Your cheat sheet to NYC’s 2025 ballot proposals

With early voting already breaking records across the city, one Queens neighborhood has found itself at the enter of the 2025 election season’s energy. Last Sunday, Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani drew a sold-out crowd for a get-out-the-vote rally at Forest Hills Stadium alongside progressive celebrities (Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders). The previous weekend, the borough’s No Kings Rally in Forest Hills also drew thousands of protestors against the Trump administration’s policies on immigration, militarization of Democratic-leaning cities and attacks on free speech, as Epicenter NYC reported. 

And last Thursday, a smaller but equally engaged crowd packed the basement of the Forest Hills Library for a civic education event. Hosted by the neighborhood’s nonpartisan group, Let’s Talk Democracy the forum zeroed in on the fine print: the six ballot proposals before voters this fall. Leading the discussion was Ben Yee — a state committee member for Manhattan’s 66th Assembly District and former digital campaign director for Barack Obama who’s known for making New York’s civics make sense.

We incorporated insights from the forum and other local reporting and research to help you figure out what those proposals are really about, what supporters and opponents say about them and how they could shape the city long after the mayoral race ends.

Ballot Proposal 1

How it appears on the ballot: “Amendment to Allow Olympic Sports Complex In Essex County on State Forest Preserve Land”

A “Yes” vote: Allows the state to acquire more protected land in the Adirondacks while authorizing the existing Olympic sports complex (after the fact) and regulating its development. 

A “No” vote: The Olympic sports complex remains in violation of the state constitution, meaning the state can’t develop it further without another amendment. 

Break it down: 

• What’s the problem? The Mount Van Hoevenberg Olympic Sports Complex in Essex County, New York has long operated on forest preserve land, which should be “forever wild” under the state constitution as part of the vast Adirondack Park. This means it generally can’t be developed. 
• But when it was first built — for the 1932 Winter Olympics — the state allowed the construction of the sports complex for holding the event.
• However, the state never formally amended the constitution, so the sports complex has been in violation of the “forever wild” clause. Its facilities have so far made use of 323 acres of the 1,039 acres within the complex’s designated boundaries. 
• Environmental groups have long pushed for this amendment to regulate this site’s use and protect additional Adirondack lands.      

• What the measure would allow if it passes: authorizes the use of ski trails and related facilities in the sports complex.

• What’s allowed? New York state could only develop within the designated 323 acres of the 1,039 acres in the sports complex. And even then, the only developments allowed would be for trails and facilities such as access roads, parking lots, offices, small lodges and snowmaking equipment.   
• What’s not allowed? Even if the measure passes, New York could not use these acres to build hotels, condos, swimming pools, tennis courts, zip lines, off-road vehicles or other equipment or facilities of the sorts included in this bill.

• If the measure passes, to compensate for greater use of the sports complex land, 2,500 acres of forest land that’s now under a lesser form of protection would be added to Adirondack Park.

• But it’s in Essex County — why is it on the ballot in NYC? It’s on the ballot in elections across the state because passing this proposal would require a change to the New York State Constitution. 

What supporters say: 

• “This is the best-case scenario for both the human and ecological communities of the Adirondacks: it protects wildlands while an historic attraction continues to host world-class sporting events, drawing athletes and visitors from the region and around the world.” – Adirondack Council, environmental nonprofit

• “This proposed amendment would help to right historical wrongs,” fixing the sports complex’s past mistakes and ensuring the site is managed properly going forward. — Protect the Adirondacks, environmental nonprofit

After all, they say, by legalizing and regulating the sports facilities at Mount Van Hoevenberg, the proposal would put them under the same environmental rules that already govern Gore, Whiteface and Belleayre Mountains in New York, all of which are home to ski resorts. 

• “For the Adirondacks, go for it. We get more land out of it, and honestly, it’s kind of a done deal anyway —  they’re not gonna demolish that [nearly] hundred-year-old center.” – Ben Yee, state committee member for Manhattan’s 66th Assembly District and former digital director for Barack Obama’s campaign

What opponents say: 

• “New York’s ‘forever wild’ protections are not a suggestion. I oppose carving exceptions into the constitution for new construction on protected lands. Once we weaken these safeguards, it becomes easier to do it again.” — City Councilmember Robert Holden (Democrat, represents central and western-central parts of Queens)

• “This doesn’t affect us directly, but opens the door to further encroachment on protected state lands, and the potential for government corruption.” — The Queens Village Republican Club, citing Councilmember Holden

Ballot Proposal 2 

How it appears on the ballot: “Fast Track Affordable Housing to Build More Affordable Housing Across the City”

A “Yes” vote: Speeds up approval for city-funded affordable housing in the 12 neighborhoods that have built the least affordable housing over the past five years, gives boards appointed by the mayor final approval over eligible projects and removes the City Council’s final say in those approvals.

A “No” vote: Keeps the current system, where nearly all affordable housing projects must go through the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) and receive City Council approval.

Break it down:

• If the amendment is adopted, projects in the eligible districts would follow an expedited land use review procedure:
  
  • Community Board review (60 days)
    
  • Borough President review (30 days)
    
  • City Planning Commission (CPC) gets final say (30-45 days)
    
• The proposal would remove any say the City Council has in the final decision. 

• The CPC members who would make the final decision are appointed by the mayor.

Ballot Proposal 3

How it appears on the ballot: “Simplify Review of Modest Housing and Infrastructure Projects”

A “Yes” vote: Extends a similar expedited review process beyond the original 12 districts to additional project types. That includes housing projects that are up to 45 feet tall, roughly 30% taller than current limits.

