Written By: Michael Mariani
On September 8, 2025, The New York Court of Appeals considered a challenge to the Even Year Election Law (“EYEL”), which would move some local elections to even-numbered years. After years of litigation by Upstate New York counties on the issue, the court is set to weigh the importance of local control against the state’s interest in increasing voter turnout. What will remain of home rule after the court hands down its decision in the coming months remains to be seen.
A History of Municipal Home Rule
“Home rule” can be best described as a desire to maintain local control of local issues. The goal, since the Magna Carta, has been to prevent broader legislative interference in traditionally local concerns.
In November of 1963 voters approved an amendment to article IX of the New York State Constitution, providing for the passage of “Statute of Local Governments” that would grant “powers including . . . those of local legislation and administration. . .” To meet the requirement, the state legislature passed chapter 205 of the laws of 1964, which is now known as the Municipal Home Rule Law. The goal was to provide greater autonomy to local governments, recognizing that a one-size-fits-all approach was improper in many cases.
Article IX specifically prohibits the state legislature from acting with respect to the “property, affairs or government” of any local government except by general law, or by special law specifically requested by a municipality. A general law is one that impacts all municipalities within the state equally, while a special law is one that affects only a portion of them. The legislature may also enact a law to advance a “substantial state interest.”
The Municipal Home Rule Law sets guidelines and grants specific areas of concern that local governments control, including requirements on referenda for certain actions, the ability to adopt a county or city charter, and the means by which a local government can request a special law enacted by the legislature.
Home rule permits local governments to enact laws that regulate specific types of conduct within their borders, like a county sanitary code. An attempt to legislate by a local government must not violate the state legislature’s attempt to pre-empt a field via a general law.
The Even Year Election Law
In 2023, the state legislature passed, and the governor signed, chapter 741 of the Laws of 2023; known as the Even Year Election Law (“EYEL”). The EYEL made substantive changes to parts of the County, Town, and Village Laws to require that elections for most local officials be held on even-numbered years. Before the passage of the EYEL, the opposite was true: most local elections occurred during odd-numbered years.
The purported goal of the EYEL was to increase turnout in local elections and encourage voter participation, as well as create cost savings by running many elections simultaneously. Only 18 percent of eligible New York voters cast ballots in local elections in 2023 compared to roughly 43 percent in the 2022 midterms.
Subsequently, eight separate lawsuits were filed, challenging the law as violating the state constitution and a local government’s right to home rule. The actions were consolidated in Onondaga County Supreme Court in a case called Cty. of Onondaga v. State of N.Y. In his decision, Judge Gerard Neri found that the law, as enacted, would constitute an improperly structured special law. He called it “inherently a local issue,” and noted that the fact that the law would not apply to some offices, such as county clerk or sheriff, would only serve to confuse voters.
The Appellate Division reversed, finding that the home rule provisions of the constitution and state laws did not give local governments “exclusive local control over the manner in which local elections will be held or the specific details of each office.” The court also found that the law constituted a general law that would apply to all municipalities, meaning it did not need to meet the passage requirements of a special law.
“What’s The Dilemma?” Court of Appeals Hears Oral Arguments
Plaintiffs appealed the decision to the New York State Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments on September 8, 2025. The discussion centered around whether terms of office were a part of a county’s “form of government,” which the constitution lays out as an area of local control.
The Court of Appeals judges were not very receptive to the arguments made by the plaintiff counties, especially those about turnout impacts. In briefs before the Court, many plaintiffs and Amici Curiae (meaning “friends of the court”; other parties who submitted briefs on the issue before the court) argued again that the law constituted an improperly enacted special law. The court wasn’t receptive to that idea either, as several judges spent time picking apart inconsistencies in the county’s arguments on the general/specific law distinction.
The court also didn’t appear to buy that upholding the law would require changing the standard interpretation of Article IX. When counsel for the plaintiffs offered that the “dilemma” before the court was determining whether to read Article IX as permitting the legislature to make changes to the contours of home rule, Judge Jenny Rivera asked: “What’s the dilemma? You have another constitutional provision that allows exactly for that,” referencing language in the constitution permitting the legislature to change the structure and powers under the Municipal Home Rule Law.
“Why Do We Even Have Home Rule?” The Impact
The court did not immediately issue a decision and is not expected to for some time.
If the law is upheld, the law stands to significantly change how the Court of Appeals interprets Article IX and may lead to a decrease in local control over local issues. If that happens, then “[w]hy do we even have home rule?” Stephen Acquario, the Executive
Director of the New York Association of Counties (“NYSAC”) said to Spectrum News. “Why does it even exist if you can’t decide when your own officials run for office?”
The law would likely not decrease costs for local governments, because it would not affect elections for some city officials and county officers like clerk, sheriff, and district attorney. Those local governments would still need to hold an election on odd-numbered years, meaning they would be required to hold an election every year.
Turnout is likely to increase for these local elections, especially among younger voters and voters of color, according to Ben Weinberg at advocacy group Citizens Union. But the law wouldn’t fix all turnout problems with local elections, because certain officers would still be elected on odd years, including in cities. The law would not impact New York City, for example, but the city itself is considering a ballot proposal that would move future elections to even-numbered years. That law, however, would require a change to the state constitution, because the constitution specifically requires city officials be elected on odd-numbered years.
Sources
Ashley Lopez, New York City may move its mayoral elections to even years. It’d be part of a trend (Sept. 24, 2025 at 5:00 E.T.). Chris McKenna, Court rules NY can move local elections to even years. What it means for voters (May 10, 2025 at 4:59 E.T.). Chris McKenna, NY battle over moving local elections to even years goes to top court. What’s at stake (Sep. 9 at 3:01 E.T.).
Cty. of Onondaga v. State of N.Y., 1536, 235 N.Y.S.3d 780, 785 (App. Div. 4th Dept.).
Cty. of Onondaga v. State of N.Y., 222 N.Y.S.3d 342 (Sup. Ct.) Erik Uebelacker, New York high court questions GOP challenge to even-year election law (Sept. 8, 2025).
Esther Sun, Fate of even-year local elections rests with New York’s highest court (Sep 8, 2025).
James A. Coon, Adopting Local Laws in New York State, New York State Department of State (2019, Reprinted 2024).
Kate Lisa and Luke Parsnow, New York’s highest court begins hearing arguments in state’s new even-year election law (Updated Sep. 08, 2025 at 20:40 E.T.).
Luke Parsnow, Appeals court rules New York’s new even-year election law is constitutional, reversing lower ruling(Updated May 8, 2025 at 10:10 E.T.).
Luke Parsnow, Judge rules New York’s new even-year election law violates state Constitution (Oct 8, 2024 at 16:15 E.T.).
New York State Court of Appeals, No. 66 Onondaga County v State of New York, Youtube.com (Sept. 15, 2025) (Oral Argument).
Onondaga County v. State of New York (APL 2025-00088) (Court of Appeals).