The document summarizes the civic engagement process for the Array of Things project in Chicago. It describes how public feedback was gathered through an online policy co-creation platform called MyMadison.io, online forms, and public meetings. The engagement methods aimed to build awareness of the project, address community needs, and gather input on draft governance and privacy policies. Lessons learned included the challenges of informing and engaging communities at the same time, balancing technical transparency with accessibility, and using multiple feedback collection tools to accommodate different participation preferences.

1.
Array of Things Civic
Engagement Report
A Summary of Public Feedback & the Civic Engagement Process
August 2016
Prepared by the ​ Smart Chicago Collaborative​ for the residents of Chicago, the City of Chicago,
and the operators of the Array of Things: ​ Urban Center for Computation and Data​ , a research
initiative of the ​ Computation Institute at the University of Chicago​ and ​ Argonne National
Laboratory​ .
Denise Linn, Program Analyst
Glynis Startz, Harvard Ash Center Summer Fellow

2.
Introduction
Background
Methods of Resident Engagement
MyMadison.io
Online Forms
Public Meetings
Meeting in Libraries
Meeting Components
Documentation
Summary of Public Feedback
On Array of Things operators and partners
On data collection & personally identifiable information (PII)
On data sharing & accessibility
On public notice & community engagement
Miscellaneous project questions
Lessons for Future Engagement Efforts with Urban Sensors & the Internet of Things
Informing & engaging at the same time is a challenge
There is a trade­off between technical transparency and accessibility
It’s just as important to communicate what the sensors can’t do
Be tool agnostic when it comes to public feedback collection
Important Links & Resources
1

3.
Introduction
As smart cities embrace and deploy innovative technology embedded in public spaces,
residents voices need to be represented. To prevent disconnect between residents and their
city’s technology, broad engagement is key — not only to inform residents of innovations, but to
take inventory of public concerns and questions associated with them.
The purpose of this report is to describe the civic engagement and resident feedback collection
process associated with a new Internet of Things (IoT) initiative in Chicago: ​The Array of Things​.
This report outlines the methods, decisions, and philosophies that went into this effort to
increase Chicagoans’ engagement and involvement with smart city technology. Since the
deployment of Internet of Things is so timely for cities around the world, we’ve shared the
lessons we gleaned from our work. We hope this information can be of service to similar
projects in other cities.
About Smart Chicago.​ Smart Chicago is a civic organization devoted to improving lives in
Chicago through technology. Smart Chicago was founded in 2011 and is guided by three
organizations: the ​City of Chicago​, the ​MacArthur Foundation​, and the ​Chicago Community
Trust​. We are guided by our principles — technology, open, everyone, and Chicago — and we
stay focused on providing access, skills, and data. The Smart Chicago model is based on a lean
organization focused on have a broad regional impact, centered among philanthropy and
government.
Background
Array of Things​ is an urban sensing project — one of the first of this kind and scale. Sensors will
be placed across Chicago starting in August of 2016 to measure livability factors like climate,
pedestrian traffic, air quality, and flooding. The sensors will collect data about our city. That data
will then be released publically for residents and researchers to interpret and use.
The Smart Chicago Collaborative has committed to educate and engage residents with this new
IoT project which is operated by the ​Urban Center for Computation and Data​ (UrbanCCD) — a
research initiative of the ​Computation Institute at the University of Chicago​ and ​Argonne
National Laboratory​ — and implemented in partnership with the City of Chicago.
This engagement work aligns​ with Smart Chicago’s ​guiding principles​: open, everyone,
technology, and Chicago. We want to facilitate a transparent conversation in Chicago about
data, sensors, the ​Internet of Things​, and how we can put these things in service to the people.
2

