[MUSIC]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. Now, we continue our 30 Issues in 30 Days election series. Let the corporate media focus only on the polls. We're doing an issue a day for 30 days until the Friday before Election Day. We're up to Issue 18 here on day 18. Should mayoral elections in New York City move to presidential election years? That question is on the New York City ballot this year. Voters are being asked whether the city should move its current primary and general elections for mayor and all municipal offices to even-numbered years, in particular, presidential election years.

The logic goes that those years see significantly higher voter turnout than the current odd-year system. It's always the year after the presidential that we've been having mayoral elections in New York City. What's the effect of this? Well, in the last general election, 2021, the New York City Campaign Finance Board reported that of the more than 4.9 million active registered voters, only 1.147 million cast votes, or reduced to a percentage, only 23% of eligible voters showed up to vote for mayor in November of 2021.

Now, cities like Baltimore and Los Angeles recently changed their calendars in this way, but not everyone thinks it's a good idea. Some think that national political issues would overshadow the local ones. Joining us now to break down the ballot question and with more of those for and against arguments and who's on what side is our own Brigid Bergin, Gothamist and WNYC senior political correspondent. Hey, Brigid, welcome back to the show.

Brigid Bergin: Good morning, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: 23% turnout in 2021, how average is that for New Yorkers?

Brigid Bergin: Well, we have been seeing steady decline in our municipal general elections since 1989. We saw about 60% of voters participate in that election, and then we have seen those numbers dipping down to what you just revealed, that 23%, which was a historic low four years ago. Of course, that was the general election for an open mayoral seat. That's where we saw Democrat Eric Adams, who, at the time, was running pretty far ahead of Republican Curtis Sliwa in a race that was shaped by the city's re-emergence from the COVID-19 pandemic and this desire to boost public safety, and yet the turnout was very, very low.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, who has a question about this? I guess you can call up and lobby for or against this change if you want as well, but we're certainly here to explain it to you. 212-433-WNYC. That's not our membership drive number. That's our on-air number. Never going to ask you for money on the air. 212-433-9692, if you have a question or an opinion about moving mayoral election years and all the rest of the city offices to presidential election years for Brigid Bergin, 212-433-WNYC, call or text, 212-433-9692. You note that the group Citizens Union, that good government group, issued an analysis of what happens when cities did shift municipal elections to national election years. What did they find?

Brigid Bergin: Yes, I first started looking into this issue in large part because Citizens Union did this pretty lengthy analysis a couple of years ago, looking at other municipalities across the country that shifted their elections from odd-numbered years to even-numbered years. One of the key drivers was that in many of these places, turnout had been so low. They looked at places that made that shift, and how did the turnout changed.

One of the examples they included, which was particularly striking, Brian, was El Paso, Texas. They had 8% turnout in their mayoral election in 2017 before they shifted to even-numbered election years. Starting in 2020, they shifted to even years to coincide with the presidential election. Voter turnout in that municipal race was then 45% in the election. By percent increase, that's a 460% increase compared to that off-cycle mayoral election, which is a pretty staggering number.

It wasn't just in a place like El Paso, Texas. Other cities saw similar increases. Los Angeles switched even-numbered election years for its mayoral election. The city's last off-cycle election in 2015, the voter turnout there was about 24%. After the shift to even-numbered years, their turnout in their November mayoral election in 2022, to coincide with the midterms, was 45%. Again, a significant increase in voter turnout by shifting to those even-numbered years.

Brian Lehrer: There's also the question of who would turn out more than in the current odd-numbered years. The writer, Ross Barkan, who also supports this idea, noted in Crain's, "A larger electorate, a truer electorate would come to the polls. Voters across the ideological spectrum would benefit." Do you have more on that? I think he cited Los Angeles and San Francisco, which also did this, and that no ideological faction could be said to have benefited over the other. I wonder if there's anything on who is disproportionately not turning out in the current system, and how has it worked out in the cities that have done this?

Brigid Bergin: Yes, looking at this particular question, there's a researcher out of the University of California, San Diego, who has been studying municipalities who shifted their elections to even-numbered years. His name is Zoltan Hajnal. What he said is you really see this dramatic shift in the share of active voters who are both younger and voters who are more reflective of a community's demographics.

