The upcoming election for Mayor and City Council includes ballot proposals 2-4 that change City Land Use and Zoning—for the worse
Then there’s the dicey Question 6.
by Kathryn Freed
If you read the wording to these proposals, they sound good. The measures claim changes are needed in order to make it easier and faster to build more housing, especially affordable housing. They also seem to propose ways to simplify and speed up land use changes. What could be bad?
The important back story
For the past four years, the City Council under Speaker Adrienne Adams, has been fighting with Mayor Eric Adams for control of land use and zoning process, and pretty much everything else, in NYC—giving us our own Adams Family.
The City Council had actually proposed its own version of ways to amend and simplify land use in the city. They had held committee hearings with input from the public, etc. Not surprisingly, the Mayor’s Office disagreed with these proposals, feeling that they would vest too much power in the Council. He therefore set forth his own set of proposals.
By law, if the Mayor and the City Council both have similar ballot proposals, the Mayor’s proposals supersede the Council’s. So, the Council’s got bumped, and we will be voting only on the Mayor’s proposals.
Result? More power to the mayor
The Mayor’s proposals make changes that mostly diminish the input of the Council and from local groups, including Community Boards. These new provisions vest more power in mayoral agencies. The new Affordable Housing Review Board, would be controlled by the Mayor.
Here’s a pretty good explanation of each of the proposals and the City Council’s objections from City & State. https://www.cityandstateny.com/policy/2025/10/whats-deal-2025-nyc-ballot-proposals/408750/
Much like the National scene, we do not need an imperial Executive.
The City Council is a co-equal branch of government in New York. The city is much better when both branches work with each other. We shouldn’t be passing laws that put a finger on the scale for either branch. Ironically, both of the Adamses will be out of office before these proposals would be enacted. That’s another good reason not to vote for the proposals that would foist their past feuds on a new government.
It would be so much better for the City for the incoming Mayor and the new City Council and new Council Speaker to start fresh rather than have to deal with the toxic leftovers from the past. Hopefully they can find a way to work together and agree on changes that will help the City function better for those of us who live or work here. We should give them that chance.
Vote No on all these proposals to allow for a new and better start for the City.
Proposal 6 would move primary and general city elections (normally held in odd-numbered years) to the same years as federal presidential elections.
VOTE NO!
The main arguments for this change are that it should increase voter turnout and save money by holding fewer elections. More people vote in national elections, so, the argument goes. If local races are held at the same time as the national election, more people will vote. Also holding one election rather than two, will cost less.
While these are both admirable goals, it’s not so simple. There is good reason to believe that the changes would actually reduce the number of votes, and decrease voter knowledge of and input on the candidates’ positions.
Voters won’t get to the end of the ballot
Anyone familiar with voter behavior knows about “voter fatigue.” (It’s also known as ballot fatigue or ballot drop off.) This is the tendency of voters to vote for the highest positions on the ballot, but not the lower positions.
This is especially true in city elections where people vote for mayor but not judges or party positions or even City Council. Having all these races at the same time on a ballot that could easily go to four or more pages practically guarantees voter fatigue. Fewer people will get to the end of the ballot and therefore, fewer people will actually vote for those local positions. Primary ballots will be much worse, because of the numbers of candidates vying for local races.
Too much information for anyone but us election geeks.
Confusion about the various type of voting, such as ranked choice that the City has for local election primaries, but not for state or federal, will also confuse people and complicate the ballot. People who are confused about the process are more likely not to vote or vote with an incorrect process and invalidate their ballots.
About money
A further complication is that city races have public financing and therefore local candidates have strict limits on how much they can spend on their elections. Federal candidates have no such limits. They will massively outspend local candidates. The flood of ads to all types of media will eclipse local elections, resulting in the federal races dominating the election. Local candidates and their issues will get little or no attention.
Public financing limits could also give incumbents, big moneyed candidates or party-favored candidates an advantage because federal candidates could easily align themselves with a slate of candidates they favor, drowning out the voices of less connected locals.
Finally, it is not even clear that this will save money by having fewer elections, since certain city elections, such as judges, or special elections, may still need to be held annually.
Given all these potential problems, including the likelihood of favoring incumbents or big-money-backed candidates, we believe its better for our community to keep the ballot the way it is and to continue to be able to work closely with our local candidates on community issues.
Kathryn Freed is a former City Council Member, a retired NYS Supreme Court Judge and active with East River Park Action.
Early Voting starts Saturday, October 25th.
Regular Election Day is Tuesday, November 4th.
Detail of mural from FivePointz, Queens, 2018, by Jim Naureckas