Portland voters will decide whether residents should control millions of dollars in city spending each year, weighing a permanent expansion of public budget authority against concerns about financing basic services and maintaining the projects residents select.
Measure 26-267, on the November 3 ballot, would amend Portland’s city charter to establish participatory budgeting. Residents would propose projects, help develop viable options and vote on which should receive funding. Their selections would bind the city, giving the process authority beyond the public testimony and advisory recommendations that accompany ordinary budget deliberations.
The annual commitment would equal at least 2% of the previous fiscal year’s adopted General Fund discretionary ongoing expenses. Preliminary figures in the official ballot summary place the allocation at $16.4 million in fiscal year 2027–28 and $17 million the following year. Those estimates are subject to the spending base used in the calculation.
The proposal would not increase or decrease taxes. It would reserve existing city resources for a separate spending process, reducing the amount elected officials could allocate through their regular budget decisions. The council would be authorized to identify funding across the city budget to meet the obligation.
That financing provision has become a central point of disagreement. Supporters contend that Portland can give residents meaningful control over public investments while retaining flexibility over the source of funding. Opponents question whether the city can sustain another permanent commitment while confronting budget shortfalls and competing demands for services.
Mayor Keith Wilson opposes the measure, arguing that its timing could complicate efforts to maintain basic operations. Concerns have centered on pressure on police, fire protection, parks and other services supported by discretionary resources. The amendment does not identify specific service reductions, and passage would not automatically establish which programs would lose funding. Those decisions would follow as city officials assembled the required allocation.
Supporters describe the proposal as a way to put neighborhood priorities directly into spending decisions. The Your 2 Cents PDX campaign argues that residents should have enforceable authority over a portion of public investment, with detailed administrative rules developed through implementation rather than embedded in the charter.
Under the proposed structure, an oversight committee would include residents representing every City Council district. Residents could submit ideas through public meetings and other accessible forums. City employees and resident budget delegates would review those submissions, assess feasibility and refine them into a limited number of projects eligible for selection.
Qualified proposals would then advance to a binding resident vote. Projects could serve an individual council district or the city as a whole. City government or its agents would implement the winners, while the oversight committee would guide the process without independently deciding which projects receive money.
The amount available for those projects would depend partly on administrative expenses. The required program funding would also cover staffing, implementation and evaluation, meaning the annual allocation would finance both the public process and its resulting investments.
Longer-term costs present another unresolved issue. A project approved for construction or expansion could require maintenance, employees or operating money in later budgets. The measure does not settle every question about how those continuing obligations would be financed, leaving future implementation decisions with consequences beyond the initial award.
Voting procedures also remain to be developed. The charter language makes project selection open and accessible to residents and establishes a process separate from elections governed by ordinary city and state voting laws. Detailed participation rules and safeguards would be determined as the program takes shape.
The amendment requires funding to begin no later than fiscal year 2027–28, with the first participatory budgeting process beginning no later than July 2028. It also requires evaluations by city employees and the oversight committee, along with periodic independent performance audits by the city auditor.
Approval would place the annual funding obligation in Portland’s governing charter. Rejection would leave the existing budget process in place, with the mayor and city administration developing the proposal and the council considering, amending and adopting spending after public hearings.
The election will determine whether Portland guarantees residents a binding share of budget authority before resolving the program’s detailed financing and operating rules. The subsequent budgets would determine how that commitment fits alongside the city’s existing services.