Bloomberg Administration Resists Online Mandate, Citing User-Friendliness

datafolks Bloomberg Administration Resists Online Mandate, Citing User FriendlinessBloomberg administration officials just finished testifying at a City Council hearing at 250 Broadway on legislation that would require them to post more information online than ever.

Joe Pompeo previewed the legislation, and administration officials declined to comment on it at the time.

It is now clear that the administration disagrees pretty strongly, and views the potential requirements as a burden—the administration said complying with the legislation could cost as much as $500 million.

The bill’s author, City Councilwoman Gale Brewer, said she wants “raw data” the administration already collects to be posted online.

Sami Naim, assistant counselor to the mayor, testified that the data may be more accessible to the public if it’s “easy to use.” Brewer took this to mean that the data would be “processed” and therefore, not raw.

Joining Naim was Ariel Dvorkin, special assistant for policy and government for City Hall.

“Agency records encompass a lot of different categories,” Naim said. “You might have a thousand records that you can say in two lines. Our goal is to be as user-friendly with the public as possible.”

That led to a debate between them about who should be the focus of this type of initiative.

“We feel we further the goal of transparency the more user-friendly we can be,” said Naim. Later, he said, “Again, it starts with the customer. We build our entire initiatives, all our applications, around the customer.”

Brewer criticized that approach because, she said, most people don’t know what government does, and therefore aren’t in a position to know what information to ask for. She said she wanted an explicit policy that would determine what information the administration would release, rather than respond to what is already being searched and asked for.

“So, do you have a published, technical standards manual for the publication of city government data on the Net? Or do you just say that if somebody is interested in this topic, we’ll put it up?” asked Brewer.

“It’s not how much paper can you put up on the Internet,” Naim said. “It’s more, ‘How much can you engage New Yorkers.’” He went on to say, “It starts and ends with the customer.”

Brewer said, “I think you need to have a technical policy. You need to have standards—"

“Well, we’re already taking ourselves away from the customer,” Naim said.

Article continues below
More from Politics
STAR OF DAVID OR 'PLAIN STAR'?   If you thought "CP Time" was impolitic, on July 2 Donald Trump posted a picture on Twitter of a Star of David on top of a pile of cash next to Hillary Clinton's face. You'd think after the aforementioned crime stats incident (or after engaging a user called "@WhiteGenocideTM," or blasting out a quote from Benito Mussolini, or...) Trump would have learned to wait a full 15 seconds before hitting the "Tweet" button. But not only was the gaffe itself bad, the attempts at damage control made the BP oil spill response look a virtuoso performance.  About two hours after the image went up on Trump's account, somebody took it down and replaced it with a similar picture that swapped the hexagram with a circle (bearing the same legend "Most Corrupt Candidate Ever!"!). Believe it or not, it actually got worse from there. As reports arose that the first image had originated on a white supremacist message board, Trump insisted that the shape was a "sheriff's star," or "plain star," not a Star of David. And he continued to sulk about the coverage online and in public for days afterward, even when the media was clearly ready to move on. This refusal to just let some bad press go would haunt him later on.
Donald Trump More Or Less Says He’ll Keep On Tweeting as President