"Together, these systems form the A.R.E. Movement: the internal mechanism STLCA built to transform fragmented public records into structured, auditable accountability data."
Each module is a specialized component of the accountability pipeline. Together they create a reproducible public evidence system with no silent failures and no uninspected outputs.
The Driver initiates extraction runs, controls execution order, manages district sequencing, and ensures the system follows locked operational rules from start to finish.
Without the Driver, the movement does not begin.
The Harvester enters the public portal, retrieves complaint records, downloads attachments, accesses related enforcement data, and gathers the raw evidence required to reconstruct accountability outcomes.
This is where fragmented public records become recoverable.
The Gatekeeper rejects malformed records, invalid structures, duplicate rows, and schema violations before they contaminate downstream outputs.
Dirty data does not pass. Failed runs stop here.
The Signal identifies relationships, enforcement patterns, concern flags, inspection visibility gaps, and measurable indicators that help explain how systems behave over time.
This is where records begin to speak.
The Ledger converts extracted records into searchable datasets, public review tables, district summaries, and accountability-ready reporting structures.
This is where evidence becomes navigable.
The Auditor validates counts, uniqueness, district metrics, manifests, extraction integrity, and output consistency.
If the evidence cannot survive audit, it does not become public release data. Trust is the product.
The Dispatch controls run sequencing, district movement, fail states, and execution boundaries. No fix-forward patching. No silent corrections. No partial-release improvisation.
The movement either passes or stops.
The Reckoning calculates NOV duration, enforcement exposure, fee gaps, unresolved timelines, and measurable accountability indicators tied to enforcement outcomes.
This is where measurable public consequence becomes visible.
Every field inside the Accountability Record Engine must trace back to a public source category. No invented dates. No guessed outcomes. No undocumented assumptions.
Only traceable public accountability data.
Fields without a verifiable source are left empty and tagged as absent — not estimated.
The pipeline follows strict rules with zero tolerance for deviation. Hard-stop QA enforcement is intentional — if integrity fails, the run fails.
The A.R.E. codebase is organized into a city-agnostic architecture, allowing deployment across multiple cities without rebuilding core infrastructure.
| File | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|
| config.py | New — city abstraction layer | ✓ Complete |
| extractor.py | Refactored — city-agnostic | ✓ City-agnostic |
| classifier.py | Copied from production | ✓ No changes needed |
| aggregator.py | Updated — uses config | ✓ Uses config |
| schema.py | Copied from production | ✓ No changes needed |
| run_extraction.py | Updated — --city flag added |
✓ --city flag added |
| run_requests_extraction.py | Updated — --city flag added |
✓ --city flag added |
| summarize_district_complaint_metrics.py | Copied from production version | ✓ Complete |
| STRICT_PARSING_RULES.md | Copied from production | ✓ Complete |
| setup.py | New — bootstrap script for new cities | ✓ Complete |
| README.md | New — city-agnostic documentation | ✓ Complete |
| requirements.txt | Copied from production | ✓ Complete |
Seattle has no shortage of housing policy, dashboards, programs, task forces, ordinances, or public statements. What has been missing is a reliable public accountability record capable of measuring what happened after a complaint entered the system.
Seattle A.R.E. was built to help close that gap — not by replacing City records, but by making them measurable.
"Public records should produce public accountability."
— STLCA
STLCA created Seattle A.R.E. as a public accountability infrastructure framework designed to help researchers, policymakers, journalists, advocates, and the public evaluate housing and code enforcement systems using documented outcomes, inspection visibility, enforcement records, and measurable evidence.