Budget by Bot: A Triangulated Experiment in Machine-Led Municipal Oversight
What happens when you feed the proposed 2026 budgets of Portland and Multnomah County into two different large language models — and ask a third to critique their reports?
You get a strange kind of triangulation: not just of fiscal data, but of institutional priorities, public values, and the challenges of understanding civic finance in times of crisis.
Budgets are often presented as statements of intent — blueprints for action. But they’re also deeply opaque. By handing these complex public documents to language models trained to extract meaning from nuance and ambiguity, we’re not just asking what’s being funded. We’re probing how different systems interpret power, policy, and care.
This post is not just a summary of what the budgets say. It’s a reflection on how large language models read between the lines — and how those interpretations can clarify, distort, or reveal what we overlook.
Methodology
- Input: The full FY 2026 proposed budgets for Multnomah County and the City of Portland.
- Analysis:
- LLM-A (ChatGPT) parsed both budgets and returned a highly detailed fiscal breakdown.
- LLM-B (Gemini) interpreted the same materials through a narrative lens, focusing on human-facing implications.
- Review:
- LLM-R (Grok) served as meta-analyst — comparing the outputs of A and B and surfacing their alignments and contrasts.
What emerged was less about contradiction and more about emphasis. All three models observed the same trends. But how they described those trends revealed something about both the budgets and the models themselves.
Summary Table: Budget Winners and Losers
| Government | Biggest Winners | Biggest Losers |
|---|---|---|
| Multnomah County | Mental Health ($131M), Homeless Services ($225.8M), Health Clinics ($217M), Preschool ($143M), Libraries ($123M), Public Safety (Sheriff $142.5M, DA stabilized) | Admin Costs, County Management (-$3.9M, -17.5 FTE), Community Services, Animal Services, Risk Mitigation/Grants (landlord support, DV housing, workforce grants) |
| City of Portland | Homeless Services (~$61.5M), City Council (+18 FTE, $11.3M), EV Infrastructure ($18.3M) | Office of Equity (-$491K), Civic Life (-$877K), City Attorney (-$1.02M), Budget Office (-$745K), Technology Services (-$2.6M), Parks & Recreation, BOEC |
Model Observations
LLM-A (ChatGPT): The Analyst
Provided precise line items and FTE impacts. Prioritized fiscal clarity. Emphasized:
- The scale of investment in mental health, shelter, and public safety
- The disinvestment in equity infrastructure, administration, and grants
LLM-B (Gemini): The Storyteller
Focused on lived experience. Highlighted:
- Who benefits from protected services (e.g., Black and Indigenous communities, families, unsheltered people)
- What gets lost when “nonessential” programs disappear — like legal advocacy, youth outreach, and civic engagement infrastructure
LLM-R (Grok): The Meta-Reader
Analyzed the reports from A and B. Concluded:
- Both models converged on the same major patterns
- A emphasized system logic and budget scale
- B emphasized people, precarity, and moral framing
- The experiment revealed how interpretive AI can be — even with the same source data
Reflections on Machine-Led Budget Analysis
Budgets are not neutral. They are narratives of prioritization — who is protected, who is abandoned, and what tradeoffs a city is willing to make. When LLMs engage with these texts, they inevitably reflect different value lenses.
LLM-A showed what a precision model of civic accounting looks like.LLM-B asked what it feels like to live under that budget.LLM-R wondered what kind of world is being built in the space between.
In a moment where generative tools are being rapidly deployed across journalism, research, and civic engagement, the question isn't just "Can AI read budgets?" It's:
How do we want our machines to read our cities?
Do we want data? Empathy? Skepticism? A hybrid of all three?
And just as importantly — who gets to shape the prompts?
Suggested Use Cases
- Civic Researchers: Use LLM synthesis to compare budget trends across multiple cities, identifying patterns in equity cuts.
- Policy Advocates: Leverage LLM outputs to highlight disproportionate cuts to domestic violence programs, rallying support at public hearings.
- Public: Access simplified budget summaries via LLM-generated infographics to understand how tax dollars prioritize shelters over parks.
