Honolulu voters will decide on November 3 whether to add a city data office to the charter. Question 15 is one of 20 charter measures on the ballot and asks voters to establish an Office of Innovation and Technology. The Hawaiʻi Data Collaborative describes the proposed entity as an Office of Data and Innovation, with responsibility for citywide data strategy, standards, accountability and artificial-intelligence review. The proposal was submitted by Thomas Lee, the Collaborative’s director of government partnerships, and was among nearly 300 submissions considered during the Charter Commission’s 10-year review process, according to Honolulu Civil Beat.
What would change
Honolulu already has a chief data officer position, but it exists because of a 2022 city ordinance rather than the charter. The ordinance passed unanimously, according to the Hawaiʻi Data Collaborative. Lee has argued, as reported by Civil Beat, that putting the office in the charter would make the position and its responsibilities less vulnerable to future changes by the mayor or City Council.
Question 15 would create a data office alongside, rather than inside, the Department of Information Technology. According to the Honolulu Department of Information Technology, the city centralizes its IT functions in one department. IT would continue to oversee technology and telecommunications systems, while the proposed data office would focus on how information is organized, shared, analyzed and used across departments. Supporters describe those functions as complementary: one maintains the underlying systems, while the other develops broader uses and standards for the information those systems produce.
The case for a permanent position
What existing oversight shows
Honolulu’s centralized IT structure would provide the administrative setting alongside which a charter-created data office would operate, according to the Honolulu Department of Information Technology. The available information does not establish current funding levels or performance measures for the city’s IT and data functions. Past oversight has identified systems-governance problems, but not as findings about Question 15 itself. In a separate audit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020, the Honolulu Office of the City Auditor reported several IT control deficiencies involving logical security and change management, according to the audit report. That finding predates the proposed data office, and the available records here do not establish whether related recommendations were implemented.
Kira Chuchom became Honolulu’s first chief data officer on April 1, 2024. The Hawaiʻi Data Collaborative says her career includes technology and data-strategy work at Microsoft and Cisco Systems, as well as service as San Francisco’s Management Information Systems manager. Since joining the city, she has published a citywide data plan and evaluated Honolulu’s data practices.
That assessment placed the city at level 1 on a five-level data-maturity scale, a stage identified in the plan as “Initial Chaotic,” according to Civil Beat’s reporting. The report said city departments often treat data as material to report rather than as a resource for broader analysis, rely on outside consultants for analytics and lack a large in-house pool of experienced data specialists. It also identified limited data sharing between departments.
The city’s public data resources provide some visible examples of the problem. The City Services section of the open-data portal contains one dataset, concerning building permits, while the portal lists a bike-rack dashboard last updated in 2012 and a bus-routes dashboard last updated in 2015. Civil Beat reported that the weaknesses also became significant during the pandemic, when the city needed stronger data systems to direct American Rescue Plan funds, evaluate equity and report program results.
Data, artificial intelligence and public accountability
Question 15 would also direct the proposed office to help create a city data plan, coordinate analytical work among departments and examine municipal artificial-intelligence use. Chuchom leads the city’s AI working group, which developed a proposed governance policy. That policy was awaiting review by city employee unions, and the city did not have a complete inventory of employee AI use, Civil Beat reported. The departments of Community Services and Planning and Permitting were already using AI in some capacity.
Other charter proposals considered by the commission would have addressed AI more specifically. Community groups and advocates proposed a public list of departmental AI tools, human review and appeal rights for decisions involving AI, and recurring public audits, according to News From The States. Those proposals are separate from Question 15, although Lee has said the proposed data office could eventually oversee responsible AI practices citywide.
The Office of Hawaiian Affairs supports Question 15 but sought language requiring community participation in decisions about how data is collected and used. OHA has described Native Hawaiian data governance as including the collection, sharing, disaggregation and governance of stories and other information. The community-engagement language was not included in the final version of the question, according to Civil Beat.
Positions and voter decision
Council Chair Tommy Waters has cited audits that criticized city departments’ data collection and reporting. Council communications director Aron Dote said the Council supports the proposal, while spokesperson Taylor Ursum said Waters was unavailable for an interview about it, according to Civil Beat. The central question for voters is whether these responsibilities should remain subject to ordinary legislation or receive a permanent place in the city charter.
