Don\u2019t forget to flip your ballot. New York City voters won\u2019t just be deciding among candidates this year. They\u2019ll have an opportunity to vote to approve or reject five questions when they cast their ballots for the Nov. 3 general election. Early voting kicks off Saturday, Oct. 24. If passed \u2013 as tends to be the case for ballot proposals \u2013 each of the questions would make amendments to the city\u2019s governing document known as the City Charter.\u00a0<\/p>\n
We\u2019re not talking about anything that would shake city government at its core. These proposals are wonky, staked on the premise of streamlining government processes and cutting red tape \u2013 in this case, around public space, city contracting, building permitting, street safety and the city\u2019s budget reserves.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey are positive, measured, practical steps towards government reform,\u201d said Ben Weinberg, policy director for government reform group Citizens Union. \u201cThey aren\u2019t wholesale transformative \u2026. But they would allow government to move faster to serve New Yorkers.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
The proposals were crafted and approved by a 15-member panel assembled by Mayor Zohran Mamdani,<\/a> which he\u2019d dubbed the Commission on Government Efficiency, or COGE \u2013 a cheeky play on President Donald Trump\u2019s Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. The commission collected feedback at hearings<\/a> held around the city last spring and early summer.<\/p>\n Unlike the last couple of times a Charter Revision Commission has sent ballot proposals to voters, the City Council isn\u2019t waging war against them<\/a>. So don\u2019t expect a repeat of last year\u2019s dueling costly public education<\/a> campaigns that centered around a set of housing proposals.\u00a0<\/p>\n But it\u2019s not totally smooth sailing for the 2026 ballot questions either. Some have garnered opposition from civic groups as well as the scorn of a few individual council members. Mamdani himself has been promoting the proposals with his trademark videos<\/a> \u2013 though carefully encouraging New Yorkers to vote on faster government, rather than vote for them, since the city charter bars government advocacy for or against ballot proposals.\u00a0<\/p>\n Here\u2019s what you should know before hitting the ballot box.\u00a0<\/p>\n Prop 1: Speed up the timeline for using public space \u2013 like with outdoor dining and benches<\/p>\n What would it actually do? This proposal would simplify the process in which the city doles out permits for public sidewalks and streets to be used for outdoor structures like dining sheds, benches, bus shelters and ramps.<\/p>\n Currently, business owners that want to use public space for any of these things must get permission from the city and go through a lengthy application and approval process. Applying for an outdoor dining shed or sidewalk cafe is particularly complex, taking as long as eight months. Public interest in correcting this has only grown now that the City Council passed legislation once again allowing year-round outdoor dining in the city.\u00a0<\/p>\n The proposal would simplify the approval process by making public hearings optional and no longer requiring the publishing of newspaper advertisements ahead of a hearing, which would save small businesses money. According to COGE, these changes would cut down the outdoor dining process to two months \u2013 a roughly 75% reduction from the current timeline.\u00a0<\/p>\n What\u2019s the vibe?\u00a0<\/p>\n Restaurants and civic and good government groups like Citizens Union, the Regional Plan Association, Reinvent Albany and the Citizens Budget Commission are fans of this proposal.\u00a0<\/p>\n Reform group Common Cause New York opposes it<\/a> because they argue it would remove \u201cmeaningful opportunities\u201d for New Yorkers and elected officials to weigh in on decisions involving the use of public space.\u00a0<\/p>\n Prop 2: Reform the city contracting process to improve procurement<\/p>\n What would it actually do? New York City government relies heavily on its procurement process, using outside contractors to provide vital municipal services like afterschool programming, construction projects, early childhood education and the shelter system. In the last fiscal year alone, the city paid outside contractors roughly $35.9 billion \u2013 about 30% of the municipal budget. But this system is notoriously complicated<\/a>, often rife with delays for the nonprofits and small businesses seeking to do business with the city.\u00a0<\/p>\n The proposal would make several changes to this process in an attempt to simplify things. Top city agency officials would be allowed to sign off on some contracts worth more than $5 million, allowing the mayor to delegate a responsibility that currently rests in his hands. It would also cut down on paperwork for potential contractors, dramatically simplifying the questionnaire they must fill out to apply. It would also direct the Procurement Policy Board, the five-member body that writes the city\u2019s procurement rules, to meet at least once every three months. There\u2019s currently no meeting requirement.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n According to the commission, these changes would cut down the procurement timeline by 12%, speeding up how long it takes the city to decide which organizations or companies to award contracts to.\u00a0<\/p>\n What\u2019s the vibe?\u00a0<\/p>\n While there is broad support for what the proposal is attempting to do, many nonprofits and city officials are skeptical that it will actually make things easier for nonprofits and small businesses contracting with the city.\u00a0<\/p>\n Still, most good government groups are supportive. That includes Common Cause New York, Reinvent Albany and Citizens Union.<\/p>\n Prop 3: Fast-track street safety infrastructure, acquisition of office space and activation of city land<\/p>\n What would it actually do? This proposal pertains to two different land use issues: speeding up construction for street infrastructure, like bike and bus lanes, and simplifying the process in which the city sells, leases or uses unused city property and office space for city workers.<\/p>\n It would make three major changes: the first would simplify review of street safety projects, the second would replace the City Council with the City Planning Commission for review of unused city property and the third would remove hearing requirements and approvals when the city leases office space.<\/p>\n According to COGE, the first component would reduce project timelines by 33% because the Department of Transportation would no longer be required to present to the local community board before beginning a project or confer with multiple offices in the same agency.\u00a0<\/p>\n The second component, which applies to only smaller lots and developments, would make the city permanently able to sell undevelopable lots to adjacent property owners without public auction, which COGE says will reduce the timeline to sell the smaller lots from seven months to 90 days. The third would remove City Council and the City Planning Commission approvals, and the City Council\u2019s ability to override, when the city leases office space for employees.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n What\u2019s the vibe?\u00a0<\/p>\n