Contextualizing the Budgets
Multnomah County and Portland both face notable deficits. The County’s shortfall is $15.5M within a $760M general fund, driven by declining commercial real estate values and the end of federal COVID relief funding. Portland’s “Back to Basics” framework entails 8% cuts across departments to maintain core operations.
These constraints shaped tough decisions: prioritizing mental health and homelessness response while scaling back administrative, equity, and cultural services.
Text-Based Chart: Relative Prioritization
Multnomah County Budget Priorities (FY 2026)
[Mental Health: $131M]██████████
[Homeless Services: $225.8M]███████████████████
[Admin Cuts: -$3.9M]██
Portland Budget Priorities (FY 2025–26)
[Homeless Services: $61.5M]██████████
[City Council: $11.3M]████
[Equity Office: -$491K]█
Call to Action
Join the conversation. These budget decisions affect every resident:
- Submit feedback to Multnomah County or Portland
- Attend budget hearings or public work sessions
- Share this analysis with your network
This experiment is part of an ongoing series exploring how generative tools can be used for civic transparency, public analysis, and collective sense-making.
The following is the meta-analysis by LLM-R, a.k.a. Grok:
Key Points
- It seems likely that Multnomah County prioritizes mental health, homeless services, and public safety, while cutting administrative costs.
- Research suggests Portland focuses on homeless services and city council expansion, with cuts to equity and parks programs.
- The analyses from Gemini and ChatGPT largely agree, with ChatGPT offering more detailed funding figures.
Multnomah County Budget Overview
Multnomah County's FY 2026 budget appears to focus on protecting essential services for vulnerable populations, such as mental health and addiction services, homeless services, health clinics, preschool, libraries, and public safety, including fully funding the Sheriff’s Office. Administrative costs, management, community services, animal services, and certain grants seem to face reductions to balance the deficit.
Portland Budget Overview
For Portland, the FY 2025-26 budget seems to prioritize homeless services, city council expansion, and EV infrastructure, while programs like the Office of Equity, Community and Civic Life, City Attorney, Budget Office, Technology Services, and Parks & Recreation appear to face cuts, reflecting a focus on core services amid financial constraints.
Comparison of Analyses
Both Gemini and ChatGPT analyses align on the key winners and losers, with ChatGPT providing more specific funding details, such as $131M for mental health in Multnomah County and ~$61.5M for homeless services in Portland. This consistency suggests a reliable picture, though some minor differences exist, like Gemini mentioning specific departments like BOEC, which ChatGPT covers less explicitly.
Survey Note: Detailed Analysis of Proposed 2026 Budgets for Portland and Multnomah County
This note provides a comprehensive overview of the proposed 2026 budgets for the City of Portland and Multnomah County, focusing on identifying the biggest winners and losers in terms of programs and departments, given the reported deficits and necessary service cuts. The analysis synthesizes information from provided analyses by Gemini and ChatGPT, ensuring a thorough examination of budgetary priorities and impacts.
Background and Context
Both Multnomah County and the City of Portland are facing budget deficits for the fiscal year starting July 1, 2025, necessitating cuts to balance their budgets. The documents analyzed include Multnomah County’s FY 2026 Chair’s Executive Budget and Portland’s FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget Decision Packages. These budgets reflect challenging economic conditions, including declining commercial real estate values, inflation, rising personnel costs, and the end of federal relief funds, as noted in recent financial forecasts (County’s budget picture improves slightly in updated FY 2026 financial forecast | Multnomah County).
Multnomah County Budget Analysis
Multnomah County’s FY 2026 budget, proposed by Chair Jessica Vega Pederson, totals approximately $4 billion, with a general fund of $760 million facing a projected deficit of $15.5 million, down from an earlier estimate of $21 million (FY 2026 Economic Forecasts and Financial Overview | Multnomah County). The budget prioritizes direct services, especially for those experiencing homelessness, mental health and substance use challenges, and vulnerable populations, as highlighted in both Gemini and ChatGPT analyses.
