In this limited series, we explore the progress, challenges, and future trends in GovTech through conversations with leaders across all levels in the sector.
Crandall O. Jones is a career public administrator with 39 years of experience and is currently the Municipal Administrator of the Municipality of Norristown, PA, Adjunct Professor at the Villanova University Department of Public Administration, and a CitizenLab client.
Q: How would you describe your role in the GovTech space?
A: I’ve always seen technology as an important part of what we do, both in managing operations and making connections to residents. We weren’t really that tech-savvy just 8 years ago – we weren’t even using much software for our general operations or infrastructure, let alone having a social media presence. My job initially was to bring us from just a static website to as close to the 21st century as we could get by integrating technology into our work in Norristown. Now, my focus is on raising awareness in our team about the tech available to help us all better serve our constituents. By finding the resources we need to make tech accessible to us, we also make us more accessible to our community members.
Q: In your opinion, what are the biggest challenges GovTech currently faces?
A: First and foremost are government resources. Some communities may not have the resources to make investments in technology, either financial or human-power. Sometimes you’re just trying to do the basics – keep the lights on and the doors open to provide essential services. In that case, having the time to branch out and do other things – even if they’ll make life easier for you – is a challenge. And second, you’re going to be limited as an organization if you’re not able to dedicate time to developing your team and giving them training and exposure so they’re aware of GovTech’s value in local government services. It’s always been important to me that our team gets training, exposure, and can benchmark against what others are doing so that tech becomes a part of our standard operating procedure. Of course, to incorporate tech in this way we have to find the partnerships and resources that will enable that. And the other thing I’d mention is that sometimes we get so caught up in being “government-y” in how we do things. We lean too heavily into saying “we’ve always done it this way” or “this is the ordinance, we can’t change it” and sometimes don’t think about being transformational in order to stay responsive to changing community needs and what’s happening now.
Q: What are the GovTech advancements that you’re most excited about?
A: I’m most excited about the ways that technology enables people to connect with us, and how it helps us better plan and allocate resources based on those connections. Sometimes local government officials can get caught up in what we’re trained to do, and by engaging with the recipients of our services using these tech tools, we have an opportunity to tap into what the public really wants so we can budget, plan for, and do the things they really want us to do. And while I recognize that there is a digital divide, and not everyone has equal access to this tech, I’m excited to see how we can bridge that gap so more people can get involved. Cell phones give us so much opportunity to do that and with tech being more mobile-friendly, access to desktops and laptops isn’t really a barrier anymore. Thanks to this tech, we’re connected to meaningful feedback from people in our neighborhoods, and we use that information when we’re allocating dollars or advising elected officials.
Q: We’re seeing more funding allocation like ARPA to the infrastructure bill come into play – how can governments ensure they’re spending those dollars well?
A: First, look at your community’s needs. These funding streams are once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to get an infusion of revenue that we wouldn’t otherwise have. There are a lot of “wicked problems” that governments have to deal with, and they are structurally difficult to address. By openly sharing all the information we can with our communities about those issues, they can help us envision solutions that will ultimately help elected officials make decisions that attract others to the community, bring revenue and sustainability, and help build a resilient infrastructure for the long-term.
In Norristown, we knew it was important to address infrastructure because, among other things, we were still dealing with the impacts of 2021’s Hurricane Ida. Less than a year ago, parts of our town were underwater, our firefighters managed over 50 in-town boat rescues, and over 100 of our residents were displaced. Our Council knew from earlier community engagement that they needed to address infrastructure. That was already in progress when we got our ARPA funds. We made some decisions about funding allocation based on the knowledge that we already had. For instance, we also knew our residents were struggling under the pandemic economy so we didn’t want to increase property taxes for them and therefore recovered some of our losses through ARPA funding to avoid a tax increase for our community. But for the rest of our ARPA funding allocation, we turned back to the community by launching a project on our CitizenLab platform. There, residents can share how they want us to allocate the remaining $10.8 million of ARPA funds that we have been granted.
Q: What is the type of feedback that you and your team want when you’re setting direction for the city and making decisions?
A: We want to make sure that we’re doing things that are forward-looking and sustainable so that the city can endure for the decades to come. Knowing and understanding if we’re designing services and programs the way people want us to is key. For example, if we’re investing in parks, are we putting in the things that people want to see? If we’re doing trash collection, how do we know that residents are satisfied with the level of service that we provide or if they want more incentives to participate in recycling? If there’s development going on, is it the development they want to see? We operate on a blueprint of what was there before us, but the good news is that now we can tinker with that and ensure that changes we make are in sync with what the community needs based on the data we get through both community engagement and research.
Q: What kind of engagement data is most valuable to you public administrators?
A: Sometimes when you’re trying to make high-level decisions, quickly sharing surveys helps you tap into what people are thinking about so you know if you’re on the right track. But when it gets down to implementing a project, you need to know exactly what’s happening and you need more context. Let’s be honest: most people don’t know what the local government does. They see it as Public Works picking up their trash or a Mayor making a speech, but they don’t know how general government operations impact their lives. We need to create the infrastructure to engage with them so they’re better informed and we don’t miss something. And that means we have to combine engagement methods to really get full data – from surveys, workshops in person or virtually, and more. A few years ago we held community meetings and there were “frequent fliers” who would dominate meetings and speak the whole time, whereas others were intimidated and we missed their valuable input. So we offered text-in options during the meeting where folks could vote or comment on their phones while at the meeting, which helped us get more feedback in real-time and it would open up new conversations. We were able to walk away with data captured on what was most important to more of the folks in the room. So the engagement that’s most valuable is the kind that will cast a wider net and include more people.
Q: What’s the role of online engagement in all of this? How can digital help local governments?
A: If you can create opportunities for folks to give input – if you can put a tool in people’s hands – you’ll know what is going on and can be more responsive as a government. With a digital platform, you can put it in a lot more places and try a lot more ways to engage folks without it being a time or cost drain on either party. I used to host Facebook live chats with the community once a quarter, and during those conversations, I’d open the floor so they could ask me anything. Only 10-20 people would ask questions, but over 1,200 would attend live and another 2,000 would watch the recording. With our digital community engagement platform, we have the opportunity for real-time feedback that meets the needs of the community – they can engage whenever it works for them, in multiple ways, because the platform is always up and running.
Q: What’s been the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on your engagement efforts?
A: We spent the last two years with almost all of our meetings online and that has provided us with exponentially more opportunities to talk to more people. COVID-19 highlighted several things. For instance, more people participated in Council meetings because they were online. This was a big learning for us because it showed that if folks had the option to participate online we would get more citizen input. Our average council meetings had 5 people, whereas online that number went up at least 5x because some inconvenient engagement barriers, like commute times, were removed. But it was still clunky when we first started. Now, using our CitizenLab platform we can give the community more substantive information to respond to, better ways to engage, and do it all in one place. Not everybody can show up at a specific time even when things are online, but if the projects are there for them to engage on their own time then there is a wider range of engagement across our community.