Open Government Advisory Committee Oct. 23, 2024 - Meeting minutes

The Open Government Federal Advisory Committee convened both in person at GSA’s Jess Larson Auditorium located at 1800 F Street, Washington, D.C. 20270 as well as virtually via the Zoom platform.

In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 1001 et. seq.) the meeting was open to the public from 1:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Eastern time.

Meeting agenda

Time	Item	Speaker(s)
1:00 - 1:05	Call to Order and Welcome	Arthur Brunson
1:05 - 1:10	GSA Leadership Remarks	Robin Carnahan
1:10 - 1:20	White House Leadership Remarks	Justin Vail
1:20 - 1:30	Overview of the U.S. Open Government Secretariat	Daniel W. York
1:30 - 1:40	Chair Remarks	Daniel Schuman
1:40 - 1:45	Committee Q & A	Daniel Schuman
1:45 - 1:55	Break
1:55 - 2:10	History and Overview of the Open Government Partnership	Joseph Foti
2:10 - 2:20	Brief History of U.S. Open Government Efforts Starting in 2009	Dr. Suzanne Piotrowski
2:20 - 2:25	NAP 6 Timeline Overview	Alexis Masterson
2:25 - 3:00	Organizing the OG FAC - Committee Discussion	Daniel Schuman
3:00 - 3:20	Public Oral Comments	Arthur Brunson
3:20 - 3:25	White House Remarks	Kei Koizumi
3:25 - 3:30	Closing Remarks and Adjourn	Daniel Schuman Arthur Brunson

Committee members attendance

First and last name	Type of member	Attendance	Virtual or in person
Dr. Joyce Ajayi	Non-federal	Present	Virtual
Arthur Brunson	DFO	Present	In Person
John Dierking	Non-federal	Present	Virtual
Amy Holmes	Non-federal	Present	Virtual
Ronald Keefover	Non-federal	Present	Virtual
Dr. Steven Kull	Non-federal	Present	Virtual
Janice Luong	Non-federal	Present	Virtual
Ade Odutola	Non-federal	Present	In Person
Dr. Suzanne Piotrowski	Non-federal	Present	In Person
Daniel Schuman	Non-federal, Chair	Present	In Person
Joshua Tauberer	Non-federal	Present	Virtual
Corinna Turbes	Non-federal	Present	In Person
Charles Cutshall	Federal	Present	In Person
Dr. Kristen Honey	Federal	Present	In Person
Kiril Jakimovski	Federal	Present	In Person
Bobak Talebian	Federal	Present	In Person

GSA staff present

First and last name	Role	In person or virtual
Daniel W. York	Alternate DFO	In Person
Bethany Cron	OG FAC Support	Virtual
Adam Cable	OG FAC Support	In Person
Skylar Holloway	OG FAC Support	In-Person
Benny Llamas	ASL Interpreter	Virtual
Brian Milin	ASL Interpreter	Virtual
Sheri Ferrara	Closed Captioner	Virtual

Speakers

First and last name	Role	In person or virtual
Robin Carnahan	GSA Administrator	In Person
Justin Vail	Special Assistant to the President for Democracy and Civic Participation at The White House	In Person
Joseph Foti	Principal Advisor, Emerging Issues, Open Government Partnership	In Person
Alexis Masterson	GSA, U.S. Open Government Secretariat	In Person
Kei Koizumi	Special Assistant to the President and Principal Deputy Director for Science, Society and Policy	In Person
Daniel W. York	GSA, Director, U.S. Open Government Secretariat	In Person

Written public comments received

One (1) public written comment was received prior to the meeting.

I write to suggest that the newly chartered Open Government Federal Advisory Committee reiterate to Federal agencies and their advisory committees their obligation to post meeting minutes in a timely manner. Specifically, under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA: “[a]gencies should post the meeting minutes on the agency advisory committee website (if one exists) not later than 14 calendar days after the meeting minutes have been certified.”

(1) While I will not cite examples in this comment, I can think of numerous instances when I have found agencies failing to post minutes from meetings that occurred months or even years ago. This obstructs public understanding of what committees are doing and their work. The Open Government committee should reiterate agency obligations to post these minutes. Moreover, if agencies have failed to do so, they should be encouraged to update committee or agency Web sites to post materials for previous meetings such as those that occurred years ago even if they have not previously done so. Likewise, and for the same reasons, agencies should be encouraged to post written public comments they receive as well as meeting transcripts.

