Last week, we asked ARLnow readers a straightforward question: if given a binary choice, would you rather see Arlington County raise taxes or cut services in next year’s budget?
Of the more than 1,200 votes counted as of this morning, about two-thirds favor cutting services, while the remaining third would rather see another tax hike.
The County Board, in the budget it adopted last month, went the other way and raised the property tax rate by two cents to preserve the Cherrydale library, the county’s competitive gymnastics program and the Barcroft Sports & Fitness Center, among other items in the budget.
Baked into that poll, however, was an assumption: that the primary levers available to the Board are tax rates and service levels.
There’s likely no easy, conventional way to squeeze much additional productivity out of the county government machinery — already relatively technology forward in its approach and having undergone years of trimming around the margins. But there’s at least one other possibility on the table: doing more with less by leaning on a technology that has been reshaping just about everything else.
Arlington County government has already started experimenting with artificial intelligence. Last summer, the county quietly rolled out AVA — the Arlington Virtual Assistant — a chatbot connected to the main county website plus specialized sites for the library system, elections and Arlington Transit. Residents can use it to ask questions about parking tickets, library card fees and the like. Before that, the county implemented AI-enabled routing of non-emergency calls.
That’s a modest start. The broader question is whether AI tools could eventually take on heavier lifts — automating permit reviews, responding to public records requests and other service queries, summarizing public comments, coding backend county systems, or handling other back-office work that today requires county staff.
All of that is possible with existing AI technology — and happening at business large and small — it’s just a matter of implementing it effectively and being willing to weather the inevitable blowback. At a time when there’s a lot of AI skepticism, even small-scale uses of the technology in a public setting — for instance, W-L’s plan to have AI read names at high school graduation — quickly become controversial.
The skeptics’ case ranges from doubts about AI’s actual capabilities to concerns about environmental and social impacts. AI systems can also be biased, can hallucinate confidently wrong answers and can carry significant privacy implications when fed government data. Replacing experienced civil servants with software risks degrading services in ways that aren’t obvious until something goes wrong.
Still, with another tough budget year on the horizon and personnel costs a major driver of county spending, it’s worth asking whether efficiency-via-AI is an option locals would theoretically support, if it meant being able to avoid service cuts and tax hikes.
