civic tech | Steve Spiker

Did Open Data Deliver?

If delivery is the strategy, did it? Or is delivery maybe a principle of operating and transforming?

A former Sunlight Foundation (RIP) person recently shared some ideas on the promise and failure to deliver of the open data movement, and it was a good challenge and a good read. I see plenty of evidence that supports Tait’s perception, and I also have some aligned and some differing perceptions of that time and the time since. Indulge me, I haven’t written much for years so anything that makes me put down thoughts is a win, for me anyway. Best of luck to you!

So, has open data delivered on any of its promises?

I now work at a public agency, after being a trouble maker on the outside for decades. That agency, clumsily, has shared some really critical data on the county open data site- outside of the otherwise lengthy, technical PDFs we publish. This open data site exists because vendors offered a product, because we (residents, hackers etc) lobbied for open data policies and tools, because hackathons helped make tech officials look ever so slightly cool and gave them a chance to embrace something new, edgy, interesting and open, and because Sunlight and others helped foster a community of people who thought government COULD do better.

I recently ran into two county colleagues- one recalled me as having brought them into the first hackathon they participated in. The other was a pain in my ass who gave many excuses as to why open source and open data were too much. Open data is now a default for both their agencies, and a lot has been possible because of that shift in attitude.

When I consider the claim that real transparency hasn’t materialized, I think that the mileage vaies by city and state, and mostly that’s the truth- it has not. I’ve also seen journos tackle new things after pulling some open data, but I have not seen many smoking guns from it- the radical transparency of early access open data on things like land-use decisions has not materialized for a few reasons:

1- we’re not keeping up the pressure specifically,

2- deals are still done before much public discussion happens and,

3- no-one is making a case politically that this should happen, and also why not more reasons?

4- because some of this is pretty hard to pull off, and so without sufficient motivation, nope.

I think you could argue this represents a mainstreaming of an idea, which inherently makes it less radical, but also ensures the default has changed- have govtech companies made this a product to gain entry to scale sales, yes, for sure, and has open data become a more benign part of the Public Information Officer world, sure, in part. Are these things failures? Not particularly, they represent an adoption of ideas that are slightly more transparent, where norms have shifted towards open, and this is healthy for our democracy. What IS seriously different in 2025 than in 2010? There was a strong, growing movement of advocates pushing for open government, and Sunlight, OKF and others were the standard bearers. We now have open government as a product line, but not the same advocacy movement- without that passion, that leadership, that funding, experimenting, we should expect the formula to come up short.

I do remember how freaking hard it was to find data as an advocate and researcher- this has changed, a lot, but not everywhere, not all the time, not all at once either.

CityCamp is back baby

Posted on September 20 by spjika

Not back as in baggy jeans and flannel, back as in it’s happening in 9 cities across the country today, including the reboot of the much loved and sometimes criticized CityCampOakland. CityCamp is an open source event format, which gathers a diverse array of civic minded individuals to brainstorm ways to make their communities better, envision new ways to partner with local government, and form new communities of interest. As an unconference, people come and pitch their session ideas on the day, and the agenda is built around whoever shows up and pitches. It’s freeing and beautiful to see it take shape as sessions are presented, voted on and scheduled.

Sticky notes featuring session idea pitches — Session ideas being added to the wall today

We held the first CityCampOak back in 2012, at a very different time in our country and certainly different in the Town itself. It felt radical- taking over city council chambers in an approved use, and giving residents and city staff a chance to talk, think and learn together without the usual confrontation and tension that accompanies public meetings. We never consider these types of events a substitute for formal public proceedings and legal processes, but they are a powerful additional layer that has I think shown real value across the country. For me, CityCamp in San Francisco was a nexus of many paths of my work, and a catalyzing event that connected me to wonderful people who helped shape my journey in the coming years. it helped me see my efforts as part of something much grander, maybe even something important.

Oakland’s Chief Resiliency Officer speaking at CityCampOak 2025

As the USA slips ever deeper into fascist rule, it’s beautiful and powerful to see communities across this country gathering and refusing to give up on really making their city and their communities better, safer and healthier. Not “again”, but for the first time, for when in our country’s past were things great for Black people, or for our First Nations brothers and sisters, when in our nation was it safe to simply exist as a gay, lesbian or transgender individual?

Perhaps more people will start to look at more distributed models of doing things- as an open source idea, CityCamp was something we could get support from the creators and spin up our own local version really smoothly- yes it’s important for communities to develop their own concepts and event formats to meet their needs, but there’s so much power in sharing these and distributing them, supporting others to repeat what works. Each CityCamp I’ve attended in different cities has had a different feel, a different mix of local government staff engaged, and different themes, as you’d expect. This is fine with an open source model. As communities look at ways to resist the occupation of our cities and the creep of authoritarian rule, ideas and models like CityCamp have a part to play in forming new coalitions and efforts to aid each other and fight for justice.

Open source isn’t just about tech as people are starting to discover. There are models of mutual aid and resilience and resistance that have long been open sourced and shared and fostered across cities and states, we just don’t describe them as such. From the growth of land trusts like the Oakland Community Land Trust (that I had a tiny part in creating) to Sagorea Te’ Land Trust, who are in turn building on other open models of land trusts to preserve community control of land, to new models of organizing that are replicated across cities as a blueprint- what is a chapter after all if not a new copy of an organizing model in a new place, using an open playbook from the central body. This idea ain’t new.

I’ve found it is valuable to consider if your brilliant new idea justifies creating all the new infrastructure that a whole new organization requires- I often said in public that the last thing Oakland needed was another nonprofit, only to find myself and Eddie Tejeda creating one, then realizing it was more work to operate than was needed, and becoming part of a collaborative was a better choice, as happened with OpenOakland eventually.

So as ideas are formed, deliberated and acted upon at CityCamps today, take some time to consider if your new thing needs a whole new thing, or if you can find an open source (or just openly shared) model or example to build on from elsewhere- it will save you time, provide you with the wisdom of those who have gone before you, and let you grow into larger efforts to seek peace, justice, love and safety for our communities.

Keep talking, keep building, keep resisting; the people will overcome, in time. Fascism never wins in the long run.