Oftentimes, in a city like New York, that means less white and more diverse, more people of color participating in those elections. That's one of the reasons that people who are supporting this say that there is a reason to make this shift to even-numbered elections. The electorate who would actually be participating would be more reflective of the city itself. Therefore, those elected officials would feel more beholden to a broader swath of the electorate and that constituency.

Brian Lehrer: Ross Barkan, who I think it's fair to identify as a progressive-lane writer, notes that comparing San Francisco and Los Angeles, in LA, Karen Bass, a progressive, defeated Rick Caruso, a more conservative Democrat and ex-Republican. Then last year in San Francisco, moving to even-year elections, a pro-business centrist, Daniel Lurie, was elected mayor. He's arguing that it doesn't help one faction or another. Here's a negative, Brigid, from a listener in a text. They write, "It's challenging enough to keep up with the information on mayoral candidates without that election being overshadowed by the presidential election," and that overshadowed critique is a common one, right?

Brigid Bergin: Absolutely. That is something that you hear from some candidates. I moderated a forum on this topic, where this was an issue that some of the people who were concerned with it raised immediately. How could you ask voters to keep up with all of the candidates in these municipal offices, in addition to candidates in federal offices, all in the same election, and make their decisions across all of these elections at the same time?

Errol Louis, the host of Inside City Hall over at NY1, wrote a column making some similar points for New York Magazine, arguing when you're trying to make decisions about who is the best person to decide land use issues in your community, or who is the best person to hold the sanitation department accountable, will that get lost if those issues somehow become then taken into a national context, if the candidates running in your community are not just Democrats and Republicans at the local level, but are branded with the national party, and potentially any of the issues or baggage that those brands bring with them?

Brian Lehrer: Let's take a phone call from none other than Grace Rauh, the executive director of the Citizens Union, who's calling in. They have taken a position in favor of moving the municipal elections in New York City to presidential election years. Grace, can you hear me? You're on WNYC. Thank you for calling in.

Grace Rauh: I can. Thank you, Brian. Really appreciate it. Thank you to Brigid for citing our report and research on this and for devoting time to this conversation. I just wanted to address some of the concerns that we've heard that you voiced as well around the idea of local issues getting drowned out in the context of a presidential race. I'm a former political reporter. I can safely say that anyone who is a regular listener to this show is a well-informed New Yorker and voter. We, frankly, sadly, are outliers.

When fewer than one in four New Yorkers is turning out to vote for the mayor of New York City, we have a major problem. This is like an alarm going off when it comes to the health and strength of our democracy. What is so incredible about this reform is we have the data. We can look at other cities and see just how dramatic the boost to voter turnout has been. This reform also saves the city money, which is pretty incredible.

More importantly, what we know is that most voters are doing the work to get informed about the races often as they head to the polls. The people who are engaged and closely following local issues, I firmly believe, will continue to do so. What this means is that more and more New Yorkers will actually be having a direct say in choosing the leaders of our city. Right now, we have a problem where there's growing disengagement from government, growing distrust in government.

Many New Yorkers look around and say, "How did this person get into office? I didn't elect them. I didn't actually play a part in selecting this person to lead our city." That will change dramatically when we make it easier for people to go to the polls, easier for them to have a say. It will mean that a much more representative cross-section of New Yorkers will be actually choosing the leaders of our city, which is so important.

Brian Lehrer: You're arguing for. Some of our listeners may remember that you were a lead political reporter on NY1 for a number of years. Your former colleague there, Errol Louis, wrote up this issue in New York Magazine, including some of the arguments against. One of the reasons that Errol cited that people might not want to vote for it is that it makes New York perhaps even more of a one-party town or a one-party state.

He wrote, "One reason Republicans in New York have been pushed to the edge of extinction over the last decade, no GOP candidate has won a statewide office since 2002, is that voters associate them with a national party that has become stridently conservative and wholly subservient to President Trump." The implication is that more moderate Republicans would be even further harmed because voters would be having that coattails effect one way or another based on who the presidential candidate is, and the local candidates may not be looked at as much as individuals. How would you respond to that?

