Data, Power, and Belonging
Guest Editor: Monique Ho
In today’s political and technological landscape, data has become a powerful tool and a pressing responsibility. As polarization, misinformation, and digital surveillance reshape public trust, the questions of what we collect, why, and who decides are no longer just technical concerns. At Cityfi, we see this reality every day in our work with public agencies, private innovators, and community leaders. The ways we manage data have wide-ranging implications for how communities and businesses function, grow, and make decisions.
This month’s newsletter explores how better data practices–rooted in shared values, not just shared servers–can transform policy, relationships, and outcomes. From the early challenges of scooter data sharing to today’s collaborative frameworks behind next-generation curb management, we unpack how thoughtful data stewardship unlocks alignment between public goals and private innovation. We also surface the less visible costs of data, from environmental impact to overcollection, and how communities on the ground are pushing for data infrastructure that reflects their lived experience and safeguards their rights.
Across these stories runs a shared thread: data is not neutral. It can reinforce hierarchies or redistribute power. It can isolate or build belonging. And as this newsletter’s contributors highlight, the future of effective governance will depend on our ability to treat data not just as a commodity or compliance measure, but as a civic good.
We hope this newsletter sparks new ideas, deeper questions, and stronger resolve to shape a data future that works for everyone.
Data Specifications as a Policy Tool: How to Align Private Vendors with Public Values
Image Source: Open Mobility Foundation
By Marla Westervelt
"Well, you clearly don’t understand business," huffed a Senior Vice President at Bird. It was 2018—the early, chaotic days of e-scooter sharing, where I was leading our data sharing policy.
Cities had just begun requiring companies like Bird to produce real-time data feeds using the General Bikeshare Feed Specification (GBFS). At the time, the spec was simple — it required companies to publish a public API endpoint that listed available scooters and their locations. That was it.
I had just gotten off a call with a city official. They couldn’t access Bird’s GBFS feed—we were out of compliance with our permit. It was now my job to figure out why, and fix it.
What seemed like a simple technical hiccup turned out to be a window into a deeper strategic divide—one that urban tech companies still face today—are data standards and data sharing a regulatory burden, or a strategic opportunity?
Before I could contemplate that question, I had to solve my immediate problem. Nothing about early stage start up infrastructure is intuitive. There was no handy admin dashboard for the policy team and no way for me to just log in and flip the feed back on. I had to track down whoever had turned it off—and figure out why.
When I did, the SVP who had made the decision to turn off the feed made his stance clear. It felt like a reminder of hierarchy, but I held firm. Bird’s ability to operate in that city depended on turning the feed back on. If leadership believed enabling that data was more harmful than losing a permit, I needed to understand why—and identify whether there was an alternative path forward.
He explained the fear—if we made this data public, competitors would consume the data, reverse-engineer our operations, and gain an edge.
I pushed back. Sharing this data wasn’t optional—it was a condition of operation. Our competitors were also producing feeds. We could consume their data, too. A level playing field. That caught his attention.
Eventually, we turned the feed back on.
That moment wasn’t the first or last of many internal debates around data standards. And Bird was hardly alone. These tensions are common in urban tech—especially in sectors where business-to-consumer (B2C) companies operate in the public right of way. It's not a failure of leadership, it's a reflection of how new this terrain was in 2018—but many of those growing pains are still with us in 2025.
Over a half a decade later, Bird has evolved dramatically, learning many lessons about collaborating with regulators the hard way. They now share data with partners proactively, including the advance provision of MDS 2.0 with select cities.
Yet, their experience is instructive. Early regulatory challenges in urban tech showed what happens when companies treat data sharing as a burden rather than a tool. For CEOs and VCs building city-regulated consumer products—like AVs, drones, delivery robots, or short-term rentals—the lesson is clear: engaging early with data standards can unlock trust, streamline operations, and create durable market advantages. The companies that embrace this approach won’t just avoid regulatory setbacks—they’ll lead the next generation of urban innovation.
There are five recommendations that I suggest to help fuel this shift, which you can read more about in the Cityfi blog. A lot has changed since the early scooter battles of 2018—but the fundamentals hold. Companies that align early with public goals, build for interoperability, and lean into transparency don’t just survive—they lead. The future of mobility won’t be built behind closed doors. It’ll be built in partnership—one data feed at a time.
Bringing It All Together: The Importance of Data Frameworks
By Ryan Parzick
At Cityfi, one of our core strengths is helping diverse groups—each with their own goals and priorities—work together toward a shared outcome. A recent example is our work with the Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator (LACI)’s Curb Management Program, funded by the Department of Energy’s Vehicle Technologies Office (DOE VTO). This pilot initiative brought together academic and federal research institutions, private technology firms, and local governments to tackle urban transportation challenges using smart curb management strategies.