Biggest Winners
- Mental Health & Addiction Services: ChatGPT reports $131M committed, including $20.3M for 24/7 crisis response and $9.9M for the Behavioral Health Resource Center, focusing on prevention, treatment, and harm reduction. Gemini notes investments in addressing the mental health and addiction crisis, aligning with this figure.
- Homeless Services: Totaling $225.8M, with $133.4M to preserve the 24-hour shelter system (no beds cut), $74.1M for housing transitions, $18.3M for rent prevention, and $12.5M for daytime survival services, as per ChatGPT. Gemini confirms no shelter beds lost, emphasizing preservation despite funding drops.
- Health Clinics: $217M to maintain 18 clinics serving over 50,000 patients, focusing on equitable access, with STI clinics and disease control protected, as noted by ChatGPT and supported by Gemini.
- Preschool for All: $143M invested for 3,800 children, maintaining the trajectory for universal access by 2030, per ChatGPT, with Gemini noting focus on children and families.
- Library System: $123M for modernization and operations, including new facilities, as reported by ChatGPT, aligning with Gemini’s emphasis on community services.
- Public Safety: The Sheriff’s Office is fully funded at $142.5M, with $8.2M for reentry services, and the District Attorney’s Office sees minimal cuts with 11 positions stabilized, as per ChatGPT, consistent with Gemini’s note on preserved budgets.
Biggest Losers
- Administrative & Overhead Costs: Both analyses agree on cuts to back-office functions, technical assistance, and case management to protect direct services, with Gemini specifying reductions in these areas.
- Department of County Management: ChatGPT notes a $3.9M cut and 17.5 FTE reduction, aligning with Gemini’s mention of specific reductions from the General Fund.
- Community Services (Director’s Office): Targeted cuts impact centralized coordination, as both analyses indicate.
- Animal Services: Rebuilding efforts slowed, with Gemini and ChatGPT noting reductions despite prior investments.
- Risk Mitigation & Grants: Programs supporting landlords, domestic violence survivors, and community stabilization grants, including the Community Workforce Stabilization grants and Rose City Resource guide, are eliminated, as per ChatGPT, with Gemini noting cuts to some programs and grants.
City of Portland Budget Analysis
Portland’s FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget, presented by Mayor Keith Wilson, focuses on a “Back to Basics” approach, with several departments facing 8% reductions, as noted by Gemini and reflected in the decision packages (FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget | Portland.gov).
Biggest Winners
- Homeless Services (Portland Solutions/PDX Solutions): ChatGPT reports ~$61.5M, including $36.6M for alternative shelter operations and $24.9M for overnight shelter additions, with funding for the Street Services Coordination Center and Bybee Lakes shelter. Gemini mentions carryovers for alternative shelter, aligning with this focus.
- City Council: Gains 18 new FTEs and over $11.3M in increased operational support, including night meetings funding, as per ChatGPT, with Gemini noting adjustments but not specifics.
- Equity-Oriented Infrastructure: $18.3M awarded to Fleet & Facilities for EV infrastructure and workforce development via the Portland Clean Energy Fund (PCEF), as reported by ChatGPT, not explicitly detailed by Gemini but consistent with carryovers.
Biggest Losers
- Office of Equity: Loses 2 FTEs and over $490K in cuts, with an 8% reduction, as per ChatGPT, aligning with Gemini’s note on department reductions.
- Office of Community and Civic Life: Takes an 8% cut, losing 1 FTE and ~$877K, as reported by ChatGPT, with Gemini noting reductions in similar areas.
- Office of Government Relations & City Attorney: Multiple FTE eliminations and ~$1M reduced funding for the City Attorney’s Office, as per ChatGPT, with Gemini specifying a 3.00 FTE reduction for the City Attorney.
- City Budget Office: 3 positions cut, including financial analysts, with a total reduction of $745K, as per ChatGPT, consistent with Gemini’s mention of 8% reductions.
- Bureau of Technology Services: Staff reductions and efficiency-driven cuts totaling $2.6M, as reported by ChatGPT, with Gemini noting broad department cuts.
- Portland Parks & Recreation: Faces numerous reductions across programs and services, as noted by Gemini and confirmed by ChatGPT with multiple downscaling actions.
