NYC Ballot Proposals 2026 Explained: Mamdani’s Five COGE Measures and What Happens Next

By the GovBuddy team · Last reviewed November 10, 2026

Where We Are

Following the November 3, 2026 general election, all five New York City ballot proposals passed, according to unofficial New York City Board of Elections results reported by City & State NY.

The five proposals came from the Commission on Government Efficiency (COGE), a charter revision commission that Mayor Zohran Mamdani convened in May 2026 and chaired by Patrick Gaspard. The commission held 10 public hearings across the five boroughs through June and July before adopting its final report and five ballot questions on July 23, 2026.

Official results are finalized through the New York City Board of Elections canvass and certification process.

For government affairs teams, lobbying firms, trade associations, and in-house legislative affairs offices, the useful question now is not simply whether the measures passed. It is which agencies will handle implementation, which policy sectors may feel the changes first, and whether any related state-level issues emerge during the 2027-28 legislative session.

That last question matters particularly for organizations operating across both city and state government. A city agency may be responsible for implementing a Charter amendment, while any subsequent state legislation would involve a separate group of lawmakers, legislative committees, and staff.

For companion procedural context on the New York legislative staff landscape, see our guide on how to find New York legislative and committee staff contacts. For the broader November 3 election picture, see our New York Governor Election 2026 guide.

Quick Answer

New York City voters approved all five 2026 NYC ballot proposals on November 3, 2026, according to unofficial election results. The five proposals were placed on the ballot by the Commission on Government Efficiency (COGE), a charter revision commission convened by Mayor Zohran Mamdani in May 2026 and chaired by Patrick Gaspard.

The approved proposals cover public space permitting (Prop 1), city contracting reform (Prop 2), street safety and city property transactions (Prop 3), building permit consolidation (Prop 4), and a formal rainy day fund contribution methodology (Prop 5).

Implementation involves the Department of Transportation, the Department of Buildings, the Mayor’s Office, the Procurement Policy Board, the Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant city agencies.

The changes have different effective dates, with some beginning upon certification, others in 2027, and certain provisions extending to 2030.

State-level follow-up remains possible where city procedures interact with existing New York State law, although no additional state legislation is automatically required for the approved Charter amendments to take effect.

For organizations working with the New York Legislature, any subsequent Albany legislation would also mean identifying its sponsors, committee assignments, and relevant staff contacts. Resources such as the GovBuddy New York legislative committee directory provide a starting point for understanding the legislative committees and officials who may become involved.

Table of contents

1. The results in one table
2. Who put these on the ballot
3. Proposal 1: Public space permitting
4. Proposal 2: City contracting reform
5. Proposal 3: Street safety and city property
6. Proposal 4: Building permit consolidation
7. Proposal 5: Rainy day fund formula
8. Where Albany comes in

The Results in One Table

Percentages reflect the approximate election-night figures reported by City & State NY using unofficial New York City Board of Elections data with more than 88% of scanners reporting. These figures are not final certified percentages.

Implementation proceeds according to the effective dates and requirements of each Charter amendment. Some changes begin shortly after certification, while others require agency planning, revised administrative procedures, or the development of new systems over several years.

For organizations tracking these changes, the immediate work is at the city agency level. State legislative monitoring becomes relevant if related bills or policy changes are subsequently introduced in Albany.

Who Put These on the Ballot

The five proposals came from the Commission on Government Efficiency (COGE), a charter revision commission convened by Mayor Zohran Mamdani in May 2026 and chaired by Patrick Gaspard, with Ann Cheng serving as executive director.

COGE held 10 public hearings across the five boroughs through June and July 2026 and adopted its final report and five ballot questions on July 23, 2026.

The commission followed earlier Charter revision efforts under former Mayor Eric Adams. An Adams-appointed commission established in December 2024 developed proposals for the 2025 election. A separate commission appointed in December 2025 was subsequently dissolved by Mamdani before he established COGE in May 2026.

The proposals attracted both support and opposition. Supporters argued that they could reduce administrative delays and simplify government procedures for businesses, nonprofits, and residents. Critics questioned whether streamlining certain approval processes could reduce opportunities for public participation and oversight. Because the five proposals covered different policy areas, arguments for and against individual measures varied.

The rainy day fund proposal also raised questions about whether the 12% reserve target was sufficient. In an April 9, 2026 report, New York City Comptroller Mark Levine recommended a reserve target of 16% of city tax revenues, above the target ultimately included in Proposal 5.

