Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civic Assembly Model topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lexington civic assembly model: 36 residents, $225,000 budget and three recommendations
Summary
Panelists described Lexington’s civic assembly as a transferable model: 36 randomly selected residents deliberated 35 hours, earned $1,200 each, and recommended raising council pay, setting attendance/accountability expectations, and institutionalizing assemblies every eight years.
At the Boston City Council’s April 24 hearing, Richard Young of Civic LUXE presented a detailed account of Lexington, Kentucky’s civic assembly as a model for charter review.
Young said the Lexington process used a mailed invitation to about 11,500 randomly selected residential addresses, gathered applicant demographics across eight categories, anonymized those data and used software to assemble a demographically representative panel. From that pool Civic LUXE selected 36 residents (one seat reserved for a youth representative) who met across seven sessions totaling about 35 hours.
The assembly set a 70% threshold to advance recommendations; ultimately it produced three recommendations that met supermajority support. The largest recommendation called for increasing council compensation to roughly the county’s average annual wage (about $59,000 in Lexington), another proposed clearer accountability and attendance expectations for council members paired with the compensation changes, and the third recommended institutionalizing a civic assembly every eight years with a standing committee to collect year‑round input.
Young said Civic LUXE raised roughly $225,000 to run the assembly, paying each participant about $1,200 and covering childcare, transportation and meals; staff time, facilitation and educational materials were the highest costs. The sessions were streamed and archived on government television, with an hour of closed relationship‑building followed by open deliberation.
Panelists noted limits and lessons: Lexington’s first assembly was held in English only, which panelists said limited accessibility; true equity would require multilingual facilitation and additional supports. They also recommended securing formal buy‑in from elected and administrative decision makers before convening an assembly so recommendations have a clear path to implementation.
Lexington’s organizers plan to present the recommendations to their local council and to a standing committee; Boston councilors asked whether a similar model could be funded and scaled in Boston and whether it should be run by nonprofits or the city.
