The City of Fresno finds itself in a precarious position, caught between the necessity of technological advancement and the constraints imposed by private companies. This dilemma was brought to light during a recent budget hearing, where city leaders openly discussed the challenges posed by artificial intelligence and proprietary software.
At the heart of the discussion was the city’s growing dependence on AI and the software solutions provided by private companies. This reliance raises questions about autonomy, costs, and the long-term implications for both the city and its residents.
Fresno’s technological captivity
During a budget hearing on June 8, Councilmember Miguel Arias voiced his concerns about the city’s financial commitment to AI. He drew a stark comparison, stating, “I suspect that AI is going to be like meth. They give it to you at a really cheap price on day one, and then they’re going to rob you and rape you on year two because now we’re on the hook.”
Fresno city Manager Georgeanne White elaborated on this sentiment, explaining how the city is increasingly dependent on private companies for essential software and programs. “They don’t have those standalone products anymore that you just upload — we’re stuck,” White remarked. “We’re stuck because then what happens is if you don’t keep your product updated, then they stop servicing them, they stop updating them. We are trapped to a certain extent, and it just becomes the standard.”
White drew a parallel to her personal experience in the mid-1990s, when she resisted switching from WordPerfect to Microsoft Word. Despite her initial reluctance, she eventually had to adapt, much like the city is now being forced to do with AI and other advanced technologies. “You’re either going to have technology or you’re not,” White asserted. “We’re going to have to have technology and so we are captive — we’re absolutely captive.”
The broader implications of AI dependency
The City of Fresno’s struggle is not an isolated incident but rather a reflection of a broader societal issue. The rapid advancement of AI has significant implications for labor, environmental sustainability, and the cost of technology. This inevitability has seeped into local government operations, where city employees have been using AI products for years without formal policies to guide their use.
Despite the widespread adoption of AI many city leaders remain unaware of the associated costs and the impact of AI on problem-solving and decision-making processes. This lack of awareness was highlighted when OpenAI contacted city leaders about the extensive use of ChatGPT by city employees. The company demanded that the city either pay for an enterprise subscription or cease using the service entirely.
In response, Fresno City Hall blocked access to ChatGPT and directed employees to use CoPilot an AI feature integrated into Microsoft Office. While there is no formal policy regarding AI use, White emphasized the need to formalize existing informal guidelines into an administrative order. She also pointed to a recent legal mishap involving an outside law firm representing the city, where an invalid citation likely generated by AI led to embarrassment in the courts.
The cost of AI integration
A city memo obtained by Fresnoland lists two dozen programs that city employees are permitted to use, either incorporating AI features or being entirely AI products. The memo outlines projected costs for some of these programs but lacks detailed information on past expenditures. For instance, the city anticipates spending approximately $25,000 on Madison AI a software that drafts internal staff reports, over the next fiscal year. Similar costs are projected for AI features in Salesforce and Wordly AI which provides live transcription and Spanish translation during city council meetings.
The costs associated with Claude AI used by the city’s Information Services Department, are less clear due to their dependency on usage tokens. Additionally, the city’s $18.3 million contract with Axon for body cameras and software, which includes AI features for drafting police reports, demonstrates how costs can escalate over time. The contract’s expenses triple from the first to the third year, culminating in a substantial $5.8 million bill in the fifth year.
The inevitability of AI and the call for policy
As investments in AI continue to grow, so does the call for caution and regulation. A coalition of scientists, engineers, and researchers has been advocating for tech companies to address the consequences of AI development before releasing these technologies to the public. This movement has gained traction, with top employees and executives at OpenAI resigning in protest of the company’s approach to AI development.
David Krueger, an assistant professor at the University of Montreal and a vocal AI safety advocate, founded Evitable, a nonprofit organization aimed at discouraging the uncritical development of AI programs. Krueger emphasizes the importance of governments establishing clear policies on AI use to protect constituents and ensure transparency. He suggests that such policies should include recording all AI usage, barring products that leak private data, and educating employees about the potential for AI hallucinations and sycophancy.
Krueger’s outlook on current AI advancements is sobering. He warns that on the current trajectory, AI will increasingly automate decision-making, potentially leading to humanity losing control of its destiny. He argues that adopting AI technologies is a choice, but so is moving away from them. Recent actions by major companies like Uber and Starbucks highlight the challenges and potential pitfalls of AI integration.
The impact of AI on cognitive processes has also been a subject of research. A study published in April 2026 by researchers at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania explored how AI can “supplement or even supplant” human thinking, leading to what they term “cognitive surrender.” The researchers found that users often adopt AI-generated answers without constructing their own, raising questions about the preservation of human agency and autonomy in an AI-driven world.