The COGE process operated under the City Charter’s charter revision rules, which allow a mayor-appointed commission to propose amendments to the City Charter for voter approval. Those proposals can reach the ballot without requiring separate City Council approval.

Proposal 1: Public Space Permitting

Proposal 1 (“Speed Up Process for Granting a Revocable Consent to Use Public Space”) simplifies approval procedures for using public sidewalks and streets, including outdoor dining areas, accessibility ramps, benches, and other structures.

It modernizes public notice requirements and removes mandatory public hearings and certain City Council review procedures for qualifying applications, while retaining opportunities for community and Council input.

The commission estimated that the broader reforms could reduce an outdoor dining approval process that previously took approximately eight months by as much as 75%.

That reduction is a projected benefit, not a guaranteed processing time established by the Charter amendment.

The Department of Transportation is the principal implementing agency for outdoor dining, ramps, benches, and other street-use applications. The Office of Technology and Innovation (OTI) also administers revocable consents for telecommunications-related infrastructure. Both agencies are covered by relevant changes to the revocable consent process.

The new procedures take effect March 1, 2027, and do not apply to applications already submitted before that date.

Implementation may involve updated application procedures, public notices, and methods for receiving community input. State-level involvement is expected to be limited because the measure primarily changes New York City’s own approval process for public-space use.

For government affairs teams, the sectors most likely to be affected include hospitality and restaurants, accessibility and mobility-related businesses, street furniture vendors, and business improvement districts operating public-space programs.

Trade associations representing restaurants and public-space permit applicants should monitor Department of Transportation announcements and any proposed administrative rules or public-comment opportunities as the March 2027 effective date approaches.

Proposal 2: City Contracting Reform

Proposal 2 (“Reduce City Contractor Paperwork; Require Regular Meetings of Procurement Policy Board”) changes several procedures governing how New York City purchases goods and services and awards contracts.

It authorizes the Procurement Policy Board to simplify the detailed questionnaires required of prospective city contractors, requires the board to meet quarterly, allows the Mayor to delegate certain contract approval responsibilities, and makes public-comment requirements permanent for qualifying contract awards.

It also removes the mandatory public hearing requirement associated with the annual client services procurement plans prepared by city contracting agencies. Those plans are agency responsibilities rather than documents submitted by nonprofit contractors.

The commission estimated that the procurement reforms could save up to 30 days on certain contracting processes, representing an approximately 12% reduction in the timeline used for its estimate. Those figures describe projected efficiencies, not measured improvements following implementation.

The Mayor’s Office and the Procurement Policy Board are central to implementation, with the Mayor’s Office of Contract Services (MOCS) and individual agency contracting offices handling relevant operational procedures.

The Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) also has responsibilities within the city’s broader procurement system.

The quarterly Procurement Policy Board meeting requirement begins January 1, 2027. Certain provisions concerning the board’s authority to set contract thresholds begin October 1, 2030.

Implementation may include changes to procurement rules, questionnaire requirements, and the delegation of agency-level contract approvals, subject to the specific provisions and schedules established by the amendment.

Where State Procurement Rules May Matter

Certain city procurement requirements operate alongside state contracting law, particularly for firms doing business with both New York City and New York State.

Government affairs teams representing these organizations should monitor whether implementation raises questions about compliance with existing requirements in both jurisdictions.

If a related measure is introduced in Albany, the next step is to identify the bill’s sponsor, the committee to which it is referred, and the legislative offices responsible for considering it.

New York’s Senate has a Procurement and Contracts Committee. That does not mean any future NYC-related contracting bill will necessarily be assigned there, but it is one of the committees organizations working in procurement may need to understand.

The New York legislative committee directory maintained by GovBuddy Connect provides committee information, while Connect gives subscribers access to legislative staff and member contact details. That can help organizations identify the appropriate legislative offices once a bill is introduced, rather than trying to reconstruct the relevant contact list after an issue becomes urgent.

No specific state procurement alignment legislation has been established as necessary to implement Proposal 2.

Sectors likely to pay close attention include small business contractors, nonprofit human services providers, consulting and professional services firms, and construction procurement specialists.

Proposal 3: Street Safety and City Property

Proposal 3 (“Speed Up Street Safety Projects, Disposition of Unused City Property, Office Leasing”) combines several operational changes under one ballot question.

It simplifies aspects of the review process for street safety projects, including bike lanes and roadway redesigns. The commission projected that the reforms could reduce certain project timelines by approximately 33%.

