Anyone have strong opinions on the ballot proposals up for a vote? (construction, legally)

[Cida]

I love those Voter Guide booklets.

[BBMW]

Voting against ranked choice voting. Keep it the way it is.

Voting against the CCRB changes. We don't need the damn thing in the first place.

[Gantz]

Strong opinions:
Ballot Question #5 - NO.
Extending ULURP review from 2 months to 3 months is idiotic. Literally has no benefit, but increase construction costs. All it will do is make land use reviews more expensive, for no reason but NIMBYism. As it is, 2 months is already waaay too long.

Most of the rest of the questions are about increasing spending and have "guaranteed minimum" $$$ mandates in the budget for programs that should not even exist. Public Advocate is a completely useless position that should be eliminated. CCRB changes are excessive if what is supposed to be a minor review board is staffed with ~1% of the NYPD total force... that's way too much bureaucracy.

[OyCrumbler]

Ballot Q1 - ranked choice voting - voting yes as it theoretically gives a better outlet to break up the Democratic machine and any political machine that may try to take its place

Ballot Q2 - CCRB reforms - maybe. Asking for further clarity on the commissioner’s disciplinary actions but I don’t like that it’s through more board members

Ballot Q3 - Elected officials lobbying reform - yes, extending the time before former elected officials can lobby their former agency means that sweet return on investment from lobbying groups is diminished just a bit

Ballot Q4 - Requiring NYC saves up a rainy day fund - yes. The city riding and dying on boom and bust cycles is stupid

Ballot Q5 - ULURP reform - probably not. If it were just the requirement to post project reviews, then yes, but extending the review period another 30 days is not going to make the board more efficient. I wish this ballot question was just the former.

[Gantz]

Ballot Q4 - Requiring NYC saves up a rainy day fund - yes. The city riding and dying on boom and bust cycles is stupid

It depends how this "rainy day fund" is implemented and under what conditions can the city spend it. Keep in mind, this is not an amendment to run balanced budgets or anything. Also, this sets "minimum budgets" for offices of public advocate and borough presidents.... which is a bad idea. All it would mean is that during a recession NYC would legally not be able to make cuts in those offices, and instead would have to cut actual services instead.

[Cida]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

Ballot Q1 - ranked choice voting - voting yes as it theoretically gives a better outlet to break up the Democratic machine and any political machine that may try to take its place

Ballot Q2 - CCRB reforms - maybe. Asking for further clarity on the commissioner’s disciplinary actions but I don’t like that it’s through more board members

Ballot Q3 - Elected officials lobbying reform - yes, extending the time before former elected officials can lobby their former agency means that sweet return on investment from lobbying groups is diminished just a bit

Ballot Q4 - Requiring NYC saves up a rainy day fund - yes. The city riding and dying on boom and bust cycles is stupid

Ballot Q5 - ULURP reform - probably not. If it were just the requirement to post project reviews, then yes, but extending the review period another 30 days is not going to make the board more efficient. I wish this ballot question was just the former.

Thank you, Oy, for such good specifics.

Ranked choice seems okay as long as it's ONLY in primaries.

They seem like fairly minor tweaks.

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by Gantz

It depends how this "rainy day fund" is implemented and under what conditions can the city spend it. Keep in mind, this is not an amendment to run balanced budgets or anything. Also, this sets "minimum budgets" for offices of public advocate and borough presidents.... which is a bad idea. All it would mean is that during a recession NYC would legally not be able to make cuts in those offices, and instead would have to cut actual services instead.

Yea, I hear you. The ****tiness of these ballot choices is directly from the bundling they have.

[Mr.Retired]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

Ballot Q1 - ranked choice voting - voting yes as it theoretically gives a better outlet to break up the Democratic machine and any political machine that may try to take its place

Ballot Q2 - CCRB reforms - maybe. Asking for further clarity on the commissioner’s disciplinary actions but I don’t like that it’s through more board members

Ballot Q3 - Elected officials lobbying reform - yes, extending the time before former elected officials can lobby their former agency means that sweet return on investment from lobbying groups is diminished just a bit

Ballot Q4 - Requiring NYC saves up a rainy day fund - yes. The city riding and dying on boom and bust cycles is stupid

Ballot Q5 - ULURP reform - probably not. If it were just the requirement to post project reviews, then yes, but extending the review period another 30 days is not going to make the board more efficient. I wish this ballot question was just the former.

1) Yes
2) No
3) Yes
4) No
5) Yes

[dfc99]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

Ballot Q1 - ranked choice voting - voting yes as it theoretically gives a better outlet to break up the Democratic machine and any political machine that may try to take its place

Ballot Q2 - CCRB reforms - maybe. Asking for further clarity on the commissioner’s disciplinary actions but I don’t like that it’s through more board members

Ballot Q3 - Elected officials lobbying reform - yes, extending the time before former elected officials can lobby their former agency means that sweet return on investment from lobbying groups is diminished just a bit

Ballot Q4 - Requiring NYC saves up a rainy day fund - yes. The city riding and dying on boom and bust cycles is stupid

Ballot Q5 - ULURP reform - probably not. If it were just the requirement to post project reviews, then yes, but extending the review period another 30 days is not going to make the board more efficient. I wish this ballot question was just the former.

I'm voting NO on all but Q4.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by Mr.Retired

1) Yes
2) No
3) Yes
4) No
5) Yes

Curious, why "yes" on ULURP reform?