Rapid urbanization and the expansion of artificial intelligence, digital platforms, connected infrastructure, and automated public services are reshaping how urban governments plan, coordinate, and deliver public services. In Indonesia, selecting an appropriate digital governance strategy remains challenging because expected service improvements must be considered alongside digital inclusion, public trust, algorithmic fairness, institutional capacity, environmental resilience, privacy risks, and implementation costs. This study investigates how alternative digital urban governance strategies can be evaluated within a transparent multi-criteria decision-support framework. Ten candidate strategies were evaluated against fifteen technical, social, institutional, environmental, and economic criteria using constructed role-based picture fuzzy assessments. Mutual information (MI) was applied to identify overlapping criteria and reduce redundancy, after which the Logarithmic Percentage Change-driven Objective Weighting (LOPCOW) method was used to derive objective criterion weights. Ranking Comparison (RANCOM) weights were then generated from the LOPCOW-based criterion ordering and combined with the objective weights before the alternatives were ranked using the Measurement of Alternatives and Ranking according to Compromise Solution (MARCOS) method. Ranking robustness was examined through parameter sensitivity analysis, 10,000-run Monte Carlo simulations, and comparisons with seven established multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods, including the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR), Multi-Objective Optimization on the Basis of Ratio Analysis (MOORA), Multi-Attributive Border Approximation Area Comparison (MABAC), Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS), Evaluation based on Distance from Average Solution (EDAS), and Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS). The results showed that mobile-first public services for remote and island communities ranked first, with a MARCOS appraisal score of 0.734412, followed closely by citizen participation and e-consultation at 0.723203. Privacy-preserving urban data exchange ranked third at 0.686119. The leading strategy remained stable across the tested parameter settings within the proposed MARCOS framework, although alternative weighting and ranking specifications produced greater variation in the identity of the first-ranked strategy. This result, together with the narrow gap between the two highest-ranked alternatives, indicates that local priorities, assessment inputs, and modelling choices can materially influence the final decision. The findings demonstrate that the proposed framework provides a traceable basis for comparing competing digital urban governance strategies while making the assumptions, trade-offs, and uncertainty underlying the ranking explicit. The approach offers urban authorities a structured decision-support tool for planning inclusive, accountable, resilient, and institutionally feasible public-service transformation.