Accelerating SmartCities: A Conversation with Jay Nath of City Innovate

Jay Nath is a key national leader in systematizing how tech startups and municipalities can work together. His work came to national attention when he served as one of the first Chief Innovation Officers in the US, under the late Mayor Ed Lee of San Francisco. Nath's work with the city focused on connecting private sector expertise to the public sector, open data legislation, and supporting the creation of a Chief Data Officer in San Francisco. He's probably best known, however, for being a primary architect of the Startup in-Residence program. In February of 2018, Jay moved to serve as Co-Executive Director of City Innovate, for a full-time focus on the STIR program and associated efforts. Appropriately and amusingly, part of our recent interview with this urban warrior took place while he was commuting to work on his bike.


SA: Tell me about the last ten months, and about your decision to leave your position with the City of San Francisco?

JN: I had been serving in government for nearly 12 years and I asked myself, 'how can I accelerate and increase the impact we'd been having on city governments, especially working to expand the impact across the country. Generally, of course, I enjoy working with entrepreneurs and supporting their ability to make a positive impact in government. That mentorship and guidance process was personally and professionally satisfying to me, and I wanted to focus on it more.

All of this helped inform my decision to make this leap into City Innovate. Our mission is to support government in addressing challenges they face through emerging technologies. The Startup in Residence program has been around for five years and it's been great to see how much interest there's been across the US and in Canada. The tech and municipal worlds are very different and we see ourselves as part of the bridge between those worlds. We are now working with nearly 30 governments, from small cities to states. On the startup side, nearly 700 applied to participate in our last round. That's always inspiring. It's great to see so many talented people wanting to help government. Also, I'm inspired to see more governments willing to adapt to change. No one's telling them they have to do this, but they see a lot of opportunity and possibility and, believe it or not, they are very willing to have that conversation.

I also have to add that I'm seeing a lot more interest on the investor side, especially in the Bay Area. More capable talent coming in and there's specific interest in municipal IoT technologies and mobility solutions from those investors. That's not surprising, but the scale and level of interest has increased, and the skepticism around working with the public sector seems, to me at least, to be diminishing.

SA: Are you seeing any trends in terms of where startups are focusing their attention, domain-wise?

JN: Well, the truth is that our model is based on defining a municipal problem first and then letting startups respond. So, in that sense, we are helping to shape the focus of these startups and the startups that come to us are self-selected to focus on the most pressing municipal problems.

Let me give you an example. San Francisco was looking to reduce street litter and was dealing with overflowing trash cans. They were thinking about smart trash cans, but were also open behavioral - or design-based approaches. We worked to define the problem statement and help to bring a solution made by Nordsense out of Copenhagen through a competitive solicitation. They collaborated closely with SF Public Works, by installing fifty IoT sensors in public trash cans and proved that they could reduce the amount of street litter by 80%. In the areas of the pilot, requests related to overflowing trash cans dropped to nearly zero. Additionally, the city gained visibility into precisely when service providers were actually attending to trash cans; in the past, this had worked on the basis of trust alone.  Now, San Francisco is looking to deploy this capability across several thousand trash cans. This is a big deal for our city, which has been hit with plenty of criticism in this area.

Leaders in the city saw that tech can make a dramatic impact in a short time and I would say that they have growing self-confidence that they can solve these problems, that they can work with external partners in innovative way, that they can utilize data in innovative ways. So, there are second order impacts to a success like this.

SA: You seem to be emphasizing the criticality of those 'soft wins', in terms of changing perceptions and attitudes?

Absolutely. There is abundant tech and many, many great startups. The greater challenge is in engagement. City officials often do not have strong tech backgrounds and this is not an easy journey. Strong leadership is required and we simultaneously have to work with startups to drive cultural change. Culture is more important than administrative change.

SA: Have you explored working with the City of Austin?

JN: Yes, we've had some early communications there but would absolutely love to accelerate collaboration. Austin is a Tier I tech city in the US and I know that there are a wide range of interested leaders in this space. We look forward to more conversations here, and look forward to deepening our contacts.

Connecting with Coord: Urban Data Platform for the Mobility Market

In recent months, we’ve begun exploring opportunities to expand our connections between the Austin smart cities scene and that of some of the larger East Coast cities. In that process, we have come across some very cool and innovative startups, and we wanted to share more about one of them with you.

Coord, a New York City-based spinout from Alphabet Labs (recently raised $5M in its Series A), works to support the integration of mobility services into city life. A recent blog post of theirs gives us a taste of some of the potential that can be gained through richer data analysis and visualization.

First a bit of background on the company . . . From Wired: Coord “will build the cloud-based platform to integrate the many mobility services that have sprung up around the world's cities in the past few years—bike-sharing, car-sharing, and ride-hailing—plus more traditional transportation options, like public transit. .  . For a price, Coord will give the software developers at those companies access to thorough, local, standardized data on things like tolls, parking, and curb space. Critically, info can be shared across cities, instead of siloed in provincial departments.”

Coord’s most recent blog post focused on Washington, D. C.’s ongoing efforts to expand dockless biking/scootering. The analysis identifies patterns in the usage of mobility services across high/middle/low-income census tracts and the article comes complete with some nifty graphics, which we think you’ll enjoy. Differences across census tract categories included: differences in availability patterns for different, general lack of availability in certain tracts, and differences in availability patterns across times of day. The post (usefully) raises at least as many questions as answers, but should stoke the interest of those excited by the prospects of what richer data and visualizations can do for urban/mobility planning.

Take a look and let us know what you think!