Dallas County reviews draft AI governance and ethics code, commissioners ask for vendor input
Loading...
Summary
County staff presented a draft AI policy and code of ethics referencing NIST guidance and recent Texas legislation; commissioners sought vendor and Texas Cyber Command input, asked for clearer responsibility assignments, and recommended returning the item in June with additional vendor briefings.
County staff presented a first draft of an AI governance policy and combined code of ethics that staff said is designed to comply with state rules and national guidance. The presenter summarized recent legislative and regulatory developments and said the National Institute of Standards and Technology—s AI Risk Management Framework and Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) rules shaped the draft.
"We're not using OpenAI," the presenter said, adding the county intends to use closed AI systems and to require disclosure where residents interact with machine-driven services. The draft proposes a designated point of contact for complaints and an AI risk officer role; staff recommended the county—s CISO, Mr. Rausch, fill the risk-officer role and offered the presenter as the point of contact.
Commissioners raised numerous practical questions: how the county will inventory deployed systems, how to protect children—s data under COPPA and FERPA when AI affects juvenile justice and public-health services, bias-testing requirements, accessibility and language-equity standards, incident-notification timelines and law-enforcement safeguards including restrictions on facial recognition. Several commissioners urged staff to consult major vendors and the Texas Cyber Command and to return the draft to the committee in June after soliciting additional feedback.
Staff said only a small number of internal projects are currently contemplated and that the county will perform privacy and risk assessments (DPIAs) before deployment. Commissioners asked for clearer assignment of responsibility inside "Dallas County" in the policy text so that, if an incident occurred, the public would know which office or official to contact.
As a next step the committee asked staff to: 1) discuss the draft with major vendors and the Texas Cyber Command; 2) produce an inventory of current AI use across departments; and 3) return with a revised draft and vendor briefings at a later meeting. One commissioner also requested that UKG and sheriff—s office representatives attend the next continuous improvement meeting to demonstrate timekeeping configuration that intersects with department operations.