The program tested zero-emission loading zones (ZELZ) and smart loading zones (SLZ) in three cities, aiming to boost electric vehicle (EV) adoption, reduce emissions, improve curb turnover, and generate actionable data on congestion. Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) technology was deployed to gather real-world data, informing both microscale and macroscale modeling efforts.
Sounds straightforward—but effective data sharing is rarely that simple. For the project to succeed, all partners needed to align on how data was collected, formatted, and analyzed. That’s where Cityfi came in.
As part of our role in the DOE VTO Curb Management Program, we led the development of a unified metrics framework to align the capabilities, interests, and objectives of all stakeholders. This involved distinguishing between upstream and downstream data flows, and clarifying which metrics were core to the project versus those that were elective. Through facilitation and collaboration, we helped define project-wide metrics, identify data sources to supplement the ALPR data, and ensure compatibility and completeness of model inputs and outputs across the various teams.
Once consensus was reached, we created a comprehensive data framework. This included a data schema illustrating how collected data connected to model inputs, outputs, measures, and metrics—all presented through intuitive graphics. The framework also standardized variable names, formats, and definitions across partner teams, while surfacing gaps in data coverage critical to achieving project goals.
The result? A robust, accessible, and replicable framework that not only supported the immediate needs of the project but also serves as a roadmap for future cities looking to adopt similar strategies. The LACI Curb Management Program shows what’s possible when diverse teams work in alignment. Cityfi’s role in creating a clear, shared data framework ensured that all partners could collaborate effectively. As cities continue to tackle the complexities of mobility, equity, and climate, this work offers a replicable model for how to move from siloed systems to shared solutions.
Interested in learning more about how we may be able to help you? Reach out and we’d be happy to talk!
The Cost of Knowing Too Much
Image Source: Colocation America
As important as advanced analytics are to shaping smarter, more responsive public services, we’re living in an age when collecting certain data carries massive risks—many of which extend beyond privacy.
Recent headlines about state-level surveillance and data breaches brought me back to my time at the Brooklyn Public Library, where our commitment to protecting patron privacy wasn’t just policy—it was a value. That value came with tradeoffs. Library patrons never received the kind of personalized recommendations they might expect from Amazon or Netflix. We didn’t track their reading habits, store search histories, or sell behavioral data. And while the library remains a trusted community institution because of that restraint (something I reflect on with deep gratitude these days), it also meant we sacrificed some of the efficiencies and conveniences that personalization could bring.
That tension is playing out across the public sector today. Many government agencies are being asked to do more with less—providing responsive, tailored services while maintaining public trust and minimizing risk. I want to be clear: I do believe in the power of data to improve public services. But we need to be thoughtful about when it’s essential and when it’s just “nice to have.” This means not only asking what data we need to deliver better services, but also asking who is best positioned to gather, hold, and use that data—and at what cost.
Too often, the cost conversation stops at ethics and cybersecurity. But there’s another, less visible cost we rarely talk about at the local level: climate impact. Data centers already consume 1–1.3% of global electricity, according to the International Energy Agency’s 2024 report—a figure that is expected to grow as artificial intelligence and digital services expand. Training just one large AI model can generate over 626,000 pounds of CO₂ emissions, the equivalent of driving five average (internal combustion engine) American cars for their entire lifespans. Even storing and processing basic data requires energy and water: in 2021, Google reported using more than 4.3 billion gallons of water in the U.S. to cool its data centers.
That doesn’t mean we abandon the promise of smart systems. But it does mean we need to be smarter about how and why we collect data in the first place. Not every service needs to be hyper-personalized. Not every system needs to be monitored in real time. And perhaps most importantly, not every public agency needs to build those capabilities internally. This opens the door to new collaborations—with nonprofits, libraries, community networks, and yes, even the private sector—to meet data needs responsibly, sustainably, and in line with public values.
We often say Cityfi is about systems thinking—and that includes understanding the full system costs of digital infrastructure. As governments move toward “smarter” solutions, let’s make sure they’re also more intentional, equitable, and climate-conscious. Sometimes, knowing less can actually serve us more.
Future-Proofing Policy: Building Community Data Infrastructure
Image Source: NordVPN
By Monique Ho
As cities and regions grapple with complex challenges–from housing unaffordability to climate resilience–one key tool is increasingly essential to equitable and effective policymaking: community data. But not just any data. To truly future-proof policy, we must invest in community-centered data infrastructure: systems built not only for insight, but also for inclusion, accountability, and shared power.
That was the central theme of the North American Equity Data Convening hosted by the Othering & Belonging Institute (OBI) at UC Berkeley. The Convening brought together researchers, organizers, policymakers, and technologists committed to advancing equity through better data practices. Through panels and workshops, participants explored how to dismantle harmful data regimes and build infrastructure that reflects and responds to the needs and values of historically marginalized communities. These are the same goals that drive many of Cityfi’s engagements, whether it’s helping local governments reimagine their approach to mobility data, or co-designing public engagement strategies rooted in transparency and trust.
