Civic information tools are only useful when they quote the official record and say when that record does not answer. We do not build systems to profile voters, to generate persuasion at a person, or to present a generated claim as an official statement. A person remains accountable for anything that is published as the institution's voice.
What makes AI work different here
- The official record is the only source. Answers cite the statute, the agenda, the register, or the published notice. If it is not there, the system says so.
- Generated text is not an official statement. Drafts for a clerk or a communications team stay drafts until a person publishes them.
- We do not build voter targeting. Profiles, persuasion, and lookalike audiences for a campaign are out of scope for this work.
- Public records are still personal in places. A register can contain personal data. Access follows the rule that already governs that record, not a model's convenience.
Where we typically start
We start by naming the official sources in scope, the questions the system must refuse, and who is allowed to publish. The published case study is a civic assistant that quotes the official agenda and says when that record does not answer. It does not profile residents or draft persuasion.
Services we typically provide
Case studies from this industry
Frequently asked questions
Will you build a tool to target voters?
No. Voter profiling and campaign persuasion are out of scope.
Can it issue a statement for an office?
It can draft from the sources you provide. A person publishes anything that speaks for the institution.
What if the official record does not say?
The system says it does not know. It does not fill the gap with a plausible sentence.