Last year, Nate Sanford filed a “silly story” for Spokane’s alt-weekly Inlander about a state senator getting into a Twitter argument with an AI porn spambot. The bot was eventually suspended after Spokane’s mayor reported the account.

But a city employee mentioned to Sanford, now a reporter at KNKX and Cascade PBS, that they’d been testing AI tools at work. That offhand comment sparked Sanford’s curiosity about how local governments were actually using generative artificial intelligence and led to a series of investigations that revealed how chatbots are quietly embedding into the machinery of local government.

Sanford used extensive public records of ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot logs from city employees to show, among other things, the city of Bellingham’s draft AI policy was written with the help of ChatGPT.

I get excited when I see an intriguing use of FOIA to demystify local government. And leading Poynter’s AI work, you can imagine how I geeked out when I saw Sanford’s investigations.

Here is how they start:

When the Lummi Nation applied for funding to hire a crime victims coordinator last year, Bellingham Mayor Kim Lund sent a letter encouraging the Washington Department of Commerce to award the nation a state grant.

“The Lummi Nation has a strong history of community leadership and a deep commitment to the well-being of its members,” the letter read. “The addition of a Coordinator will enhance the Lummi Nation’s capacity to address violence and support victims in a meaningful and culturally appropriate manner.”

But the mayor didn’t write those words herself. ChatGPT did.

Records show Lund’s assistant fed the Commerce Department’s request for proposals into the artificial intelligence chatbot and asked it to write the letter for her. “Please include some facts about violence in native communities in the United States or Washington state in particular,” she added in her prompt.

The stories highlight the need for AI literacy as the technology embeds deeper into our lives, even in ways we may never see. So, I reached out to Sanford in an email conversation to find out why and how he used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain  ChatGPT logs, and what they say about where we’re heading.

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Alex Mahadevan: So, why did you think to FOIA for chatbot logs? Did you get a tip? Just curious?

Nate Sanford: After the porn spambot story, I did some research online to see if it was possible to use records requests to get more info on local government AI use. I found a post from someone on MuckRock who had tried requesting AI records from their local police department. I was inspired to try something similar to see what would turn up with Washington city government leaders.

I ended up filing records requests seeking chatbot records from almost a dozen cities in Washington. I was mainly just testing the system to see if it was even possible.

Mahadevan: What was the custodian’s reaction? Did it take a lot of back and forth to get what you wanted?

Sanford: It varied by city. Many have required a fair amount of back and forth. It was clear that most jurisdictions had never dealt with this type of request before.

I got a call from one records officer who wanted to know more about what I was looking for and how they could help. They said it was the first time they’d dealt with a request of that type, and they weren’t really sure how to process it. I’ve had similar questions from several records officers.

Mahadevan: Were you surprised they complied? Surprised they even kept the records? 

Sanford: I really wasn’t sure what to expect.

The story I published ended up focusing on two Washington cities: Bellingham and Everett. We ended up focusing on those cities because they were the fastest and most responsive to my records request. They aren’t necessarily outliers in their use of AI.

Bellingham and Everett both deserve a lot of credit for acting in good faith and doing their best to provide a comprehensive response to my (very time-consuming) records request. Some cities haven’t been as cooperative or transparent. I’m aware that this type of request is expansive and a big lift for records officers and respondents. But I also think it’s important for transparency. Citizens have a right to know how their representatives are using these tools.

Mahadevan: Were you surprised by the widespread use of ChatGPT you found?

Sanford: I knew the technology was widespread in the private sector. I expected that it would also be present in government, but I really didn’t expect it to be this widespread. I hadn’t heard any public communication from governments about how or if they’d be using it.

Mahadevan: What are some tips you’d give to another local reporter looking to do the same thing?

Sanford: Request records from CoPilot as well as ChatGPT: When I first tried filing these records requests, I tried asking for chat logs from every AI chatbot city staff have used. Records officers told me that was too vague and expansive. For simplicity, I ended up limiting the requests to ChatGPT, the world’s most popular chatbot.

