Skip to content

Process for Participation in the Citywide Participatory Budget Program

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


Rule status: Adopted

Agency: CEC

Effective date: July 30, 2023

Proposed Rule Full Text
Public-Hearing-Notice-1.pdf

Adopted Rule Full Text
NoticeofAdoptionrulesgoverningcitywideparticipatorybudgetingprogram-6.27.2023.pdf

Adopted rule summary:

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY VESTED IN THE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT COMMISSION by Sections 3202 and 1043 of the New York City Charter that the Commission has adopted rules pertaining to the Citywide participatory budgeting program.

Comments are now closed.

Online comments: 3

  • JML

    In section 2-05, the parameters of the borough committee should be fleshed out more. While section 3202 sets forth the kinds of people who should be considered for the committee, it would be more fair and transparent to establish in the rule how those members will be chosen, how many there will be (for example, at least five members), how long a member’s term on the committee will be, etc., similar to the language in section 3201 for the Commission membership.

    In addition, that section says the Commission will conduct outreach to the public, but doesn’t say how it will conduct outreach. The ways in which the Commission will conduct outreach should be set forth in the rule.

    Section 2-08 says the Commission retains the final authority to select the local projects. There should be a legal standard in the rule for determining the local projects so that decisions are not arbitrary and capricious and subject to political whims given that members of the Commission are appointed by politicians, thereby undercutting the whole point of participatory budgeting. For example, the rule could say that the Commission must select the local project or projects that it has determined are in the best interest of the people of the borough after considering the number of votes and the factors in 2-06.

    Comment added June 2, 2023 10:52pm

  • Christopher Dowling

    I believe we are on the right track and discretionary spending helps communities thrive in their own space and bring them together. However, I do have some reservations on the communication strategies used. As a community member and organizational leader I only heard about this after all the ideas had been submitted. I also only hear about the voting on social media and no where else. The website is confusing and even the web announcements are too busy and not direct enough. On a different note I believe a borough wide application is too broad. There is no way that even a million dollars will impact even a small percent of the population and we are too diverse by neighborhoods that the impact will have meaning. Also the time of one year to organize and spend the money is way too short. Real programming can take a year of more to come to fruition. This should be a multi-year project. Thank you!

    Comment added June 5, 2023 2:31pm

  • Antonio Mendez

    I was a BAC member representing the borough of Manhattan for the evaluation phase of proposals submitted. I cannot stress enough the importance of such a collaborative process within our city government, not to mention the learning experience for all involved as BAC members. I fully support the rules proposed and feel it is essential for the working, participation and success of our city and it’s inhabitants. There is no better way for all New Yorkers to have a stake in the success of our environment.

    Comment added June 5, 2023 3:52pm