We have submitted a request for a referendum to stop the “Novi Sad na vodi” development. The Danube waterfront belongs to all citizens, not to a privileged few.
The disputed plan turns the Danube waterfront, land meant for tourism, sport and recreation, into yet another construction site for housing, in violation of the city's General Urban Plan.
Alongside Fruška Gora, the Danube is the most important natural resource Novi Sad has. Instead of protecting it, the city is handing it to private interest.
The absurdity is complete. The investor commissioned the plan, the investor paid the public city enterprise for it, and the Commission that adopted it was staffed by architects the same investor had previously hired.
A referendum is the strongest tool citizens have: direct decision-making whose result carries legal force. Not a message, but the binding will of the city.
The referendum and citizens' initiative are guaranteed by the Constitution and are equal in force to the decisions of elected representatives.
The city assembly is obliged to call a referendum at the request of at least 10% of voters. It is a legal duty, not a favour.
A binding decision made at a referendum must be respected. The authorities cannot bypass it or overturn it with a contrary decision.
When other mechanisms have been rendered meaningless, a referendum returns the decision to those the city belongs to: its citizens.
No one can reliably predict the election date, as it depends on political circumstances beyond our control. That is exactly why we must not tie the fate of the Danube to someone else's calendar. It should also be noted that the announced elections are national, not local, and do not decide the future of the waterfront. The timeline is decisive: as soon as the re-parcelling is completed, applications for building permits and the start of works follow. By the time elections are held, a government is formed and the question of Novi Sad reaches the agenda, the foundations may already be poured and the damage irreversible. A referendum does not rule out any other struggle; it is a concrete, legally grounded mechanism that takes effect immediately.
The logistics are demanding and we do not downplay that. Collecting signatures, field work and oversight of the process require people, time and organisation. The complexity of the task, however, is no reason to give up. Behind the platform stands a large and expert team that has worked through the scenarios and prepared a plan for every stage of the procedure. From citizens we ask one thing: a signature. The organisation, the certifiers and the oversight are ours to handle.
The procedure is prescribed and it is important that everyone knows it. The city first has fifteen days to verify the citizens' initiative with the referendum question, and the legal room to reject the proposal is very narrow. After verification, signature collection begins before municipal certifiers, and certifying a signature is free of charge, on a form the city administration is obliged to provide, within ninety days. Only then does the city assembly decide on calling the referendum, and by law it cannot reject it without grounds. In the event of obstruction, the competent court has thirty days to rule. The point is simple: from this moment on, every decision they make is a problem for them. If they refuse without cause, they face legal and political consequences; if they accept, the referendum moves forward.
We expect obstruction and have factored it into the plan. The law is on the citizens' side: signing is possible at local community offices, and the city is obliged to enable electronic signing of the proposal, which makes the process easier still. In earlier initiatives the city administration provided certifiers on request, so there is a basis to insist on the same. Our main instrument is public pressure, consistent and persistent, aimed at making institutions act in accordance with the law. We do not reveal every step in advance, but for the scenarios ahead we have prepared answers.
Yes, for three reasons. First, by law an annulled decision cannot be re-initiated for four years, which is enough for the project to effectively cease to exist. Second, economic logic: once citizens annul the plan, no serious investor re-enters a venture that has already cost them dearly. Third, and most important, a successful referendum sends a clear message to every future city government that decisions made against citizens' interests can be overturned by the citizens themselves. A citizens' referendum of this kind has never been carried out in Serbia. If we are the first, we permanently shift the balance of power in favour of the citizens of every city.
We fight for the Danube together. Sign up and help in any way. No contribution is too small: every signature, every share and every hour on the ground makes us stronger.
Leave your details and tell us how you'd like to help. We reply to everyone.
The button opens your email app with a message ready for 100postosad@gmail.com.