4.
The first goal of this engagement work was to build citywide awareness around Array of Things.
The second goal was to aid the operators of Array of Things in their research to address
community needs. The third goal (and the focal point of this report) was to aid the City of
Chicago in gathering input on draft governance and privacy policies for Array of Things. These
policies were developed in cooperation between the operators of the Array of Things and the
City, with input provided by an independent policy board including the ​American Civil Liberties
Union​, the ​Electronic Frontier Foundation​, and the ​Center for Applied Cybersecurity Research​.
For more information on Array of Things, see its​ project website​ and ​FAQs​.
Methods of Resident Engagement
Smart Chicago, in partnership with the City of Chicago and Urban CCD, collected public
feedback on the Array of Things Governance & Privacy Policies in three ways: public meetings,
online forms, and the new ​OpenGov Foundation​ tool ​MyMadison.io​. All feedback collected in
3

5.
person and online during the public comment period was eventually consolidated on
MyMadison.io and can be seen ​at this link​.
While having one centralized feedback collection method would have been simpler, we found
that the added accessibility to residents was worth the complication of using multiple platforms.
Preserving varied feedback loops including off­line, anonymous, and accessible modes of
engagement was a priority.
MyMadison.io
The ​OpenGov Foundation’s Madison​ tool is a government policy co­creation platform that
collects public edits on policy or legislation. Here is how the ​OpenGov Foundation​ describes
Madison​:
Madison is a government policy co­creation platform that opens up laws and legislation
previously off­limits to individuals and the Internet community. Launched to battle the
Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), it has since been used to power citizen participation in
government policymaking in the United States Congress. With Madison, you can
access the law as it’s being written, leave comments, annotate specific content, and
interact with other civic­minded participants. Madison brings the lawmaking process
straight to you, and gives you a say in your government’s decisions.
The MyMadison.io values of openness and collaboration aligned with the Smart Chicago’s
values as well as the goals of this Array of Things Engagement Project and the guiding
principles of the Array of Things Governance and Privacy Policies. The entire draft of the Array
of Things Privacy and Governace Policies was posted on MyMadison.io on Monday, June 13,
2016 and remained open for public annotation, edits, and comments online during the two week
comment period.
4

6.
The OpenGov Foundation is still improving Madison’s functionality for both resident and
institutional users. In the spirit of building better civic technology, we wanted to partner as an
early adopter of Madison in Chicago. We saw the potential of Madison not only as a means of
co­building draft public policy, but also as a landing page to centralize resident feedback from
other sources.
“Madison is a technology platform that lets residents dive into a proposed policy’s
language and make specific suggestions. It also compliments other important
modes of civic engagement and feedback collection like public meetings and
traditional comment processes. Using Madison to collect public input on the Array
of Things governance and privacy policy aligns with Smart Chicago’s dedication to
civic engagement with and through technology.” — ​Kyla Williams​, Interim
Executive Director of the Smart Chicago Collaborative
5

7.
Knowing the range of Chicago residents’ digital skills and engagement preferences, Smart
Chicago also wanted to complement this platform with a simple online form and public
meetings. Questions and comments from those other in­person and online feedback loops
would later be incorporated into Madison.
Online Forms
Smart Chicago and our partners saw the importance of preserving an anonymous, low­barrier
medium to providing feedback on the Array of Things policies. Participation in a meeting
required time, effort, and transportation. Participation on Madison required creating an account,
having an email address, and attaching your name to a comment or question.
A PDF of the online form form can be found ​here​. All responses can be found ​in this folder​. With
the exceptions of organizations or individuals that explicitly included their names and contact
information within their comments, the forms in that folder are anonymized.
Public Meetings
Smart Chicago hosted public meetings for residents to learn about Array of Things directly from
the project’s operators and the City of Chicago, ask questions, and provide input through
community discussion.
Meeting in Libraries
We held two community meetings during the public comment period ­ the first at Lozano Library
on Tuesday, June 14th from 5:30pm to 7pm and the second at Harold Washington Library on
Wednesday, June 22nd from 5:30pm to 7pm. These locations were targeted because they were
close to the first projected locations of the Array of Things sensors. The map for those proposed
locations ​can be found here​.
6

