The Office of Mass Engagement (OME), established by Mayor Zohran Mamdani earlier this year, has come under intense scrutiny following revelations about its substantial budget. During a recent City Council executive budget hearing, Budget Director Sherif Soliman disclosed that the OME would have a total budget of $53 millionincluding $2.8 million in new funding for staff in fiscal year 2027. This disclosure has sparked a wave of questions from lawmakers regarding the office’s funding sources and safeguards against political influence.
The OME was created via executive order in January to consolidate and expand city outreach functions. Mayor mamdani emphasized that the office was not a continuation of his campaign operation but rather a restructuring of existing civic engagement efforts within the government. Tascha Van Auken, a longtime Democratic Socialists of America organizer, was appointed as the office’s first commissioner. Van Auken described the new office as an effort to organize participation at scale and build systems for long-term co-governance.
Budget Breakdown and Concerns
City Council Speaker Julie Menin raised concerns about the budget allocation within the OME, particularly the portion dedicated to the Public Engagement Unit (PEU). Soliman indicated that the administration could provide a breakdown of the different offices within the OME, including PEU and the Community Affairs Unit. Office of Management and Budget officials stated that PEU’s budget is approximately $24 million and that they could provide Council staff with the relevant budget codes.
Menin noted that the executive plan shows $10.3 million in dedicated budget codes for PEU within the Human Resources Administration (HRA), including 20 new positions. However, she expressed understanding that there was additional PEU funding and headcount not clearly delineated in the budget. This lack of transparency has raised eyebrows among council members, who are keen to ensure that taxpayer funds are being used appropriately.
Organize NYC Initiative and Political Influence
The OME has drawn attention for its Organize NYC initiative, aimed at increasing participation in the Rent Guidelines Board process. Mayor Mamdani made a rent freeze a centerpiece of his campaign, although he has since stressed that the RGB is independent. The administration has stated that the outreach effort is not intended to tell residents what position to take. Instead, canvassers are tasked with asking residents whether they know if their apartments are rent-stabilized and whether they would testify before the board. The effort also includes outreach to landlords.
Landlord groups have questioned whether City Hall’s organizing effort amounts to political pressure on a board that is supposed to operate independently. This concern has been echoed by City Council members, who are wary of any potential conflict of interest. During the hearing, Menin asked what safeguards exist to ensure the OME is not engaging in political work. Soliman responded that government offices cannot engage in political activities and that employees are instructed on those rules through conflict-of-interest and Department of Investigation training. He emphasized, This is a government office, not a political operation.
Community Engagement and Future Directions
The OME’s work builds on existing outreach functions, including connecting New Yorkers with government services and housing-related assistance. Soliman described the new structure as a continuation and expansion of those efforts to reach residents in their communities. However, concerns have been raised about whether the office will effectively engage with groups that do not fall under the lefty umbrella. City Councilwoman Lynn Shulman expressed concerns about the new office absorbing the longstanding community affairs unit, which served to connect New Yorkers to City Hall.
Shulman noted that past mayoral administrations assigned a point person for council and community boards to reach out to over issues, but that has yet to happen under the current administration. This has led to questions about the office’s effectiveness in engaging with diverse community groups. A Manhattan community board member, who wished to remain anonymous, questioned the allocation of funds within the OME, stating, Only one staffer in this office is dedicated to liaising with all of Manhattan’s community boards, so where exactly is all this money going? If it’s to support the mayor’s political priorities, that’s unacceptable.
As the OME continues to evolve, it remains to be seen how it will address these concerns and ensure that its efforts are perceived as genuine civic engagement rather than political maneuvering. The coming months will be crucial in determining the office’s impact on New York City’s civic landscape.