In scoping
Municipal Governance
City councils. Zoning boards. Planning commissions. Business Improvement Districts. Housing authorities. Local development corporations. The bodies where land, money, and daily life actually get decided — and where the accountability infrastructure is thinnest.
Common accountability gaps in this area
- Variances are sometimes granted without published rationale; relationships between applicants and board members are not always disclosed.
- BIDs collect mandatory assessments from property owners, and can operate with corporate-level opacity.
- Contracts are sometimes awarded to vendors with prior performance concerns.
- Meeting notices can be technically compliant but functionally hard to find.
- Public-comment periods are sometimes scheduled during business hours, in less accessible locations, for decisions effectively already made.
What TASFGA will track
- Variance ledger — requests, rationale, grants, and relationships
- BID audits — assessment in, spending out, governance of that flow
- Zoning decision tracker — what changed, who benefited, who was not heard
- Meeting-access audits — notice, timing, accessibility, comment windows
- Vendor/contract transparency — who got paid for what, on whose recommendation
Why this matters
Most Americans' direct experience of governance is municipal. The potholes, the permit, the rezoning, the school board. These bodies control massive budgets and discretionary decisions with almost no external audit infrastructure. Accountability here is not exotic — it's the difference between a neighborhood that works and one that's been allowed to rot.