Accessibility has moved from a compliance checkbox to a defining axis of public trust. Over the next election cycles, debates about captioning, language access, document remediation, and inclusive formats will become proxies for larger questions: who gets to participate, whose voice is legible to government, and how cities manage digital risk while protecting the public record.

For clerks, the political terrain is operational. Residents judge outcomes—intelligible audio, timely captions and translations, readable agendas, and stable links—while advocacy groups and media scrutinize failures. This paper proposes a pragmatic path that converts ethical and legal obligations into console-visible controls, procurement language, and publication practices that survive leadership changes and staff turnover.

We organize the analysis into five domains. First, demand-side pressures: demographics, disability prevalence, multilingual growth, and online participation have shifted expectations. Second, supply-side constraints: legacy systems, fragmented ownership, and vendor lock-in raise risk. Third, the narrative landscape: how incidents become political, and how transparency disciplines diffuse tension. Fourth, governance: identity, logs, privacy, and change control as the foundation for credible operations. Fifth, budgeting and procurement: outcome-based contracting that preserves portability and auditability.

We close with a two-year roadmap and scenario outlooks. The thesis is modest but consequential: when accessibility is observable, reversible, and attributable, the politics soften and trust grows. The battleground then becomes a proving ground for competence rather than a stage for crisis.