Source of authorityFormalityBindingnessScopeStatus
Council or boardFormalAdvisory with required responseFull discretion within the potCommitted and released
Council or boardFormalAdvisory with required responseMixedCommitted and released
Council or boardFormalAdvisory with required responseMixed—
Maker’s note · curator

Row one is Cycles 1 and 2, row two Cycles 3 to 6, row three Cycles 7 and 8 (status undocumented). PB exists by City Council resolution of April 2012, passed 4 to 3 against the Mayor's opposition, and lives on through an annual budget allocation and a rulebook the Council approves and may change by simple majority at any time. It was never codified in the charter or municipal code. Vote results are formally brought before the Council for consideration and the Council has the discretion to approve which projects are funded, the amount of funding, and conditions, so the mandate is advisory with a required response; Chapin's first finding was that this override power casts doubt on the public's real influence. In practice the Council approved every winning slate from Cycle 1 to Cycle 6, sometimes partially funding the last project to fit the cap and reworking projects with legal problems, and in Cycle 1 a standing-room-only crowd watched the approval. The Council did use its rule-making power: it raised the voting age to 16 over the Steering Committee's Cycle 1 proposal (lowered to 14 from Cycle 4), edited the Cycle 2 rulebook in January 2014, and gave direction for Cycle 4 in December 2015. Scope narrowed over time from any public-benefit project implemented by the City or a partner (Cycles 1 and 2) to two pots with distinct eligibility, City-owned property for capital and CDBG rules for programs, and ballot placement decided by the City Manager with the City Attorney.

Guest book

Notes left on Authority and Mandate.

No notes yet. Be the first to leave one on this node.