Requesting ChatGPT logs was fruitful, but going forward, I think requesting Copilot chatlogs will be even more valuable. Microsoft made its chatbot available to government clients earlier this year, and many jurisdictions are now instructing staff to only use Copilot. I’d recommend that reporters look for records from Copilot as well as ChatGPT. (Depending on how much time you have, it could also be worth filing additional requests for records from Claude, Grok, etc.)

Provide detailed instructions: When I first started filing requests, some city employees responded by simply taking screenshots of every ChatGPT conversation they’d had — sometimes on their mobile phone. This was incredibly chaotic and difficult to sort through. It also meant that I couldn’t see the date the messages were sent or the order they were supposed to be in.

To make things easier, I started asking records officers to send city staff instructions for how to export their ChatGPT histories into a zipped folder. The .ZIP file format is ideal because it gives you:

• An easily readable HTML file of the chats in chronological order.
• A JSON file of the email the user signed up for ChatGPT with.
• A JSON file of the chat history that includes timestamps.
• Copies of any files the user uploaded into ChatGPT, and copies of any images ChatGPT generated in response to their requests.

The datestamps are in Unix time, so you’ll need to use a free online converter to decipher them.

Call records officers: If the request is taking a while, I would absolutely recommend calling records officers to explain what you’re looking for and ask how you can help make their job easier. The cities that have been most responsive to my request so far — Bellingham and Everett — responded by sending an email to literally every single city employee asking them to turn over their ChatGPT history. It took about five months for them to close out the request.

Figure out a good file management system: The volume of records returned in response to my requests was massive. I’d recommend that reporters figure out a file management system that works for them early on so they don’t lose track of documents. I organized things by taking a screenshot of every interesting message I came across and saving those screenshots to a group of desktop folders organized by city/topic. Most of the chat logs came back as HTML files that let you search to find keywords.

Mahadevan: What did your requests look like?

Sanford: Here’s a template. I’d recommend narrowing the scope a bit if you’re looking for something specific and hoping to get a faster response.

Pursuant to the Washington Public Records Act, I am requesting the following records:

Chat histories of all ChatGPT sessions conducted by city employees on city-owned devices or used in job-related functions in the following departments: City Council, Mayor’s Office, Police, City Attorney, Public Works, Information Technology, TKTKTK and TKTKT.

The timeframe for this request is 1/6/2023 to the date this request is processed. The requested documents will be made available to the general public and this request is not being made for commercial purposes. Please make records available in installments as they are ready to release.

If it’s helpful, please share with respondents the following instructions for exporting ChatGPT histories:

• **Click on your name or profile icon** (bottom-left corner of the ChatGPT interface).
• Select **”Settings”**.
• Go to the **”Data Controls”** tab.
• Click **”Export data”**.
• A pop-up will appear — click **”Confirm export”**.
• OpenAI will email you a download link with a `.zip` file containing your chat history in JSON format (and HTML for easy viewing).

Mahadevan: Any interesting chat logs that didn’t make it into the story?

Sanford: There were so many!

I think the original draft I turned in was almost 10,000 words. I’m thankful to my editors for helping me trim it.

There was lots of small, silly stuff. There were also lots of really interesting examples that shed light on how city leaders are thinking about various policy questions. It was illuminating to see which topics popped up most frequently. (Washington has a huge housing crisis, and there were numerous examples of officials asking ChatGPT for advice on how to increase housing affordability.)

A lot of the chats had sensitive personal information that was really interesting, but not necessarily newsworthy enough for us to publish.

There are a few chat logs that we’re holding on to because they raise legal questions and require more reporting before we can publish.

Mahadevan: What kind of reception have you gotten from the community?

Sanford: The reception has been really positive! It’s clear that most people had no idea that their local government leaders were using AI this way. The story prompted newspaper editorials in both Bellingham and Everett calling for city leaders to approach AI with more caution.

Generative AI is such a new technology that there’s no real consensus on what the norms should be. Does it matter that the mayor’s assistant used ChatGPT to write a letter to a congressman? Or that communications staff used it to respond to emails from constituents? We’ve heard from a lot of readers who are upset about that, but we’ve also heard from people who say they don’t care. I think both perspectives are valid. It’s really interesting seeing people grappling with where the line should be.

It’s clear that local governments have been experimenting with this technology for a while, but there hasn’t been much public discussion about it. I’m glad to see that the story has sparked a really robust debate.

