Civic City of Lubartów

Councilor Piotr Kusyk is disturbed by poles and low turnout. Us too.

Not everyone likes the view we present. And it would be possible to stop there, because we do not have to agree, as it is in a democracy. 
“The civic budget is a tool that builds social trust, both among residents and local authorities, and, above all, with the residents themselves in relation to other residents - which is the essence of the functioning of the local government community. In a situation where projects to be implemented from the civic budget selected by residents are undermined by local authorities, criticized or, worse, will not be implemented, it will certainly weaken the level of trust and discourage residents from re-engaging in the entire process. "
This is an excerpt from the Foundation's report  Batory from 2014, by Dariusz Kraszewski and Karol Mojkowski, on civic budgets in Poland. 
Sounds familiar in Lubartów.
We have been writing about the reservations to the civic budget since its introduction. In addition, these are not empty reservations, but the effect of our going out on the street and talking to residents. Do you remember fortune candies? In 2016, we encouraged residents to participate in voting, and one of the applicants - Patryk Kuś, encouraged them to support their projects. Yes! We went out on the street! 
In 2015, at a joint meeting of city committees, before the session introducing the civic budget, councilor Kusyk said: “The goal of the civic budget is to get the local community involved and enable the local community to spend the commune's money. And, in my opinion, this is not the residents' money as some claim. They ceased to be such when they were paid, e.g. in the form of taxes and fees. These funds can only be allocated to the commune's own tasks, and not to the needs of individual residents. Although the residents already know that the money is in some part at their disposal, they do not see the relationship between the funds spent and the financial condition of the city and their own wallets. This is because the civic budget directs attention to spending the money itself, rather than reflecting on how to finance specific needs and what long-term financial consequences an investment will have for the city. It's just about how to spend the money that is already in the system from somewhere. I know that our knowledge, the knowledge of councilors is much greater - in my opinion - about the city budget than the average inhabitant of Lubartów ”.
Well, as we understand, this knowledge in the case of residents - according to councilor Kusyk - should remain at the same level. 
Involvement of the local community and making it possible to spend communal money understood as passive voting. 
We see the role of residents in the civic budget differently. The councilor is famous for his pictorial comparisons, and to this day he is "hanging" with the election slogan about the rule of puppets. Now he thinks some of the real applicants are hiding behind the "pillars". 
Let us make a similar, pictorial comparison. Some time ago, the candidate for councilor Piotr Kusyk "gave a face" to the election committee. There was a risk that it would be only a machine to collect votes for the list - using the nomenclature of a councilor - he became a "pole". We think the councilman assumed that he would not be a machine. 
So why does he not understand the accusations against the councilors - applicants? Probably programmatically. We are against reducing residents to passive "voters". 
Civic or participatory budget. And a complete misunderstanding of the concepts. 
Participation is DIRECT. 
The councilor is the REPRESENTATIVE of the local authority.
The councilor (theoretically) REPRESENTS voters in the City Council. 
I think it's all clear. The fact that councilors encouraged residents to participate in consultations or the civic budget was insufficient in most cases. After all, they know better than us, they are involved and participate. 
After all, it is best for residents to get up from their seats once in five years. And when they start getting up too often, it's not good for the authorities.
An authority that has so far implemented the winning projects of the "civic" budget in a snail's manner or at all. And the authority which decided that despite not winning the vote, the applicant would get the remaining money. 
Comments:
"So what if I voted if they don't."
"I will not submit the project because I have no chance in competition with the councilor."
"There was money for what was needed. What do I decide, how the council gave to those who did not win."