Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026/01/21 - ADMIN - Minutes - Community Technology Advisory Commission - Regular Community technology advisory commission meeting January 21, 2026 6 p.m. Community technology advisory commission Minutes Members present: Shane Leverenz, Konnor Slaats, Kayla Stautz, Benjamin Straus Members absent: Reid Anderson, Nat Johnson Staff liaisons: Jacque Smith, communications and technology director School District Laison: Tom Marble, St. Louis Park Public Schools (non-voting member) 1. Call to order – roll call It was moved by Commission Member Slaats, seconded by Commission Member Stautz, approved 4-0 to call the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m. Commission members present included Commission Member Slaats (Chair), Commission Member Dyer (Vice Chair), Commission Member Leverenz, Commission Member Stautz, School District Liaison Marble and Staff Liaison Smith. Commission Members Johnson and Anderson were not present; Commission Member Straus joined the meeting at 6:23 p.m. 2. Approval of minutes – Nov. 19, 2025 It was moved by Commission Member Slaats, seconded by Commission Member Leverenz, to approve the minutes from Nov. 19, 2025. The motion passed 4-0. 3. Review revised workplan and council advisory form Commission Member Slaats initiated a discussion about the workplan, noting that two items had been included: generative AI options and resident engagement technology evaluation. Commission Member Slaats mentioned a potential third workplan item related to public safety technology that had been discussed previously with Reid but was ultimately abandoned. Commission Member Leverenz recalled meeting with Reid where they discussed potential roadblocks to the public safety technology item, including issues with accessing police data and potential pushback on information sharing. Commission Member Slaats suggested they could move forward with the two current workplan items and potentially revisit the third item later. Commission Member Leverenz suggested it would be better to proceed with just the two established items rather than trying to create a new one right before presenting to the city council. Commission Member Stautz agreed with this approach. Ms. Smith noted that meeting time could be used as work time for the commission. The commission then discussed the two workplan items in more detail: The first item was described as a white paper/research report on generative AI for cities, exploring policy adaptations cities might need to make to be AI-compatible in the future. This would include examining peer cities and use cases for generative AI technology. Commission Member Stautz mentioned that several Twin Cities municipalities including Edina, Minnetonka and Saint Paul were part of an AI consortium they could research. The second workplan item would involve assessing the MySLP app, documenting existing features, capabilities, accessibility and integrations with other city software and technologies. The assessment would include researching industry best practices, examining peer municipality apps and determining whether there were opportunities to improve the app or if it was even necessary. Ms. Smith noted that the MySLP app included both information push to residents and work ticket tracking capabilities that allowed residents to submit issues. Commission Member Stautz asked whether the app and website used the same system for work submissions. Ms. Smith confirmed they did. It was moved by Commission Member Slaats, seconded by Commission Member Stautz, to send the two workplan items to the city council. The motion passed 5-0. After the vote, the commission briefly discussed how they would divide the work. The AI research group would have each member explore three of nine identified areas related to city operations, research how generative AI might impact those areas, and bring their findings together for discussion at the February meeting. The app evaluation group would conduct research on the existing MySLP app features, examine what other metro area cities offer and investigate industry standards, bringing their findings together to determine next steps at the February meeting. 4. Communications and announcements Ms. Smith indicated she had no communications items. 5. Adjournment It was moved by Commission Member Dyer, seconded by Commission Member Slaats, to adjourn the meeting at 7:10 p.m. The motion passed 5-0. These minutes were created with the assistance of a generative AI transcript service, then edited and finalized by a city staff person.