I’ve also heard from lots of reporters in newsrooms across the country who are planning to copy the records request in their respective jurisdictions.

Mahadevan: Got any other follow-ups planned?

Sanford: I have several follow-ups planned. I’m continuing to regularly receive new installments from other Washington jurisdictions. There are a few specific chat records we’ve obtained that require more reporting before we can publish.

Mahadevan: Do you personally use generative AI for anything?

Sanford: It isn’t technically generative AI, but I use Otter.ai every day for transcribing interviews. It’s incredibly helpful.

I’ve experimented with ChatGPT for generating headline ideas, but I haven’t been super impressed with any of its suggestions. I’ve found it helpful for a few computer/coding related questions, but I don’t feel comfortable using it for writing.

I think there probably are ways that generative AI can be helpful for newsrooms, but I’m still pretty wary of it. I’m worried about accuracy, public trust and plagiarism.

Welcome to Doomsday Scenario, my regular column on national security, geopolitics, history, and—unfortunately—the fight for democracy in the Trump era. I hope if you’re coming to this online, you’ll consider subscribing right here. It’s easy—and free:

The United States, just months before its 250^th birthday as the world’s leading democracy, has tipped over the edge into authoritarianism and fascism. In the end, faster than I imagined possible, it did happen here. The precise moment when and where in recent weeks America crossed that invisible line from democracy into authoritarianism can and will be debated by future historians, but it’s clear that the line itself has been crossed.

I think many Americans wrongly believe there would be one clear unambiguous moment where we go from “democracy” to “authoritarianism.” Instead, this is exactly how it happens — a blurring here, a norm destroyed there, a presidential diktat unchallenged. Then you wake up one morning and our country is different. 

Today, August 25, 2025, is that morning. Something is materially different in our country this week than last.

Everything else from here on out is just a matter of degree and wondering how bad it will get and how far it will go? Do we end up “merely” like Hungary or do we go all the way toward an “American Reich”? So far, after years of studying World War II, I fear that America’s trajectory feels more like Berlin circa 1933 than it does Budapest circa 2015.

I debated in recent days whether this column should be written by our fearless foreign correspondent William Boot, who started satirically chronicling the backsliding of American democracy in January and the willful destruction of the federal government, but it seems more important to write plainly.

American fascism looks like the would-be self-proclaimed king deploying the military on US soil not only not in response to requests by local or state officials but over — and almost specifically to spite — their vociferous objections. 

The president’s military occupation of the capital has escalated in recent days into something not seen since British troops marched the streets of colonial Boston — even though precisely nothing has happened to warrant it, the Pentagon has now armed the National Guard patrolling DC and armored vehicles, designed for the worst of combat, are patrolling the capital, where they’re colliding with civilian vehicles because war transports are not supposed to be on civilian streets. (Why a 14-ton MRAP is in any way necessary for a domestic police mission is its own worthy line of questioning!) 

Word came over the weekend that the president is now drawing up plans and explicitly threatening domestic political opponents like the governors of California and Illinois with similar military occupations — exercising emergency powers in a moment where the only emergency is his own abuse of power.

Civilians who try lawfully to exercise their right to document the abuses of the regime are themselves arrested and charged with felonies through trumped-up charges teeming with official lies. The fact that this military takeover and federal occupation is being done to the city’s residents — and not on their behalf — is evident in how deserted DC has become as residents refuse to enter public spaces where they might have to interact with agents of the state.

America has become a country where armed officers of the state shout “Papers please!” on the street at men and women heading home from work, a vision we associate with the Gestapo in Nazi Germany or the KGB in Soviet Russia, and where masked men wrestle to the ground and abduct people without due process into unmarked vehicles, disappearing them into an opaque system where their family members beg for information.

It looks like a president, who is supposed to be the figurehead of the party of small government, is extorting US companies for the regular act of doing business — earning his good will in recent weeks has required seizing parts of major US companies or imposing bizarre taxes on others in exchange for his personal support.