(2) While some agencies no doubt make these types of records available upon request, it would be helpful as a standard practice to proactively share with the public online all such materials.

Thank you for your consideration of this input.

Digitally signed by Mitchell Berger, 10/14/2024

Call to order

Arthur Brunson, the Designated Federal Officer, welcomed attendees to the inaugural public meeting of the Open Government Federal Advisory Committee (OGFAC). The OG FAC will operate under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). He reminded attendees that the meeting is public and recorded, with materials posted on the official website. Daniel York is the alternate DFO.

Mr. Brunson conducted a roll call and members online unmuted their microphones to confirm attendance. Once a quorum was confirmed (see Committee Members Present table above), Mr. Brunson provided an overview of the agenda.

GSA leadership remarks

GSA Administrator Robin Carnahan provided opening remarks and emphasized the importance of openness and transparency as fundamental to democracy. She highlighted how increased public participation leads to greater transparency, which in turn fosters accountability and public trust in government institutions. Carnahan shared her personal experience in promoting open government throughout her career, including her role as Secretary of State in Missouri, her work with the National Democratic Institute, and her leadership at GSA. She underscored the administration’s commitment to making government data more accessible and advancing initiatives like the Federal IT dashboard and Challenge.gov, which leverages crowdsourcing to develop innovative government solutions.

Carnahan also discussed the critical role of collaboration between government and the public in ensuring the success of open government initiatives. She pointed out how GSA is working with domestic and international stakeholders to develop the next National Action Plan, addressing emerging issues such as the responsible use of generative AI. Carnahan concluded by encouraging continued efforts toward improving transparency, equity, and engagement, ensuring that the government serves all Americans more effectively. She praised the commitment of committee members, acknowledging their passion and dedication to fostering a more open and accountable government.

White House leadership remarks

Justin Vail, Special Assistant to the President for Democracy and Civil Participation, focused his remarks on the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to safeguarding democracy through transparency and accountability in government. He emphasized that since taking office, the President and Vice President have made the protection of American democracy a central priority. This includes ensuring free, fair, and secure elections, upholding the rule of law, and combating corruption. He stressed that enhancing public trust in government and democratic institutions is essential, especially in light of the growing global and domestic challenges to democracy.

Vail also highlighted the administration’s efforts to advance open government by making government data and information more accessible and encouraging greater public participation in decision-making. He pointed out that this work is particularly urgent given the democratic backsliding seen worldwide and the need to address declining trust in government within the U.S. The administration remains committed to making the Federal Government more responsive, transparent, and accountable, viewing open government initiatives as a critical part of strengthening democracy.

Overview of the U.S. Open Government Secretariat

Daniel York, Director of the U.S. Open Government Secretariat, provided an overview of the purpose and mission of the Secretariat. He emphasized the essential role of transparency, accountability, and public engagement within government, underscoring how these principles strengthen American democracy. He acknowledged the roots of the Open Government Partnership (OGP) in the 2009 Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government aimed at enhancing openness, and highlighted the ongoing importance of collaboration between the government and public to foster a responsive and inclusive democratic system.

York expressed optimism in working alongside the committee and the public to uphold these values, adding that the Secretariat is dedicated to supporting a transparent framework for government operations. He thanked the committee members and affirmed the importance of their collective efforts to advance an open, participatory government system.

Chair remarks

Daniel Schuman provided opening remarks as Chair of the Open Government Federal Advisory Committee (OG FAC). He expressed gratitude to the committee members, GSA Administrator Robin Carnahan, Justin Vail of the White House, and the public for their participation. He emphasized the importance of collaboration within the committee and acknowledged the challenges facing the U.S. at times in its pursuit of open government. Schuman highlighted that, compared to other countries, the U.S. is behind in some aspects of public engagement and transparency. He suggested that it would be beneficial to learn from successful international practices, bringing these lessons back to the U.S. to inform open government initiatives.

