Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer a distant concept for local governments. It’s already embedded in daily operations across communities of all sizes. From drafting council reports to improving public safety analytics, AI tools are quietly reshaping how local governments deliver services. Yet while adoption is accelerating, governance, evaluation, and training often lag.

Our 2025–2026 Leadership ICMA program capstone project offers a timely and practical response to this challenge. Drawing on survey data from local government professionals across the United States, the project introduces a structured AI Matrix, a scoring framework designed to help organizations evaluate AI tools before implementation. The findings reveal both the promise of AI and the pressing need for clearer guidance.

AI in Local Government: Already Here, Still Evolving

The data is clear: AI has moved beyond experimentation and into everyday use. In a survey of 28 local government professionals from various municipalities, 82% reported already using some form of AI in their work.

This adoption spans a wide range of tools and applications, including popular platforms and customer-service chatbots. These tools are being used for drafting council agendas and reports, conducting planning and zoning analysis, enhancing public safety monitoring, providing website navigation assistance, delivering real-time information to residents, and translating and transcribing meetings and documents.

In many cases, AI delivers tangible value. Public servants report time savings, improved access to information, and enhanced responsiveness to residents. For example, AI tools are helping residents quickly find information on government websites, while also enabling staff to summarize lengthy reports for elected officials. Like any other tool, it’s only as valuable as the training and proper use allow.

The Other Side of Adoption: Risks and Uncertainty

Despite these benefits, the survey also highlights significant concerns. AI adoption often happens in an unstructured way, with individual staff experimenting independently rather than within a formal framework. Respondents identified several key challenges, including a lack of training and knowledge, data privacy and security concerns, unclear policies and governance structures, accuracy issues and unreliable outputs, difficulty integrating AI into existing workflows, and skepticism among staff and leadership.

This tension between rapid adoption and limited oversight is where many local governments currently find themselves. AI is being used but not always evaluated systematically.

Why Local Governments Need a Better Evaluation Framework

Traditional IT procurement processes are not always well suited to AI. Unlike conventional software, AI systems are dynamic, probabilistic, and often opaque in how they generate results. Our Leadership ICMA project identifies a critical gap: many organizations lack a consistent, structured process for evaluating AI tools before adoption. Without such a process, governments risk implementing tools that do not align with organizational needs, overlooking ethical or privacy implications, failing to measure performance effectively, and creating inconsistent practices across departments.

The AI Matrix: Treating AI Like an Employee

At the heart of the project is a simple but powerful idea: evaluate AI tools the same way you would evaluate a potential employee. This analogy reframes AI from a passive tool into an active contributor to organizational work. Just as you would not hire an employee without an interview, reference checks, and performance expectations, AI tools should undergo a similarly rigorous evaluation.

How the AI Matrix Works

The AI Matrix is a web-based scoring tool designed to assess AI platforms across multiple dimensions, evaluating functionality, workforce impact, human interaction, ethics, and data security. Each AI tool is scored on a 30-point scale. A score above 16 indicates the tool passes the evaluation, while lower scores suggest the need for further research or reconsideration.

Beyond Evaluation: The Importance of Governance

The AI Matrix is only one piece of a broader strategy. Local governments are also seeking formal AI policies, training programs for staff, governance frameworks, regular review cycles, resident notification procedures, and oversight structures for AI use. These elements are essential for responsible AI adoption. Without them, even well-chosen tools can create unintended consequences.

Key Lessons for Local Government Leaders

AI adoption is inevitable, but it must be intentional. As local leaders, we are all tasked with maintaining public trust and keeping a keen eye on spending. Fully vetting and understanding new technology is vital to making the best decisions. AI poses many questions, and being able to provide sound answers to our communities is key. Structure reduces risk. Training is critical. Oversight is non-negotiable. Transparency builds trust.

Looking Ahead: A Framework for Responsible Innovation

AI has the potential to transform local government in profound ways. But these benefits are not guaranteed without careful evaluation and governance. Local governments are at a pivotal moment in the adoption of artificial intelligence. By adopting structured evaluation tools like the AI Matrix and establishing clear governance frameworks, they can harness the benefits of AI while minimizing risks and maintaining public trust.

Access the AI Matrix here.

SUSANA CARBAJAL is assistant city manager for Austin, Texas.

COREY COSTELLOE is assistant city manager for Tehachapi, California.

C. J. HEATON is deputy city administrator of public works for Blair, Nebraska.