City Council - Government Operations Committee Hearing on Docket #0410

• Date: April 24, 2026
• Governing Body: City Council Committee on Government Operations
• Meeting Type: Committee Hearing
• Chair: Councilor Gabriela Coletta Zapata
• Lead Sponsor: Councilor Julia Mejia
• Councilors in Attendance:
  1. Councilor Gabriela Coletta Zapata
  2. Councilor Julia Mejia
  3. Councilor Edward Flynn
  4. Councilor Liz Breadon
  5. Councilor Benjamin Weber
  6. Councilor Miniard Culpepper
• Panelists:
  • Ilona Rabofsky, Executive Director of GenUnity
  • Richard Young, Founder and Executive Director of Civic Lex
  • John Smith St. Cyr, Founder and Executive Director of the J.L. Smith Suicide Prevention Center for Young Black Boys, Inc.

Councilor Julia Mejia introduced the docket, noting that the Boston City Charter is not a single document but a collection of statutes and amendments. She outlined three primary pathways for charter reform:

1. Charter Commission: Requires certified signatures of 15% of registered voters to initiate.
2. Home Rule Petition: A pathway for amending specific items while maintaining the current governance structure.
3. Binding Ballot Question: Can be initiated by a two-thirds Council vote with Mayoral approval, a formal suggestion by the Mayor or Council, or a citizen's petition signed by 200 voters.

Councilor Mejia emphasized the need for 'restoring trust in our local government' and increasing civic engagement through modernization.

Richard Young of Civic Lex detailed the 'Civic Assembly' process recently implemented in Lexington, Kentucky:

• Selection Process: Used a 'representative lottery' to select 36 residents based on eight demographic markers (age, race, housing status, political registration, income, etc.) to match the city's census data.
• Scope: The assembly deliberated on council compensation and the frequency of charter reviews.
• Outcomes: The assembly recommended increasing council pay to approximately $59,000, creating new accountability expectations, and institutionalizing a charter review every eight years.
• Financials: The Lexington assembly operated on a budget of approximately $225,000, with $70,000 going directly to participant stipends ($1,200 per person) and support services like childcare and transportation.

Ilona Rabofsky of GenUnity expressed support for implementing similar participatory spaces in Boston to elevate lived experience in institutional decision-making.

John Smith St. Cyr provided testimony regarding the concentration of power in Boston's executive branch:

• Strong Mayor System: He argued that the current structure 'concentrates too much power in one office' and leaves the Council with insufficient counterbalance.
• 2021 School Committee Vote: He cited the 2021 advisory ballot question where 79% of voters supported an elected school committee, yet the Mayor continues to make appointments because the vote was non-binding.
• Direct Quote: 'A city charter should not make counterbalance difficult. It should not make oversight secondary. And it should not leave the public entering the process after the most important decisions have already been shaped.'
• Historical Context: Referenced the 1947 Charter Commission which led to the 1949 structural options put before voters.

• Councilor Breadon inquired about the selection of youth representatives and the Irish model of national civic assemblies. Richard Young clarified that Lexington included one 16-year-old representative selected through a self-nomination process within a youth civic network.
• Councilor Weber asked about 'baked-in' historical inequities in the charter. Panelists noted that even basic language (e.g., using only 'he' to refer to officials) and the lack of a single accessible document serve as barriers to modern governance.
• Councilor Mejia asked about potential opposition. Richard Young noted that the primary pushback usually comes from those in power who wish to maintain the status quo, but that representative lotteries often gain support because they include voices (like renters or conservatives) that feel traditionally excluded.

Chair Coletta Zapata noted that while the Council can explore these models, a formal working session would require a specific proposal or draft to review. Councilor Mejia indicated that the next steps would involve:

• Engaging the administration and legal counsel to understand the feasibility of various reform pathways.
• Determining the role of the administration in supporting or conducting analysis for charter changes.
• Exploring the possibility of a second hearing to include testimony from the administration's legal team.

Official Action: No votes were taken. The hearing was adjourned at approximately 12:15 PM.