8.
Why libraries? Smart Chicago has found value in hosting events at ​Chicago Public Library
Branches​ because they are close to public transportation, host regular community
programming, and are trusted, familiar neighborhood institutions. We hold ​CUTGroup​ (Civic
User Testing Group) tests at public libraries for these reasons. Libraries are also beacons of
information in communities. We chose not to have these meetings in tech­oriented or
academically­oriented spaces. As much as possible, we wanted to capture and increase the
comfort level of community members who did not yet self identify with the Chicago tech scene or
with academic circles already following IoT projects and news.
Meeting Components
These public meetings had several components:
● A presentation on Array of Things from the project’s operators, including a summary
presentation of the privacy & governance policies
● Community discussion and Q&A
7

9.
● Resources for further action. We had ​handouts​ for residents instructing them in how to
take further action as well as laptops set up for residents to see the ​Array of Things
website​ and provide feedback on the ​Array of Things governance and privacy policy​.
The June 14th public meeting featured Spanish language support. The June 22nd public
meeting also featured guests from the OpenGov Foundation who assisted residents in
signing up for a MyMadison.io user account
● Food. For the June 14th public meeting at Lozano Library, dinner was catered by
Taquería Sabor y Sazón​. For the 6.22 Public Meeting at Harold Washington Library,
dinner was catered by ​Corner Bakery
Documentation
These meetings were advertised online and through flyering. Smart Chicago documenters
distributed flyers at public computing centers, coffee shops, anchor institutions, small
businesses, Alderman Offices, and other community organizations.
8

10.
Members of ​our documenter program​ also recorded proceedings through photography, notes,
and social media, all of which can be found on the Smart Chicago website. ​Here is a blog post
centralizing documentation from the June 14th Public Meeting at Lozano Library and ​here is a
blog post​ centralizing documentation from the June 22nd Public meeting at Harold Washington
Library.
Summary of Public Feedback
An inventory of feedback can be found on ​Madison​ and on this ​spreadsheet​. Responses to that
feedback can be found ​on this website​ authored by the operators of Array of Things. This
feedback helped shape the​ final version of the Array of Things Governance & Privacy Policies​.
Here are the stats about participation & policy feedback:
● About 40 residents attended the 6/14 public meeting at Lozano Library in Pilsen
● About 40 residents attended the 6/22 public meeting at Harold Washington Library in the
Loop
● Here is a breakdown of the public feedback received:
○ 36 questions, comments or annotations from 7 unique account holders originally
collected from MyMadison.io
○ 21 questions, comments or annotations recorded from the 6.14 Array of Things
Public Meeting (later placed on the MyMadison.io page)
○ 14 questions, comments or annotations recorded from the 6.22 Array of Things
Public Meeting (later placed on the MyMadison.io page)
○ 9 Wufoo online form submissions (later placed on the MyMadison.io page) — 6
from individuals and 3 from groups (see below)
Among the feedback collected, three groups or institutions submitted collective, multi­part
comments on the policies:
● a group from the ​Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security 2016 (SOUPS 2016)
including Lorrie Faith Cranor of Carnegie Mellon University, Alain Forget of Google, 1
Patrick Gage Kelley of the University of New Mexico, and Jen King of UC Berkeley
● the ​Future of Privacy Forum (FPF)​, a Washington, DC based think tank that seeks to
advance responsible data practices.
● the ​FAiR Coalition​, a coalition of community organizations dedicated to the equitable
distribution of O’Hare and Midway Traffic
1
The comment clarified that Lorrie Cranor is currently on leave from Carnegie Mellon University, serving as
Chief Technologist at the US Federal Trade Commission. Comments were her own views and do not
necessarily represent the views of the Commission or any Commissioner
9

11.
Below is a high­level summary of public input (from individuals and institutions) organized by
broad categories. Public input came in the form of questions, requests for more information or
clarity, project suggestions, general comments, and formatting/language edits of the policies
themselves. These points of interest should be noted by other cities and technologists who seek
to understand and comprehensively address public questions about the Internet of Things. In
general, commenting residents and institutions wanted to know about partner roles and
accountability, how data collection and security worked, and how the community could engage
with the new technology.
All comments can be found on the ​Array of Things Governance & Privacy Policy Madison Page​.
The operators of Array of Things have responded to these comments. Those responses can be
found ​at this link​.
On Array of Things operators and partners
Comments from both residents and institutions asked for more clarity on Array of Things
partners and their roles. They were interested in who was accountable, who owned the data, the
University of Chicago’s role, and how partners like SAIC and Smart Chicago contribute to the
10

