투표용지 표시 내용
주법이 허용할 때 시의 예비 선거와 총선거 날짜를 연방 대통령 선거와 같은 해에 시 선거가 열리도록 이동합니다.
‘찬성’은 주법이 허용할 때 시 선거를 연방 대통령 선거와 같은 해로 이동합니다.
‘반대’는 법률을 그대로 유지합니다.
이 안건의 내용
이 투표안은 시 공직 선거 날짜를 연방 대통령 선거와 같은 해로 이동할 것입니다.
이 안건의 의미
현재 시 선거는 홀수 해에 열리고 연방 대통령 선거는 4년마다 짝수 해에 열립니다. 이 투표안은 시 선거와 연방 대통령 선거가 같은 해에 열리도록 할 것입니다. 이는 시 공직(시장, 공익옹호관, 감사원장, 자치구 대표, 시 의회) 선거가 연방 대통령 선거와 같은 해에 열린다는 의미입니다. 이 투표안은 또한 효력을 발휘하기 전에 뉴욕주법 변경을 요구합니다.
‘찬성’ 투표는 주법 변경에 따라 시 선거를 연방 선거와 같은 해로 이동합니다.
‘반대’ 투표는 시 선거가 연방 대통령 선거와 다른 선거 주기인 홀수 해에 열리도록 유지합니다.
Summary of Statements – Vote Yes on Proposal 6
Supporters of Proposal 6 say shifting the local election calendar to align with presidential election years would significantly increase voter turnout and increase representation among those who vote, so voters are more reflective of the city. They point to other U.S. cities that have enacted this change – Los Angeles, Baltimore, Phoenix, El Paso, Austin – which have seen the “benefits of a more inclusive, representative democracy” (Brennan Center for Justice). The Center for Independence of the Disabled, New York (CIDNY) also lifts up that “higher-turnout elections typically come with more investment in accessible poll sites, better training for poll workers, and greater outreach to voters.” Respondents agree moving local elections to even years would allow more New Yorkers to have a say in the city’s leadership. Multiple submissions note the discrepancy between presidential election turnout (60% in 2020) versus local election turnout (23% in 2021). Abundance New York notes, “The leaders who run our city day-to-day have a major impact on the city’s cost of living, quality of life, and safety; off-year elections mean that very few New York voters are actually choosing who those leaders are. ... Higher turnout means more New Yorkers having a voice in our politics, more representativeness and responsiveness from our elected leaders, and better outcomes for all.” Several submissions add that this change would save millions of dollars by reducing the number of elections overall.
Institutional and elected respondents:
- Citizens Union
- Abundance New York
- Brennan Center for Justice
- Center for Independence of the Disabled, New York (CIDNY)
- Climate Changemakers
- Reinvent Albany
- League of Women Voters of the City of New York
Number of statements: 14
Summary of Statements – Vote No on Proposal 6
Those who oppose Proposal 6 believe local issues deserve the focused attention of an election year distinct from presidential elections. Some express a lack of trust in changing the status quo and believe the current calendar grants needed focus on local issues. The statements reflect skepticism that the calendar is the cause of low voter turnout, and posit that rebuilding trust and strengthening civic engagement would better address the issue of low voter participation. Council Member Robert Holden says, “In the 1960s and 1970s New York often saw turnout above 70 percent with one day to vote. The issue is not the calendar, it is engagement and confidence in local government.”
Institutional and elected respondents:
- Council Member Robert Holden
Number of statements: 5
