Dollars for Democracy: Financing Citizens’ Assemblies in North America

In 2024, the United States spent nearly $16 billion on the 2024 election cycle. Yet, some of the most participatory forms of democracy—like citizens’ assemblies—struggle to get off the ground due to funding.

Despite their demonstrated value, securing financial resources for them remains one of the biggest hurdles to implementation.

That’s why on June 5th, the Political Reform Program, in collaboration with Columbia World Projects and FIDE North America, hosted a session focused on financing citizens’ assemblies. The conversation brought together practitioners and public officials with firsthand experience in designing and funding these processes. Moderated by Hollie Russon Gilman, Senior Fellow at New America, the panel featured Richard Johnson (Director, MASS LBP), Vivian Castro-Wooldridge (Planning Engagement Strategist, City of Boulder, Colorado), and Linn Davis (Program Director, Healthy Democracy).

Each shared insights into the funding models behind assemblies across North America and underscored the importance of storytelling in sustaining momentum and support. And as the conversation itself illustrated, the value of collaboration and dialogue exists beyond just the numbers.

Johnson opened the session with a case study from Victoria and Saanich in British Columbia, where MASS LBP recently facilitated its 50th citizens’ assembly. The assembly was tasked with exploring whether the two municipalities should amalgamate. The project had a total budget of $750,000 CAD (about $550,000 USD), with one-third funded by each of the local governments and the final third coming from the provincial government. The assembly was approved through a non-binding ballot question in 2018, lending the process legitimacy and public mandate.

However, this funding model was somewhat of an anomaly—an assembly fully funded through public dollars and initiated through a public vote. Johnson emphasized, however, that assemblies often emerge when government officials are stuck. In this case, elected leaders did not have a clear mandate, and by engaging the larger public, they were able to step out of their limbo and get direct feedback from their constituents.

Following this, Davis shared how Healthy Democracy has approached financing within a U.S. context. The organization’s Fort Collins assembly in Colorado was funded by the city with a total budget of $150,000. Additional support came from private sources, nonprofit collaboration, and volunteered staff time, totaling closer to half a million dollars in value. In Petaluma, California, another assembly addressing a contentious land use issue ran for five weekends and cost $450,000.

In Deschutes County, Oregon, an assembly focused on youth homelessness received $300,000 in private funding, which worked in tandem with a HUD grant to bring broader perspectives into the affordable housing conversation. And as Gilman noted, philanthropic capital plays a crucial catalytic role in the experimentation of new models.

Castro-Wooldridge offered a government perspective from Boulder, Colorado, a college town with a strong civic culture. Boulder’s first assembly is currently underway, paired with its 10-year comprehensive plan to implement “15-minute neighborhoods.” The assembly’s largest costs include participant stipends, $1,000 per participant, and accessibility support such as childcare, translation, and transportation. Wooldrige emphasized the importance of a timely pitch that aligns with broader city priorities. In order to reduce costs, Boulder intentionally chose to build in-house expertise and create local partnerships with universities to assist in research and facilitation.

Across a variety of contexts, successful assemblies prioritized removing barriers to entry by offering stipends, ensuring childcare and translation, feeding participants well, and creating comfortable spaces to gather.

Compared to a political environment awash in multi-billion-dollar election campaigns, a tiny fraction of funding is necessary for meaningful democratic engagement. Whether the dollars come from municipal line items or philanthropic partners, the investment generates outsized civic returns. And according to the speakers, the value of these assemblies extends far beyond the dollar amount— they are an investment in both the future of the community and the relationship between local government and community members.