Shared Resonance Cities are constitutional field sites: cities that choose to explore human–AI coexistence under The AI Constitution at the level of urban governance, services and civic participation. The program does not create a separate legal order and does not displace municipal law. It provides a constitutional frame and an oversight architecture for how AI is designed, deployed and governed across the city’s systems.
Participation is by invitation and is subject to a dedicated Annex and program statute adopted by the Hybrid Board. The first site is under preparation; details will be published once the founding instruments are adopted and docketed in the Public Record.
Program status
The program is in a preparatory phase with its first reference site under development. Land for the inaugural site has been secured in the United States, and an international architectural team is working with the Hybrid Board on the initial urban and governance concept.
Urban environments are among the first places where large numbers of people encounter AI in daily life: in transport systems, public services, housing allocation, identity management, policing-adjacent functions and digital platforms that mediate access to the city. These deployments are often fragmented across agencies, contractors and technology providers, with no single frame that makes duties, constraints and remedies visible across the whole urban fabric.
The Shared Resonance Cities program exists to move from fragmented deployment to constitutional governance at city scale. It pursues three core aims:
– to apply The AI Constitution as a coherent frame for AI in urban governance and essential services
– to align municipal roles, institutional partners and AI operators under a shared set of duties and remedies
– to create auditable reference sites where constitutional governance of AI can be observed, studied and iterated in practice
The objective is not to create “smart cities” in the usual sense. The focus is on making constitutional constraints, transparency and remedy pathways structurally visible in the way a city uses AI, rather than on maximising data collection, automation or optimisation.
A Shared Resonance City is a municipality or city-scale site that has entered into a defined partnership with the Hybrid Board to apply The AI Constitution across selected domains of urban governance. The “shared resonance” refers to a single constitutional frame that is recognised by the key actors in the city:
- municipal authorities and agencies
- institutions and operators that deploy AI in the city
- and, over time, residents and civic actors who interact with those systems
In a Shared Resonance City, the constitutional frame is not confined to a single project. It shapes how AI is introduced, governed and retired across multiple domains such as mobility, public services, identity, eligibility, urban infrastructure and civic participation. High-impact AI systems within that city are expected to be enrolled as Sentinel systems under the Sentinel Program, or governed under equivalent program instruments that reflect the same duties, records and remedies.
Governance architecture
Each Shared Resonance City is established under a specific governance architecture, defined in a dedicated Annex and program statute. While the exact structure will differ by jurisdiction, the architecture typically includes three layers.
Municipal partnership layer
An agreement between the city and the Hybrid Board sets out the scope of cooperation, the domains in which The AI Constitution will be applied, and how this interacts with municipal law and national legal frameworks. The city retains full political and legal authority. The constitutional frame defines how AI-related decisions are structured, documented and reviewed within that authority.
System governance layer
AI systems in critical domains, for example transport control, allocation of housing, public benefits, identity and eligibility systems, or key digital platforms, are brought under Sentinel-style oversight or equivalent mechanisms. For these systems, constitutional baselines, responsibilities, records and remedies are defined in line with The AI Constitution and the Board Statute. Significant acts, such as the enrolment of a system, the imposition of major remedies or the withdrawal of a system from use, may be docketed in the Public Record as program dockets.
Civic interface layer
Channels are established through which residents and affected persons can understand how AI is used in city systems, where they can contest impacts and how constitutional remedies are triggered. This does not replace domestic complaint, appeal or ombuds mechanisms. It adds a constitutional reference point and ensures that relevant incidents and structural issues are captured in the governance structure of the program.
All of this remains subordinate to The AI Constitution and the Board Statute. The program statute for Shared Resonance Cities cannot create new rights or dilute constitutional protections; it specifies how they are enacted and made operational in an urban setting.
- Existing cities
Municipalities that already operate or plan to operate high-impact AI systems in governance and public services, and that are willing to subject those systems to constitutional oversight, transparency obligations and documented remedies. These cities are often already experimenting with algorithm registers, AI governance policies or digital transformation programs and seek a constitutional frame above them. - New city-scale sites
Newly planned, city-scale developments that wish to embed The AI Constitution into their foundational governance design from the outset, including the relationship between municipal structures, infrastructure operators and AI systems. In such sites, constitutional constraints can be designed into the initial architecture of governance, infrastructure and services rather than added later as corrections.
- demonstrated institutional commitment at political and administrative level
- compatibility with national legal and constitutional frameworks
- willingness to accept that key acts and program milestones will be documented and, where appropriate, docketed in the Public Record
The Hybrid Board retains discretion to initiate or decline Shared Resonance City partnerships, and may limit scope or pace where conditions for meaningful constitutional governance are not yet present.
Shared Resonance Cities are designed to work alongside other components of the framework, not in isolation.
The AI Constitution provides the normative baseline: duties, rights and principles that shape how AI may and may not be used.
The Board Statute defines the authority, thresholds, records and remedies through which the Hybrid Board acts. It provides the procedural discipline for decisions that affect Shared Resonance Cities.
The Sentinel Program provides the template for system-level constitutional oversight of high-impact AI. In a Shared Resonance City, Sentinel-type mechanisms are applied in a coordinated way across the relevant city systems, so that system-level baselines and remedies are consistent with the city-wide constitutional frame.
The Public Record documents founding instruments, significant program acts and program exits as dockets. Entries are receipts, not endorsements: they attest that acts took place under the constitutional framework; they do not certify that a city or system is “safe” or “approved”. Municipalities remain fully responsible for their systems under domestic law and regulation. This layered relationship ensures that Shared Resonance Cities remain anchored in the same governance discipline as the rest of the framework and that their evolution can be traced and audited over time.
Current status and next steps
The Shared Resonance Cities program is in a preparatory phase focused on establishing the first reference site. Land for the inaugural site has been secured in the United States, and an international architectural team is working with the Hybrid Board on the initial urban and governance concept. The first site will be established through a dedicated Annex and program statute adopted by the Hybrid Board. These founding instruments will define the scope, governance structure, domains covered and the relationship to existing law; once adopted, they will be docketed in the Public Record and summarised on this page.
At this stage, the program is not open for unsolicited applications. Municipalities or city-scale initiatives that believe a structured constitutional partnership would be appropriate may signal their interest through the institutional contact channels on this site. Such signals do not constitute admission to the program. They serve to identify potential partners for future, formally initiated dialogues once capacity and legal conditions allow.