Schuman proposed that the committee should facilitate presentations from individuals, including committee members, who are knowledgeable about successful open government efforts worldwide. This, he believed, would allow the committee to benefit from a variety of experiences and apply those insights to improve transparency and participation within the U.S. Schuman also engaged with logistical questions about committee procedures, including subcommittee formation and the importance of conducting deliberations in public spaces to ensure transparency. In particular, he recommended a pace of monthly virtual meetings for the committee for the near future. He called for holding three preparatory meetings to collect information and conduct research on three topics: creating an evaluation rubric, engaging with the public, and structuring our subcommittees.

Schuman also discussed the significant constraints on the operation of the federal advisory committee that places significant limits on its ability to collaborate outside meetings. Those include a general prohibition on collaborative documents and group emails, long timelines to schedule meetings, and significant delay in establishing subcommittees.

Committee questions and answers

Members discussed operational and procedural aspects of committee work, emphasizing effective communication and accessibility. One member raised a concern about clarity in public meetings, suggesting that committee members introduce themselves clearly for public comprehension, which Chair Daniel Schuman agreed to incorporate. Schuman proposed a solution for virtual meetings by ensuring names are displayed accurately on Zoom and committed to reviewing meeting minutes to maintain clarity.

The committee agreed with no dissent to an initial pace of monthly virtual meetings and to hold three types of preparatory meetings – on the evaluation rubric, engaging with the public, and whether to establish subcommittees – in advance of the next full committee meeting.

The committee also discussed the value of creating an online library for research materials related to the committee’s work and finding innovative ways to receive feedback from stakeholders, such as ideascale. There was general agreement to investigate these issues further.

Schuman concluded by opening the floor to further questions, clarifying the importance of FACA compliance and transparency, and finalizing consensus on meeting protocols.

History and overview of the Open Government Partnership

Joseph Foti, Principal Advisor, Emerging Issues at the Open Government Partnership provided a history and overview of the Open Government Partnership (OGP). He congratulated the committee on its launch and outlined valuable practices from the OGP with an international perspective. He highlighted the importance of engaging citizens and incorporating transparency at every decision-making level, noting that successful open government initiatives are often those that prioritize public participation and measurable, impactful outcomes.

Foti urged the committee to leverage global examples, suggesting that the OGP’s collaborative frameworks could provide practical tools and insights to the U.S. committee. He also stressed the importance of feedback loops with the public, adding that openly sharing progress updates helps maintain trust and accountability. This international perspective served to underscore the committee’s mission of aligning open government practices domestically with best practices worldwide.

Foti also identified where government plans most likely fail: with ensuring that commitments are actually completed.

The committee engaged in a spirited conversation with Foti concerning the various challenge areas for the Open Government Partnership, best practices for committees in establishing a rubric to evaluate an idea, and what a successful plan looks like.

The committee asked whether OGP would be willing to hold further conversations with the committee about best practices for gathering information, engaging with the public, and evaluating ideas. Foti recommended another person at OGP who could address the committee in the future.

A brief history of Open Government initiatives in the U.S.

Dr. Suzanne J. Piotrowski, Director of the Transparency and Governance Center at Rutgers University Newark, provided a brief history of Open Government initiatives in the U.S. Her presentation covered the definition of open government, activities by the decade, and suggested readings. Transparency and participation are key values used in almost all definitions and often collaboration. Other terms include empowerment, usability and accessibility of information. She explained that her definition includes transparency, accountability, and participation. She asserted that while technology often plays a central role in discussions about Open Government, it is not a prerequisite for effective governance.

While open government has a long history in the United States, she focused her comments on the more recent evolution of Open Government starting from the 1990s, marked by the growth of government websites and significant events like 9/11, which heightened secrecy concerns. The Obama administration’s 2009 executive order on transparency was a pivotal moment, leading to the establishment of biannual Open Government plans and contributing to the framework of the Open Government Partnership (OGP).

Piotrowski highlighted various state and local initiatives as laboratories of innovation, including participatory budgeting in New York City and the use of 311 apps for citizen feedback. She also noted ongoing challenges with meaningful co-creation in National Action Plans, referencing her experience with the Independent Reporting Mechanism.

Piotrowski discussed problems with U.S. government performance in the context of some prior National Action Plans.