The proposal also modifies procedures for the disposition of qualifying city-owned property, certain uses of development rights associated with city-owned landmarks, and the acquisition or leasing of office space for city workers.

For qualifying small-property transactions, the commission identified a potential reduction in processing time from approximately seven months to as little as 90 days. This is an estimated improvement for eligible transactions, not a universal deadline for every city-owned property sale.

The Department of Transportation is responsible for the street safety side of implementation. City property transactions and office acquisitions involve additional agencies, including the Department of Citywide Administrative Services and the City Planning Commission, depending on the type of transaction.

The changes streamline specified review requirements but do not eliminate every applicable approval or environmental safeguard.

Most Proposal 3 changes take effect upon certification of the election results. The provision permanently authorizing certain sales of undevelopable city-owned land takes effect December 31, 2030.

Administrative implementation may involve revised street safety consultation procedures and updated workflows for eligible city property transactions.

State-level touchpoint: some transportation and property projects remain subject to applicable state environmental and land-use requirements. Those requirements continue to apply where relevant, regardless of changes to the city’s administrative review process.

Sectors that may be affected include street safety and bike infrastructure contractors, transportation consultancies, real estate firms interested in city property transactions, and law firms with land-use practices.

Proposal 4: Building Permit Consolidation

Proposal 4 (“Simplify Building Permitting and Move Waterfront Permitting to Department of Buildings”) creates a framework for a centralized construction permitting system covering approvals currently handled through multiple city offices and agencies.

The commission identified approximately 40 types of approvals across 18 offices and agencies that could be coordinated through the proposed system.

The amendment also expands the number of Department of Buildings officials authorized to approve construction documents and transfers certain waterfront construction permitting responsibilities from the Department of Small Business Services to the Department of Buildings.

The practical objective is to let construction applicants submit information and track approvals through a more coordinated system instead of navigating multiple separate agency platforms.

This does not mean that the Department of Buildings will assume every participating agency’s legal authority or that all construction approvals will be issued by one agency.

The Department of Buildings is the principal implementing agency for the centralized system. Other city agencies will be required to use the system while retaining their respective review and approval responsibilities under applicable law.

The Department of Buildings must develop the centralized permitting system by 2030.

The transfer of waterfront permitting responsibilities is scheduled for December 31, 2030, or when the applicable new waterfront construction code takes effect under the amendment’s provisions. Existing waterfront permits and approvals remain valid.

Planning and implementation work may involve developing the technical system, coordinating agency application procedures, expanding authorized DOB approval roles, and preparing for the eventual transfer of waterfront jurisdiction.

The Potential State-Level Connection

New York City’s construction permitting system operates within a wider regulatory framework that includes applicable state building standards. Any future proposed change to state requirements would need to be considered separately from the city Charter amendment.

The proposal itself does not establish a requirement for additional state enabling legislation to create the permitting hub.

If a future state bill addresses an issue arising from the permitting reforms, its sponsor, assigned committee, and legislative staff will become relevant to construction and real estate organizations following the changes.

New York has legislative committees dealing with housing, construction, local government, and related issues. The actual committee assignment would depend on the content of any introduced bill.

Organizations that need to determine who handles those policy areas can research the relevant Senate and Assembly committees through GovBuddy’s New York committee directory, including committee jurisdictions and member information, before identifying the appropriate legislative contacts.

Sectors likely to follow these changes include construction general contractors, engineering firms, architects, waterfront developers, real estate development companies, and construction law practices.

Proposal 5: Rainy Day Fund Formula

Proposal 5 (“Set Contribution Targets for Rainy Day Fund to Promote Sufficient Budgetary Reserves”) establishes a reserve target of at least 12% of the City’s previous year’s tax revenues, held in the rainy day fund or other qualifying reserve funds.

It also requires the city to develop and publish a methodology for calculating contributions to the rainy day fund when reserves are below the target.

The proposal does not automatically require an unconditional annual deposit of 12% of tax revenues.

Deposits remain subject to approval through the city’s annual budget process and may be phased over several years or adjusted during periods of financial hardship.

The amendment also incorporates into city law an existing state requirement limiting withdrawals from the fund to 50% unless the Mayor certifies a compelling fiscal reason for exceeding that threshold.

The provision adds a formal savings target and contribution methodology to a reserve framework that previously lacked those requirements in the City Charter.

The Office of Management and Budget leads implementation in consultation with the Comptroller.

OMB must publish the initial deposit methodology by May 2027, update it by May 2030, and review it every four years thereafter.

Implementation will focus on defining how the city calculates progress toward the 12% reserve target, determines appropriate contributions when reserves fall below that level, and incorporates those decisions into the annual financial planning process.

The Comptroller’s office will retain its established fiscal oversight and reporting responsibilities. The published methodology will also provide a clearer basis for assessing the city’s progress toward its reserve target.

State-level touchpoint: New York City’s rainy day fund operates within a state-authorized fiscal framework, and the State Comptroller retains established oversight responsibilities concerning city finances.

State fiscal officials and legislators may take an interest in how the methodology performs over time, particularly where it relates to broader municipal fiscal management. However, no specific new state legislation is required by the Charter amendment.

Sectors likely to follow Proposal 5 include municipal finance advisors, public finance law firms, rating agencies, and state and city fiscal oversight bodies.

Where Albany Comes In

None of the five COGE proposals automatically requires additional state Legislature approval to take effect in New York City. The approved amendments operate through the City Charter revision process, with implementation governed by their individual provisions and effective dates.

The potential Albany interaction is on the follow-up side: where city-level changes intersect with existing state law, state agency responsibilities, or state fiscal oversight, additional guidance or legislative proposals may eventually become relevant.

For the 2027-28 state legislative session beginning in January 2027, three Albany-side issues are worth watching.

First, building permitting. Proposal 4’s consolidation operates alongside state building standards. Government affairs teams should monitor whether implementation raises questions about the relationship between the new city permitting system and existing state requirements. No enabling legislation has been established as necessary for the centralized hub.

Second, contracting reform. Proposal 2 may be relevant to organizations working across both city and state procurement systems. Those organizations should monitor whether future rulemaking or administrative guidance affects how they manage their contracting obligations.

Third, fiscal reserves. Proposal 5’s rainy day fund methodology sits within a broader state fiscal framework. The State Comptroller’s office and relevant legislative fiscal committees have established responsibilities concerning public finances, although there is no confirmed package of follow-up legislation arising from Proposal 5.

For government affairs teams tracking NYC implementation, the immediate priority is monitoring agency announcements, published rules, implementation deadlines, and public hearings.

If a Related Bill Reaches Albany, Who Do You Contact?

The answer depends on the legislation.

A bill number tells you which proposal to follow, but not necessarily who in the Legislature handles the issue or whom your organization should approach.

If a related bill is introduced, the sponsoring legislator’s office is an obvious starting point. Once the bill receives a committee assignment, the committee chair’s office and relevant legislative staff may become appropriate contacts.

For an organization following procurement reform, construction rules, and municipal finance at the same time, that can involve several legislators, committees, and staff offices.

The New York Senate and Assembly publish official legislative records, including bill sponsors and committee referrals. The next practical task is finding the right people within those offices.

This is where GovBuddy Connect’s New York legislative directories can support the research. Connect provides access to legislative committee information and staff contacts, including chiefs of staff, schedulers, and other legislative personnel.

Rather than relying on an old contact spreadsheet, teams can use the directory to identify the relevant offices and research the people responsible for the issues they follow.

For government affairs professionals working across multiple policy areas, maintaining those relationships starts with knowing who is actually in each office and how to reach them.

If your organization works with the New York Legislature, explore GovBuddy Connect subscriptions for New York to see the directory options available for individual professionals and teams.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the five NYC ballot proposals from 2026?

The five proposals are:

• Prop 1: Speeding up public space permitting, including outdoor dining.
• Prop 2: Reforming the city contracting process for businesses and nonprofits.
• Prop 3: Streamlining street safety infrastructure and certain city property transactions.
• Prop 4: Simplifying building permitting.
• Prop 5: Setting a formal reserve target and contribution methodology for the city’s rainy day fund.

All five were placed on the ballot by the Commission on Government Efficiency.

Did the NYC ballot proposals pass on November 3, 2026?

Yes. Unofficial New York City Board of Elections results reported by City & State NY with more than 88% of scanners reporting showed all five proposals passing.

Props 1 through 4 received roughly 61-67% support in the reported election-night figures, while Prop 5 received approximately 72%. These were preliminary percentages rather than final certified margins.

Who supported or opposed the NYC ballot proposals in 2026?

Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Commission on Government Efficiency proposed all five measures, and the Mayor publicly welcomed their passage.

Supporters of the reforms emphasized faster approvals, reduced administrative burdens, and improved government efficiency.