A key insight from the Convening: data is not neutral. The ways we collect, interpret, and deploy data often mirror and reinforce existing systems of exclusion. For instance, data about communities of color is too often extracted without consent, decontextualized, or weaponized to justify disinvestment or surveillance. Future-proofing policy means flipping this script.
Best practices discussed at the Convening offer a roadmap for doing just that:
Responsible Collection
Data must be collected with intention and care. That means developing ethical protocols, including community-informed consent processes, and avoiding over-surveillance. It also means investing in qualitative, narrative, and participatory methods–tools that uplift lived experience, not just numerical representation.
Meaningful Sharing
Too often, data is locked behind technical, legal, or institutional barriers. To be useful, data must be accessible–not just in format, but in meaning. Community organizations need access to raw and processed data, presented in culturally competent ways, so they can use it to advocate for their needs.
Equitable Stewardship
Control over data should not rest solely with institutions. Instead, stewardship should reflect the principles of trust, transparency, and reciprocity. This can include data trusts, advisory councils with community representation, or co-governance models that ensure community voices help set the rules.
Shared Ownership
Perhaps the most transformative is the practice of sharing ownership over data. This involves recognizing the knowledge and labor that community members contribute–and ensuring they have a say in how their data is used, what stories it tells, and how it shapes policies. Projects like OBI’s Inclusiveness Index exemplify this principle by involving community partners in all stages of data design and interpretation. At Cityfi, we believe the same principle must underpin public and private sector innovation by recognizing communities as co-creators of knowledge and strategy.
As we look ahead, building robust, inclusive community data infrastructure isn’t just a technical challenge–it’s a moral and democratic one. Future-proof policy depends on our ability to embed equity into the very architecture of information we rely on as planners, policymakers, and community leaders. That means supporting the grassroots groups already building data power, reforming institutional data practices, and funding long-term capacity in communities themselves.
The path forward is clear: to shape a more just future, we must start with how we know and who gets to decide what counts as knowing. Data is not just about evidence–it’s about belonging. And at Cityfi, we are committed to helping cities and regions build the inclusive data ecosystems that make belonging possible.
The Cityfi Cluster #2
By Ryan Parzick
Ever play the New York Times Connections game? Here is our second iteration of our own Cityfi version for you to play! If you haven’t played before, that’s OK. The rules are simple - but hopefully, solving the game is not! The challenge: group the 16 words into 4 groups of 4. Each group has a unifying theme. You get one shot, so make it count. If you think you have the correct solution, please email us with your 4 groups (you must provide the unifying theme) and the 4 words contained in each theme. An example of a unifying theme could be “Types of Animals” containing the words: “dog,” “cat,” “rabbit,” “deer.” We’ll keep score throughout the year to crown the 2025 Cityfi Cluster Champion. Let’s GO!
We’ll keep score throughout the year to crown the 2025 Cityfi Cluster Champion. The answer will be posted in our next newsletter. If you want your score to count, please submit your answer before June 7th.
Last month’s solutions are:
Words Associated with an Electric Vehicle: Battery, Charger, Leaf, Zero
Revenue Generation Sources for Cities: Parking, Permit, Fine, License
City Names that end with the word “City”: Ocean, Dodge, Rapid, Atlantic
Words Associated with Earth Day: Planet, Green, Climate, April
Where in the World is Cityfi?
Check out where Cityfi will be in the upcoming weeks. We may be speaking at conferences, leading workshops, hosting events, and/or actively engaging in collaborative learning within the community. We would love to see you.
US Conference of Mayors - Tampa, FL - June 19 - 22
Join Partner Story Bellows in Tampa at the US Conference of Mayors next month! If you will be at the Conference or just hanging out in Tampa, let Story know!
Chicago City Builders Book Club - Chicago, IL - June 25
If you live in Chicago, check out the Cityfi sponsored Chicago City Builders Book Club typically every 4th Wednesday of each month. Principal Marla Westervelt co-hosts this monthly book club where we bring together professional city builders to discuss Chicago-centric books that explore local urban and political issues. Come join us for an evening of food, drinks, and discussions with other local wonks. Next month’s book is still to be determined, so reach out to Marla if you are interested in learning more or attending!
What We’re Reading
Curated by Ryan Parzick
Articles handpicked by the Cityfi team we have found interesting:
Climate: Mayors are making climate action personal. It's working.
Mobility: Zero Emissions Transit: Take the Gondola Out to the Ball Game
CleanTech: Voltpost just flipped the switch on its first public lamppost EV charger
City Planning: Groundwater Pumping Is Contributing to the Sinking of Major U.S. Cities
Job Openings
We’re hiring for a Senior Associate! If you are interested in joining our team, here’s your chance. Please feel free to share with those who you think would be great Cityfiers.
All Things Cityfi
Your guide to our services, portfolio of client engagements, team, and…well, all things Cityfi.