Legislature approves first step in moving NY races to even-numbered years
New York state lawmakers have initiated a constitutional amendment that would shift most local elections to even-numbered years, aligning them with state and federal contests. Following legislative approval on June 4 and June 5, 2026, the proposal now heads toward a potential statewide referendum in November 2027. If enacted, this change would impact mayors, city councils, county clerks, sheriffs, district attorneys, and judges across the state, with the notable exception of New York City, where elections would remain in odd-numbered years.
Legislative Path and Scope
The amendment passed the state Senate with a 38-22 vote and the Assembly with an 88-46 tally. This action follows a 2023 law, which had already moved certain county and town elections to even-numbered years—a policy that faced a three-year legal challenge before the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case in March. Sponsored by Senator James Skoufis and Assemblyman Jonathan Jacobson, the current proposal aims to further consolidate the election calendar.
Did You Know? New York City voters participated in a non-binding referendum last November where they rejected moving city elections to even-numbered years by a margin of more than five percentage points.
Arguments for and Against Consolidation
Supporters of the amendment, including Assemblyman Jacobson, argue that shifting local races to even years will increase voter participation and reduce administrative costs associated with odd-year elections. During a three-hour floor debate on June 5, Jacobson defended the consolidation as a necessary reform for the state’s electoral process.
Conversely, opponents—led by Republican lawmakers—contend that local issues may be overshadowed by national political trends. The New York State Conference of Mayors and Municipal Officials formally opposed the measure, warning in a memo that “long and complex ballots will almost certainly lead to voter fatigue” at the expense of local contests. The organization maintains that a system of staggered and focused elections is superior for ensuring informed voter participation.
Expert Insight: Samantha Carter notes that while the push for even-year elections is framed as a strategy to boost turnout, the tension between administrative efficiency and the visibility of local candidates remains a significant hurdle. The exclusion of New York City suggests a recognition of local political autonomy, yet the potential for ballot fatigue could fundamentally change how voters engage with down-ballot races in the 61 affected cities.
What Happens Next
Because the proposal involves a change to the state constitution, the bill must be passed again by the state Legislature next year. If it clears that hurdle, it will be placed before voters in a statewide referendum in November 2027. Meanwhile, a separate bill concerning the timing of elections in New York’s 532 villages remains on hold until the next legislative session.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which local offices are affected by this amendment?
The amendment covers city mayors and councils, county clerks, sheriffs, district attorneys, and judges. It excludes New York City elections.
What is the next step for this legislation?
Lawmakers must pass the bill a second time next year before it can be presented to voters in a statewide referendum in November 2027.
How did the New York State Conference of Mayors and Municipal Officials respond?
The organization issued a memo opposing the amendment, citing concerns that long, complex ballots would lead to voter fatigue and undermine local election engagement.
How do you believe consolidating local and national elections will impact your engagement with local candidates?