12.
project. Commenters also asked about the process for onboarding new, interested partners. In
feedback collected online and in person, there were recommendations for new partners that
could add value to the Array of Things.
It should be noted that since the community engagement events, the operators of Array of
Things have created ​an online form​ for community ideas and suggestions.
On data collection & personally identifiable information (PII)
There were comments and questions about personally identifiable information (PII) processed,
secured, and deleted by the Array of Things sensors. There were requests for more details on
the management of images, what the images will capture and not capture, how data will be
encrypted, who will have access to the images, how long the images will be stored, and how
they will be deleted.
11

13.
On a related note, commenters recommended that the privacy policy include a clear process for
when residents believe their personally identifiable information has been publically shared
accidently and would like it removed. There were also questions about the purpose and public
value of collecting images and data as set up by the Array of Things project.
On data sharing & accessibility
Commenters asked for more information about the Array of Things sensor data that would
become public. They were interested in exactly how open the data would be and what the data
would look like once posted on sources like the ​Chicago Data Portal​. Commenters also sought
more information about potential third party researchers who would have access to raw,
calibration data — who they might be and the systems of accountability that would govern their
work.
Several commenters inquired about how data collected from Array of Things sensors would
interact with Chicago’s law enforcement and other third parties. Three commenters specifically
brought up warrants. There was interest as to what extent any PII collected would be subject to
Freedom of Information Act disclosure requests. Commenters were also interested in law
enforcement use cases as they relate to future iterations of the Array of Things sensors.
On public notice & community engagement
Commenters supported civic outreach efforts and recommended more and continued work on
that front. Commenters identified the selection of future sensor node locations as an opportunity
to involve residents and community organizations in the Array of Things project. There were
several questions about how and if residents could be involved in selecting or informing sensor
node placement. Now the​ Array of Things operators’ new online form​ asks for resident ideas
and suggestions for node locations.
In general, commenters expressed interest in more ways of engaging with or learning about
Array of Things. Aside from collecting resident feedback on the project and the project policies,
commenters recommended that everyday “notice” be prioritized for affected Chicago residents.
Commenters recommended that Array of Things Operators clarify when residents will be alerted
in a variety of ways (including methods friendly to low­tech or low­literacy residents) when they
are in range of a node or in a node area. Methods recommended include plain­language signs,
short links, or QR codes.
12

14.
Miscellaneous project questions
There were some miscellaneous questions about the sensors themselves. Residents at public
meetings were interested in details like why aluminum was chosen for the devices, what types
of computers were in the sensors, and at what height the sensors would be placed.
Residents, especially those at public meetings, asked general project questions about Array of
Things as well. There were questions about whether other cities were deploying these sensors,
whether the sensors were capable of measuring cancer­causing pollutants, and whether funding
for the project would continue (and from where).
13

15.
Lessons for Future Engagement Efforts with Urban
Sensors & the Internet of Things
Smart Chicago has extracted several lessons that will inform our future engagement
approaches with “smart city” projects. We hope these lessons also be useful and relevant to
organizations in other cities undertaking similar technology engagement work, especially as
they relate to privacy and governance.
Informing & engaging at the same time is a challenge
The public meetings were structured in such a way so attendees did not have to have any
technical knowledge or project background to attend. Still, soliciting feedback from residents
in­person was a challenge when there was so much background information to get through first.
When residents aren’t familiar with a project, it follows that the quality or amount of sincere
feedback on that project would be naturally limited. In ​their blog post​ reflecting on the June 22nd
Public Meeting, the OpenGov Foundation made a similar observation of this challenge:
The concepts behind AoT, it is safe to say, rest on rather advanced, cutting­edge
technical knowledge. It took a full 70 minutes of the 90 minute session for the
presenters to simply explain AoT. And of the remaining 20 minutes, all but five were
devoted to basic questions.
The lesson for other cities or projects to glean from this challenge would be to undergo a wider
awareness campaign to inform residents of the who, what, where, when, and why of the project
before asking residents to react to that project.
There is a trade-off between technical transparency and accessibility
Though several Array of Things policy commenters recommended less technical language,
others also called for ​more technical detail for the sake of transparency. For future IoT project
and engagement efforts, this trade­off should be taken note of and balanced.
The lesson for other cities or projects would be to communicate not only the content of their
policies, but also communicate more about the design of the policy — for instance, why it was
chosen to be a certain length, what regulations or principles informed its structure, and why
certain information is left out or placed in another document. Another potential approach would
be to, as some commenters suggested, layer the public policies; publish a transparent, technical
policy, but also a supplementary that piece with a glossary or summary points. In short, it might
14