Grace Rauh: I have a ton of respect for Errol. I loved working with him at NY1. He is an incredible journalist and civic leader. I disagree with him on this issue. I think that I would not make assumptions about how New Yorkers are going to vote moving forward. In the last presidential election, many New Yorkers and many Democrats in the city were very surprised by the results.

In the presidential election. President Trump did much better than many folks had expected in the five boroughs. I believe he won about 30% of the vote, which was higher than when he had run previously. I don't think we can make assumptions about how people will vote. I do think we can look at the data and know and say with certainty that our democracy is stronger-

Brian Lehrer: That more people will vote, yes.

Grace Rauh: -when more people are participating, right?

Brian Lehrer: Grace--

Grace Rauh: Right now, Brian, the people who-- Yes, sorry.

Brian Lehrer: I'm going to leave it there. Clear points. We appreciate your work at the Citizens Union. Appreciate you making this call to this call-in and making your case on that. Now that we took Grace's call for, we're going to take one call against. Paul on the Lower East Side, you're on WNYC. Hi, Paul.

Paul: Hi. Good morning, Brian. Thanks for having me.

Brian Lehrer: I see you're an election lawyer and a Democratic Party district leader, is that right?

Paul: That is correct, yes. From my experience, this will not result in higher turnout in the elections that actually matter in New York City, which is the primaries in June. We will not be uniting the primary election with the presidential primary. That's in the spring. [unintelligible 00:14:36]

Brian Lehrer: There would still be two different dates for the two primaries, yes.

Paul: Right, and this primary would be in June. There would be no president on the ballot. You would have none of that presidential attention, bringing up turnout. You will have the presidential attention, the air sort of drowning, but you'll be united with primaries for state assembly, state legislative, state Senate and US House, which actually have lower turnout. Then you'll wind up with a four-page ballot. Half the election, 15 to 20 races per voter. Half the elections will be ranked-choice voting. Half of them will not be. It will be very confusing.

The state and federal races will be on the first page. Well, even the mayoral race will be on the second page. City council and I run for district leader. District leader, you'll never find me. I'll be on page 4. Studies show that voters drop off after seven elections or so and stop voting. You will wind up actually because it will be not a high-turnout election. It will be a low-turnout primary. You will have even fewer people voting for down-ballot races and not actually get any result. You will also decimate the Board of Elections by making them lay people off every other year. As discussed, it'll drown out voices. That's even harder on city council races, where they are capped by the Campaign Finance Board.

Brian Lehrer: Right, which will be on page 5 and 6 and 7. Paul, thank you very much for raising the ballot-design issue there. Brigid, we're going to leave it here. We've heard some arguments for, some arguments against. You've done your reporting on this ballot question for voters in New York City about moving the mayoral and other municipal elections to presidential election years. The pros and the cons. A lot of people are texting one last question. We just have 20 seconds. If this gets approved, will the next term of the mayor, Mamdani, Cuomo, or Sliwa, be short to switch it to 2028?

Brigid Bergin: I'm really glad you asked that, Brian, because this is a vital point that even if this question is adopted, nothing changes unless the state makes a change. This is basically a way to fast-track, from New York City's perspective, what would require a constitutional amendment for this to actually be enacted.

Brian Lehrer: A state constitutional amendment.

Brigid Bergin: Which, as we know and we've talked about many times, requires two successive legislative sessions. Before then, it has to be adopted by voters statewide. Most experts who I've talked to say it's unlikely this could take effect until January 2029 at the earliest. There would be, if it was adopted and was adopted at the state level, two successive legislative sessions and a statewide adoption by voters, then there would be a one-time transition from the odd-year to even-year elections. It would be a shift that would shorten whoever is in office, their term from four years to three years, but that would not count towards their two-year term limit, should the two four-year term limit, excuse me, as I've read in some of Bolts, et cetera.

Brian Lehrer: If voters vote yes, they will be starting a state process on moving the elections to presidential election years. That's Issue 18 in our 30 Issues in 30 Days election series. Tomorrow, Issue 19: Abortion as an issue in the New Jersey gubernatorial race. For today, we thank our senior political reporter, Brigid Bergin, for reporting the pros and cons of this ballot question. Thanks, Brigid.

Brigid Bergin: Thank you.

Copyright © 2025 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.