She ended with a recommendation for further reading on the topic.

NAP 6 timeline overview

Alexis Masterson provided an overview of the U.S. Open Government Secretariat’s development of the 6th National Action Plan (NAP 6). The current plan expires at the end of December 2024, and NAP 6 is expected to be published by December 2025. The U.S. will follow Open Government Partnership guidelines, maintaining the two-year plan structure historically used.

Masterson outlined a tentative timeline for NAP 6’s development, which includes six steps: analyzing inputs, defining problems, and identifying solutions currently in progress, with public engagement and feedback being prioritized. The drafting phase is scheduled from January to May 2025, followed by a public feedback period until September 2025. The finalization of NAP 5 is targeted for October-November 2024, allowing some buffer time for any unforeseen delays. Throughout the process, opportunities for dialogue between the government and civil society will be encouraged. Masterson concluded by inviting questions from the audience.

Open Government Federal Advisory Committee operations

Daniel Schuman led a discussion of the OG FAC on how they will operate. Members addressed challenges regarding timelines, the establishment of preparatory meetings for upcoming committee work, and the forming of subcommittees. Schuman proposed holding three preparatory meetings before the next full committee meeting in December to gather input and prepare for future discussions. He proposed three specific preparatory meetings focused on evaluation, engagement, and committee structure, aimed at aligning with the broader goals of the OG FAC over the next two years. Up to six members would participate at each meeting to stay under a quorum.

A participant suggested examining these topics through the lens of deliverables, and Schuman agreed that while not everything must fit neatly into these categories, the discussions would still be valuable.

Arthur Brunson explained logistical considerations concerning the operations of the OG FAC. He noted the need for at least 30 days to publish meeting notices. He also addressed the complexities involved in forming subcommittees, which require formal approval and oversight, and can take up to 90 days to establish. He clarified that these subcommittees would not operate independently but would report findings back to the full committee.

Brunson recommended creating a questionnaire for each meeting to identify areas of interest among participants. Schuman confirmed that invitations for the preparatory meetings would go out soon, noting that these would be virtual to accommodate scheduling challenges.

Participants also discussed the timeline for future meetings, including the potential for an in-person meeting in Washington, D.C., although details were not yet available. There was interest in holding additional meetings in November to maintain momentum.

The Committee endorsed a monthly pace of hybrid meetings for the near future and supported holding the three preparatory meetings in advance of the next full committee meeting.

The OG FAC also discussed how they can receive feedback and share resources. They asked the DFO to investigate how the U.S. Open Government Secretariat website could support the sharing of resources.

Overall, the discussion highlighted the commitment to an organized approach to input for the National Action Plan (NAP 6), with an emphasis on preparation and effective use of time during the committee’s upcoming work. Participants were encouraged to share ideas via email to facilitate collaboration while respecting procedural guidelines.

Public comments

Stephen Buckley from the U.S. Chapter of the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) emphasized the ongoing review of the IAP2’s Spectrum of Participation and encouraged feedback by the end of the month. He expressed support for regular interagency meetings to enhance collaboration among Open Government contacts across agencies, a practice he noted was more common during the Obama administration. Buckley highlighted the importance of maintaining meaningful public engagement in decision-making, particularly in light of recent initiatives by the Department of Transportation aimed at speeding up infrastructure projects, which risk sidelining public involvement.

Rob Martin spoke on behalf of the FinOps Foundation, which supports global open-source software projects. He introduced the committee to the FinOps Open Cost Usage Specification (FOCUS) open billing specification for cloud and technology vendor data, which standardizes billing information to enhance transparency and efficiency in data exchange. Supported by major cloud providers, this initiative allows for better analysis of spending, accountability, and more effective use of taxpayer dollars. Martin emphasized the outdated acquisition regulations in U.S. technology purchasing and argued that adopting the FOCUS specification could streamline procurement processes. He highlighted that this initiative has gained significant traction, with support from major companies and government entities, including the European Parliament. Martin urged the committee to advocate for the adoption of FOCUS within the U.S. government to improve decision-making and collaboration between industry and government.