It looks like a country where inconvenient figures are kidnapped and disappeared overseas to torture gulags with no due process or dumped in countries where they have no possible connection. Kilmar Albrego Garcia has been punished for months with the full weight of the US government simply because he embarrassed the Trump administration. It looks like a country where the government, devoid of irony, is reopening concentration camps on the site of some of the country’s darkest hours of history where it previously hosted concentration camps.

Just months short of the nation’s 250^th birthday, Donald Trump is close to batting a thousand at speed-running the very abuses of power that led to the Founders to write the Declaration of Independence in the first place. Does any of this sound familiar:

And so on.

One could say that Trump has blown through the nation’s constitutional and political guardrails, but a more accurate assessment is that both Congress and the Supreme Court — who have, as I wrote earlier this spring, effectively rolled over and played dead when it comes to their constitutional duty to exert checks and balances — removed those guardrails helpfully in advance.

In a dissent last week, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson compared the Court’s current approach, which has allowed Trump to streamroll past the normal constraints of the presidency through one procedural sleight-of-hand after another, to the game Calvinball, played by Calvin & Hobbes. “Today’s ruling is of a piece with this Court’s recent tendencies. ‘[R]ight when the Judiciary should be hunkering down to do all it can to preserve the law’s constraints,’ the Court opts instead to make vindicating the rule of law and preventing manifestly injurious Government action as difficult as possible,” she writes. “This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins.”

The response, meanwhile, by Democrats has been unconscionably weak. It’s no coincidence that governors like Gavin Newsom and J.B. Pritzker have been the leaders of recent days; they are clear-eyed about what is happening. As Greg Sargent writes, “Newsom shapes everything around the brute fact that Trump is serially breaking the law and using government sponsored violence and intimidation to entrench authoritarian power. He accepts this as the core fact of our moment.”

By contrast, I challenge you to find even a moderately tepid and clear-eyed statement from any national Democrat. National Democrats seem all invisible as the military takes over policing the streets of the capital and prosecuting its crimes. This should be a lay-up to oppose — the most basic duty of any congressional figure, and yet, “House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, along with other senior Democrats, have not been a part of any concerted effort to voice opposition to the occupation.”

There’s a story that I think a lot about — on September 29, 2008, I went to one of those friendly background lunches that reporters in D.C. do all the time with newsmakers. It was the heart of the financial crisis and a group of us were meeting with Rep. Eric Cantor, a rising star in the GOP and party whip. The House was about to vote on a bailout for Wall Street that effectively everyone agreed was necessary to hold together the global economy — President Bush, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, Fed chair Ben Bernanke, GOP presidential nominee John McCain (who had even suspended his campaign to focus on the crisis) and Democratic nominee Barack Obama. Cantor casually told us over lunch that his caucus was going to vote it down. We reporters, many of them far more experienced Hill veterans than me, were incredulous — all of his party’s leaders, the ones in the roles who knew the stake, the ones the party was supposed to listen to and follow, said this was critical — and yet the House GOP was going to let it burn? 

Cantor was right — the House voted down the bailout and the stock market dropped 800 points. The end seemed nigh.

I remember walking out of that luncheon feeling like I had glimpsed something important. The beating heart of the GOP no longer cared about principles or policy. There was a nihilist wing in control that scared me; they were happy to let it all burn.

For years in covering the rise (and return) of Trump and Trumpism, I imagined there was some line that the GOP would not be willing to compromise for greed and power — some incident that would bring party leaders to their senses, some principle or red-line would be unwilling to trade or cross in pursuit of furthering Trump’s agenda. Even after January 6th, I held hope that might be the end. But then Eric Cantor’s buddy Kevin McCarthy showed up at Mar-a-Lago and the rehabilitation tour began.

It has led here, to this moment, where all three branches of the GOP-controlled government have been willing to torch the republic and democracy that generations of elected officials and citizens have tended for 249 years simply to please Donald Trump and avoid running afoul of his temper.

Where America goes from here is a story yet to be written. It will surely get worse — Trump’s push now is clearly focused on locking in an illegitimate claim to power. Whether we can come back from this moment is a story yet unknown. But it’s clear today America is different and, even if we fight our way back, it will never be the same again. 

GMG

PS: If you’ve found this useful, I hope you’ll consider subscribing and sharing this newsletter with a few friends: