The ballot you'll see in the booth, explained.
This is a sample, for planning. It matches the real layout of the November 3 ballot for the Financial District east of Broadway, the Seaport, Civic Center, the southern blocks of Chinatown and Two Bridges west of Clinton Street: two sheets, both sides, same rows and columns as the paper, so nothing surprises you in the booth. Nothing you mark here is a vote. Tap an oval to mark it, tap Insights on any race or proposal for a sourced, nonpartisan rundown, then download one PDF to bring with you: a plain-English voting plan with your choices, the dates and the rules, followed by your marked sample ballot.
This ballot style serves the part of the 65th Assembly District that lies in the 1st Municipal Court District. Everyone else in the 65th Assembly District (the rest of Chinatown and the Lower East Side) has the identical ballot except the last row, Judge of the Civil Court, which is drawn for the 2nd Municipal Court District there.
Governor, Comptroller, Attorney General and the five proposals are the same citywide. Supreme Court, Surrogate and the three countywide Civil Court seats are the same across Manhattan. Congress (NY-10), State Senate (SD-27) and Assembly (AD-65) are shared by everyone in the 65th Assembly District.
Look up your own sample ballot by address to be sure.
Your picks stay in this browser only; nothing is sent anywhere.
Sheet 1 · FrontStatewide and legislative offices
Remember to vote both sidescandidato por escrito
candidato por escrito
Sheet 1 · BackBallot proposals
Five proposed City Charter amendmentsSimplify process to use public space for uses such as ramps, planters and cafes, by removing mandatory hearings and Council disapproval of sidewalk cafes, while maintaining community and Council input. “Yes” speeds up process to use public space while maintaining community input. “No” maintains longer process with mandatory public hearing to use public space and Council review of sidewalk cafes.
Reduce paperwork for City contractors by authorizing Procurement Policy Board to simplify contractor questionnaire. Require quarterly meetings of the Procurement Policy Board. Remove mandatory hearing for required client services report. “Yes” amends Procurement Policy Board authority, including to simplify contractor questionnaire; authorizes Mayor to delegate certain contract approvals. “No” leaves laws unchanged, with Mayor and Comptroller maintaining longer questionnaire.
Simplify review of street safety projects to reduce construction timelines. Fast track disposition of unused City property with approval from City Planning Commission. Expedite leasing offices used for City workforce. “Yes” simplifies street project approval, City property disposition and office leasing. “No” maintains intra-agency consultation for road projects, Council approval for City property dispositions and Council disapproval of office leases.
Create centralized construction permits hub to simplify permitting. Move waterfront permitting from Department of Small Business Services to Department of Buildings. Allow construction approval by additional Department of Buildings officials. “Yes” simplifies permitting by authorizing a centralized permitting hub, moving waterfront permitting to Department of Buildings, and allowing additional Department of Buildings officials to issue approvals. “No” leaves laws unchanged.
Set target amount of money to hold in reserve funds, including rainy day fund, to address unexpected financial hardships in future years, and require development of methodology to calculate contributions. “Yes” requires Mayor to develop methodology for calculating deposits to rainy day fund, with deposits subject to approval in the City budget. “No” leaves laws unchanged, with no reserves target.
Sheet 2 · FrontJudicial offices
Sheet 2 is blank on the backcandidato por escrito
candidato por escrito