16.
be wise to create documentation that is accessible ​along with documentation that is thorough,
but not attempt to accomplish both goals at once.
It’s just as important to communicate what the sensors can’t do
The recurring questions about law enforcement scenarios, cell phone companies, and sound
recordings during the public comment period for the Array of Things governance and privacy
policies show that more explicit, public descriptions of what the sensors ​can’t measure was
needed.
There were several comments that showed the need for this clarity. For example, commenters
asked about functions that sensors didn’t have — capturing video and cellphone information, for
instance. Charlie Catlett of ​UrbanCCD​ and Brenna Berman of the ​City of Chicago​ clarified
during the June 22, 2016 public meeting that Array of Things sensors are not capable of
interacting with a cell phones. The public meetings and online literature on Array of Things
clarifies that, while data on sound levels is collection, actual sound is not recorded. The
concerns expressed during the public comment period revealed a project messaging and
communication issue that can be fixed in the future.
Be tool agnostic when it comes to public feedback collection
Smart Chicago used three feedback loops to collect public feedback on this project: Madison,
online forms, and public meetings. Given complications surrounding digital skills, Internet
access, desires for anonymity, communication preferences, and varied desires of involvement, it
was beneficial to preserve a variety of engagement modes. Meeting residents where they are is
an important priority — one we’re sure we can improve on in the future.
Our recommendation for other cities or organizations undertaking smart city or IoT engagement
work would to be flexible and tool agnostic. Though the subject at hand is technology, the
modes of engagement should not always be technical. In a smart city, there can still be room for
low­tech outreach and engagement methods like flyering and personal outreach.
15

17.
We look forward to observing and learning from alternative approaches taken by other cities and
organizations deploying smart city infrastructure and the Internet of Things. We publish this
information in the hope that our methods and lessons will contribute to the community of
practice and to the co­building and constant improvement of inclusive smart cities.
Important Links & Resources
● Array of Things Governance & Privacy Policy on Madison​ ­ centralizes, visualizes all
resident questions and comments made during the comment period from June 13 ­ June
27, 2016. ​You can also see the comments on a spreadsheet here
● The operators of Array of Things have responded to each comment individually. ​Those
responses can be found here
16

18.
● Here are the final ​Array of Things Governance & Privacy Policies
● Here is the event flyer ​for the 6.14 Public Meeting at Lozano Library
● Here is the event flyer ​for the 6.22 Public Meeting at Harold Washington Library
● Here are ​the slides​ presented by Charlie Catlett of UrbanCCD at the events
● Here are ​the slides​ presented by Brenna Berman, CIO for the City of Chicago at the
6.22.16 Public Meeting
● Pictures from the 6.14 Public meeting can be found in ​this Flickr album
● Pictures from the 6.22 Public meeting can be found in ​this Flickr album
● The 6.14 Public Meeting was catered by ​Taquería Sabor y Sazón
● The 6.22 Public Meeting was catered by ​Corner Bakery
● Here is the ​Meeting Agenda​ for the 6.14 Public Meeting
● Here is the ​Meeting Agenda​ for the 6.22 Public Meeting
● Here is a link to the ​Array of Things Governance & Privacy Policy
● Here is a handout created by Smart Chicago and distributed at both Public Meetings:
“How to Provide Feedback on the Array of Things Governance & Privacy Policy”
● A Storify ​of the 6.14 Public Meeting
● A Storify​ of the 6.22 Public Meeting
● A map​ of the proposed locations for sensor nodes
17