Colin McNamara, representing a Texas-based organization with nearly 100 members, emphasized the importance of transparency in AI within public processes. He highlighted the challenges of government information being often late or incomplete, which hinders effective engagement, particularly for marginalized groups. As AI becomes more integrated into government, there are concerns about the lack of visibility into how AI models operate, risking public accountability. McNamara advocated for open-source tools that facilitate equitable AI development and ensure government information is accessible in both human and machine-readable formats. He mentioned the growing ecosystem of open-source platforms that can enhance transparency in AI systems. He urged that the public should have access to these tools and training to empower meaningful participation. With the 6th Open Government National Action Plan, McNamara sees a significant opportunity to deepen transparency and promote equitable access. He stressed that making AI models and their underlying code openly accessible is essential for a functioning democracy.

Alex Howard expressed gratitude for the opportunity to participate in the hybrid roundtable and emphasized the importance of public access to government information as a foundational American value. He referenced a public comment he submitted regarding the GSA’s assessment of U.S. performance in Open Government and mentioned the blueprint for accountability, co-created by civil society in 2020, which unfortunately was not included in the current National Action Plan. Howard urged the committee to leverage modern collaboration tools to enhance transparency and foster engagement with the American public. He highlighted the need for open government initiatives to combat misinformation and restore trust between citizens and their government. He encouraged participants to take risks in their outreach efforts and emphasized the significance of embracing openness in their work with the media and public. Overall, he conveyed hope for a reinvigorated commitment to Open Government principles moving forward.

Mike Gifford, the standards practice lead, addressed the committee, acknowledging the significant deliberations ahead. He emphasized the importance of enhancing accessibility and transparency in government contracting, particularly through compliance with Section 508. Gifford highlighted the concept of digital public goods, which focuses on how governments can contribute to global well-being through open standards, open-source software, and data. He advocated for the evaluation and implementation of effective digital services to foster collaboration and break down silos within the government. Gifford noted that organizations like the United Nations and USAID have embraced this concept through the Digital Public Goods Alliance. He suggested that endorsement from the Federal Advisory Committee could raise awareness of this approach in the U.S. and support the development of open-source initiatives. He concluded by inviting any questions.

Zachary Pesavento shared his experiences in the open community since 2008, highlighting his unique perspective from supporting whistleblower Chelsea Manning during her trial and interactions with WikiLeaks creator Julian Assange’s brother. He recalled a tense encounter with former colleague Timothy Ball, emphasizing the complexities of their discussions around transparency and data. Pesavento mentioned his involvement with the Data Coalition and efforts to pass the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act, which aimed to improve federal data reporting. He expressed concern about the credibility of government data, particularly reflecting on his experience during the COVID-19 pandemic while working for the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care. He recounted facing pressure to promote inaccurate information and experiencing hostility from supervisors, which ultimately led to his resignation after feeling unsafe. He concluded by stressing the need to stop the abuse of power and expressed willingness to provide further recommendations to the Open Government Federal Advisory Committee (OG FAC) in the future.

White House closing remarks

Kei Koizumi shared closing remarks on behalf of the White House Office of Technology Policy, emphasizing the U.S. commitment to open government principles dating back to President Obama’s 2009 memorandum on transparency. He congratulated the new Open Government Federal Advisory Committee and thanked the General Services Administration (GSA) for their efforts in establishing it.

Koizumi highlighted the role of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) in promoting openness and engagement, referencing key initiatives like the Freedom of Information Act, the Data Act, and the Evidence Act. He expressed pride in the expansion of the Open Government movement across various levels of government and noted the importance of the newly launched committee as a platform for collaboration between civil society and government. He encouraged committee members to navigate the challenges ahead, reinforcing the need to connect open government efforts with the American people and stakeholders globally. Koizumi concluded by thanking GSA Administrator Carnahan for her leadership and reaffirmed the commitment to uphold democratic principles through this initiative.

Adjournment

Mr. Brunson adjourned the meeting at 3:46pm ET

I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing minutes are accurate and complete.

Digitally signed by Arthur Brunson [10/30/2024]

Arthur Brunson

Designated Federal Officer

Open Government Federal Advisory Committee

Digitally signed by Daniel Schuman [10/29/2024]

Daniel Schuman

Chairperson