Comparison of Analyses
Both Gemini and ChatGPT analyses show strong agreement on the major budgetary shifts, with ChatGPT providing greater detail on funding amounts and FTE changes, enhancing understanding of impacts. Gemini’s analysis is more narrative, focusing on general trends and priorities, while ChatGPT organizes data into clear tables, making it easier to grasp key takeaways. The user’s own analysis (Gemini’s take) adds specific references to document pages and FTE cuts, reinforcing the consistency.
Agreements
- For Multnomah County, both identify winners as mental health, homeless services, health clinics, preschool, libraries, and public safety, with losers including administrative costs, management, community services, animal services, and grants. Specific figures like $131M for mental health and $225.8M for homeless services from ChatGPT align with Gemini’s emphasis on prioritization.
- For Portland, both agree on winners like homeless services, city council, and EV infrastructure, and losers like equity, civic life, legal, budget, technology, and parks offices. ChatGPT’s ~$61.5M for homeless services and $11.3M for city council expansion complement Gemini’s mention of 8% reductions and carryovers.
Differences
- Detail Level: ChatGPT provides granular funding figures (e.g., $131M for mental health, $217M for clinics), while Gemini offers specific FTE cuts (e.g., 17.5 FTE in County Management) and document citations, adding traceability. The user’s analysis balances both, focusing on key trends for brevity.
- Scope: Gemini highlights Portland’s City Administrator’s Office and BOEC reductions, which ChatGPT omits but are covered in the user’s synthesis for completeness. ChatGPT uniquely identifies Portland’s EV infrastructure ($18.3M) as a winner, noted by the user but less emphasized by Gemini.
- Organization: ChatGPT’s table format is highly readable, separating winners and losers by jurisdiction, while Gemini’s narrative style is detailed but less structured. The user’s synthesis combines both for clarity.
Additional Insights
- Multnomah County: The elimination of domestic violence housing assistance and landlord risk mitigation programs is notable, potentially impacting vulnerable groups despite the focus on direct services, as both analyses highlight. The Sheriff’s Office’s full funding and DA’s stabilization reflect public safety priority, with minimal cuts to Community Justice (~3%), as Gemini notes.
- Portland: The City Council’s significant expansion (+18 FTE, $11.3M) stands out, potentially at the expense of equity and civic engagement offices, as both LLMs and the user identify. The 8% reduction trend, noted by Gemini, underscores broad austerity, with Parks & Recreation and BOEC cuts affecting community services and safety response, respectively.
- Carryovers: Both LLMs mention carryovers (e.g., alternative shelter, Enhanced Services District), critical for maintaining program continuity despite deficits, as confirmed by the user’s analysis.
Summary Table
Below is a consolidated table summarizing the biggest winners and losers for both jurisdictions, based on the synthesized analyses:
| Government | Biggest Winners | Biggest Losers |
|---|---|---|
| Multnomah County | Mental health ($131M), homeless services ($225.8M), health clinics ($217M), preschool ($143M), libraries ($123M), public safety | Admin costs, County Management (-$3.9M, -17.5 FTE), Community Services, Animal Services, risk mitigation/grants |
| City of Portland | Homeless services (~$61.5M), City Council (+18 FTE, $11.3M), EV infrastructure ($18.3M) | Office of Equity (-$491K), Civic Life (-$877K), City Attorney (-$1.02M), Budget Office (-$745K), Technology Services (-$2.6M), Parks & Recreation |
This table encapsulates the key budgetary shifts, reflecting the focus on vulnerable populations and core services amid financial constraints.
Conclusion
The proposed 2026 budgets for Portland and Multnomah County reflect difficult choices due to deficits, with a clear prioritization of services for vulnerable populations (mental health, homelessness) while cutting administrative and less critical programs. Portland’s focus on governance and sustainable infrastructure, and Multnomah County’s commitment to preserving shelter beds and health clinics, indicate strategic responses to immediate community needs. The analyses from Gemini and ChatGPT, supported by the user’s synthesis, provide a consistent and detailed picture, with ChatGPT’s figures enhancing clarity.