The Little Hoover Commission’s chair, Pedro Nava, noted the “seismic societal shift” occurring due to the rise of AI and generative AI (GenAI), the topic of Hoover hearings held earlier this year.
The recommendations include building a state-owned computing center to support AI, as well as providing the state’s workforce with general-purpose AI tools and conducting AI training, procurement and oversight activities.
The executive summary for the 54-page report cites those three key recommendations and several others:
- Build a California AI Computing Center: “California should develop its own state-run, cloud-based AI computing center to provide affordable, scalable access to compute power, AI tools and datasets for state agencies, academic institutions, non-profits, and startups.” Specifically, it would provide users with access to “compute power and AI development tools, software and datasets that might otherwise be insufficiently secure and/or cost prohibitive.”
- Create a California AI Council, which would, among other things, oversee the creation of the AI computing center.
- Empower State Workers: “California should provide all state employees with access to secure general-purpose GenAI tools along with mandatory basic GenAI training. The state should also facilitate peer-to-peer and self-directed GenAI trainings tailored to the unique needs of its individual workers and programs.”
- Make Implementation Easier: “The state should facilitate GenAI innovation without increasing agency workloads by clarifying GenAI use policies, supporting inter-agency and intergovernmental collaboration, identifying agency needs and piloting and scaling GenAI applications across agencies.”
- Improve Procurement and Risk Assessment: “The state’s current procurement and risk-mitigation processes for GenAI should be streamlined as much as possible without compromising safety.”
- Strengthen Human Worker Voices: “The state must balance leveraging GenAI while maintaining a strong human presence in its operations. It can achieve this, in part, through regular forums, agency position statements and the creation of an AI ombudsperson.”
- Educating the Public: “To convince Californians of the value, safety and harmlessness of GenAI in government operations, the state should take steps to educate the public about how it intends to implement GenAI and protect against GenAI harm.”
- Legislative Oversight: “The California Legislature should establish a ‘Select Committee on California Public Sector AI’ to oversee AI/GenAI implementation in state operations. It should also engage in self-education relating to AI/GenAI technology and policy.”
- California Must Think Beyond AI: “California’s current focus on GenAI is too narrow. The state should expand its GenAI procurement and risk-mitigation policies and forms to include all technologies that have significant risk, not just GenAI.”
This week’s deep dive by the commission notes several factors related to the growth of AI in state, local and federal governments, including Newsom’s adoption of RFI2 (Request for Innovative Ideas), a challenge-based procurement method that has been embraced by some of the state’s largest agencies and departments.
On the legislative front, the report notes the burgeoning regulatory environment that has sprung up in recent years: “In California, prior to the 2017-18 legislative session, few if any bills relating to AI had been introduced. AI legislation then began to accelerate, with five bills appearing in 2017-18, 16 in 2019-20, and 13 in 2021-22. ChatGPT was launched in late 2022 and, in 2023-24, a remarkable 67 bills on AI were proposed in the California Legislature.”
