extension (Wyatt gave an implementation figure of $60,000 and an ongoing subscription estimate of $40,000) and a proposal to obtain higher‑resolution aerial mapping (3‑inch resolution) to replace a lower‑accuracy state dataset used by county systems. Wyatt proposed two new IT positions: a business applications technician to support enterprise systems and a database administrator who would also review AI‑generated automation and integrations.
Board response and questions: Supervisors asked for examples of guardrails, how chatbot follow‑ups are handled and whether AI‑generated code can be safely removed if misused. Wyatt replied that policies prohibit placing sensitive data in AI tools, that chatbot answers are reviewed by the webmaster (and citizens can opt to share contact information for follow‑up), and that any AI‑generated code must be reviewed by a human programmer before being run on county systems.
What’s next: Wyatt asked for support of the FY27 IT enhancements and personnel requests as part of the county’s budget process. The board did not take a formal vote at the work session; follow‑up budget hearings and the town‑hall meeting scheduled next week will provide additional opportunities to question details.