Opponents and critics raised concerns about reduced mandatory public hearings, changes to City Council oversight, and the potential effects on public participation.

Views also differed on the appropriate level of fiscal reserves. In April 2026, Comptroller Mark Levine recommended a 16% reserve target, compared with the 12% target ultimately included in Proposal 5.

What are the pros and cons of the NYC ballot proposals in 2026?

Supporters argue that the five proposals address lengthy city processes, including outdoor dining approvals that previously took approximately eight months, certain city property transactions taking around seven months, procurement procedures that can span months, and construction permitting involving numerous agencies.

They believe the changes can reduce administrative delays, improve operational efficiency, and make city processes easier for businesses and nonprofits.

Critics are concerned that removing certain mandatory hearings and review requirements could reduce opportunities for public participation and oversight.

Proposal 5 also raises the policy question of whether a 12% reserve target provides sufficient protection against future fiscal emergencies, particularly compared with the 16% target recommended by the Comptroller in April 2026.

The projected efficiency improvements remain estimates until they can be measured through implementation.

What is the Commission on Government Efficiency (COGE)?

The Commission on Government Efficiency is a charter revision commission convened by Mayor Mamdani in May 2026, chaired by Patrick Gaspard, with Ann Cheng as executive director.

The commission held 10 public hearings across the five boroughs during June and July 2026, adopted its final report on July 23, 2026, and placed five ballot questions before voters on November 3, 2026.

How did people vote on the NYC ballot proposals in 2026?

Voters could vote yes or no on each of the five proposals separately on the November 3, 2026 ballot.

Each proposal was decided by a simple majority of the votes cast on that question. All five passed, according to the reported unofficial results.

When do the proposals take effect?

The effective dates differ by proposal.

• Proposal 1: The revised public-space approval procedures take effect March 1, 2027.
• Proposal 2: Quarterly Procurement Policy Board meetings begin January 1, 2027, while certain contracting threshold changes begin October 1, 2030.
• Proposal 3: Most provisions take effect upon certification, with the permanent undevelopable-land sales provision beginning December 31, 2030.
• Proposal 4: The centralized permitting system must be developed by 2030. Waterfront permitting transfer provisions have a separate 2030 or applicable code-related effective date.
• Proposal 5: The amendment takes effect upon certification, with the initial reserve contribution methodology due by May 2027.

Actual operational changes will depend on the requirements of each amendment and the agencies responsible for implementation.

Will Albany need to act on any of these?

None of the five proposals automatically requires additional state Legislature approval to take effect in New York City.

State-level issues may arise if implementation intersects with existing procurement requirements, building regulations, or fiscal oversight responsibilities.

Proposals 2, 4, and 5 may therefore be relevant to organizations monitoring both city and state policy.

However, additional Albany legislation is a possibility rather than a confirmed requirement.

Who should I contact if the NYC ballot proposals lead to state legislation?

Start with the sponsoring legislator’s office once a related bill has been introduced.

If the bill is assigned to a Senate or Assembly committee, the committee chair’s office and relevant legislative staff may also be appropriate contacts.

New York’s official legislative websites publish bill sponsorship and committee information. For staff and committee contact research, GovBuddy Connect’s New York directory provides information about legislators, legislative committees, and contacts within their offices.

The right contact will depend on the specific legislation and what your organization wants to discuss.

Sources

Official City and Commission Records

1. COGE Releases Five Ballot Proposals and Final Report (Office of the Mayor of New York, July 23, 2026).
2. Commission on Government Efficiency Adopted Final Report (Commission on Government Efficiency, 2026).
3. COGE Proposed Final Report, July 23, 2026 (Commission on Government Efficiency, July 23, 2026).
4. NYC Votes: 2026 Ballot Proposal Explanations (New York City Campaign Finance Board, 2026).
5. New York City Board of Elections (Official election results and certification records).

Election Reporting and Public Analysis

6. Mamdani’s Five Ballot Proposals (City & State NY, November 2026).
7. Mamdani’s Charter Revision Commission Advances Five Ballot Questions (NY1, July 24, 2026).
8. What to Know About NYC’s Five Ballot Proposals (Brownstoner, 2026).

Fiscal Policy

9. Strengthening the City’s Rainy Day Fund (Office of the New York City Comptroller, April 9, 2026).

Governing Framework

10. New York City Charter provisions governing Charter revision commissions, public referendums, and the approved 2026 Charter amendments.