A “No” vote: The current process stays as is: a longer review, with the City Council having final say. 

Ballot Proposal 4

How it appears on the ballot: “Proposed Charter Amendment: Establish an Affordable Housing Appeals Board with Council, Borough and Citywide Representation.”

A “Yes” vote: Creates a new affordable housing appeals board for eligible affordable housing projects. The board would be made up of the five borough presidents (who only vote on projects in their borough), the City Council speaker and the mayor. For these projects, the board can reverse a City Council decision with a two-to-one vote.

A “No” vote: ​​Keeps the current process for eligible affordable housing projects: the City Council has final approval, and its votes are subject to the mayor’s veto.

Ballot proposals 2, 3 and 4 / What supporters say:

• “It’s hard for the political process to do something where there is opposition. That’s why you can’t allow one council person a veto on a project.” — Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, an independent candidate for mayor

• “The only solution to New York’s housing crisis is to build more housing, and we must use every tool in the toolbox to get it done. Props 2-5 will help ensure New Yorkers can live, thrive and raise their families in the city they call home. It’s time to say yes to more homes, lower costs and a stronger future for New York families.” – Gov. Kathy Hochul

• “Building new and affordable housing in this city is simply too slow, too arduous and too complicated to meet the needs of our neighbors. Something has got to give, and it’s time for our city to get used to the idea of doing things differently.” – Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso 

Ballot proposals 2, 3 and 4 / What opponents say:

• “These proposals threaten to remove our communities’ ability to hold developers and the city accountable to deliver for the needs of working-class communities and our neighborhoods. Without communities’ voices and power in development decisions, our neighborhoods will get less affordable housing, less investment and will be vulnerable to more gentrification.”  – City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams
• “We have real housing challenges, but these are false solutions,” said Julia Agos, a spokeswoman for the City Council.
• Prop. 2: “That’s ridiculous. It gives the mayor almost unilateral control over 20% of the city.” – Ben Yee
• Prop. 3: “Expands that to other use cases, vote no. It’s just a ridiculous proposition, honestly.” – Ben Yee
• Prop. 4: “I’m a little torn on this. I think I’m gonna vote no, but I don’t think it’s the worst thing. I do think that the mayoral veto with the city council override — I wish that there was another community stakeholder in the appeals board. If it weren’t the mayor and speaker, who might not live in a district, with the ability to gang up on a borough president, I would feel differently.” – Ben Yee

Ballot Proposal 5

How it appears on the ballot: “Create a Digital City Map to Modernize City Operations”  

A “Yes” vote: Combines all official borough maps into one digital, citywide map for streets, land and topography.

A “No” vote: Leaves as is: five separate paper maps held by five borough president offices.

What supporters say:

• “Modernizing administration of the City Map would increase the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations and speed up the time needed to advance public and private projects that involve changes to the public realm.” — Citizens Budget Commission, nonpartisan nonprofit civic think tank
• “A digitized map will provide clearer, more consistent information on street names and layouts, while allowing residents to access this information from home.” – The Center for Independence of the Disabled, New York (CIDNY), nonprofit disability rights and independent‑living organization 

What opponents say:

• “This move would put these functions in an agency that lacks the genuine human interaction that is needed for results. The Department of City Planning (DCP) is also notorious for being overburdened, with long backlogs and inaccuracies. This move has the potential to slow processes, create further service backlogs, weaken accountability and make it harder for everyday New Yorkers to get help.” — Staten Island Borough President Vito J. Fossella 

• “A single digital map sounds helpful, but this measure is vague on cost, privacy and who gets to change it.” — Councilmember Robert Holden

Ballot Proposal 6

How it appears on the ballot: Move Local Elections to Presidential Election Years to Increase Voter Participation

A “Yes” vote: Moves city elections to the same year as presidential elections, subject to approval by the state legislature. 

A “No” vote: Keeps city elections held in odd-numbered years.

What supporters say:

• “Higher-turnout elections typically come with more investment in accessible poll sites, better training for poll workers and greater outreach to voters.” – The Center for Independence of the Disabled, New York (CIDNY), nonprofit disability rights and independent‑living organization 

• “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.” — Abundance New York, nonprofit advocacy organization

What opponents say:

• “In the 1960s and 1970s New York often saw turnout above 70% with one day to vote. The issue is not the calendar, it is engagement and confidence in local government.” — Councilmember Robert Holden

•  “I am actually a hard no on that, which surprises some people because I’m all about voter turnout, but I’m also about voter education. 

“And I really do think in New York City, our elections matter not just for us, but for the rest of the country.  And you can tell because people are watching what’s going on with Zohran Mamdani and Andrew Cuomo. And if it weren’t for the fact that we have this odd election cycle, nobody would know about it. 

“So I am not for moving it to a presidential cycle when it’d be completely lost. Even though on the face of it would increase voter turnout, I think we lose voter education.” – Ben Yee

Before you head to the polls, consider visiting Find My Poll Site. It’s a great resource that shows you where to vote for both early voting and Election Day — and lets you preview your sample ballot.

NYC voters also have the right to bring an interpreter with them to the voting booth. Furthermore, the NYC Civic Engagement Commission provides interpretation services in select languages. Information about voting rights and the CEC’s voter interpretation program, available in 12 languages along with the list of poll sites covered, can be found at on.nyc.gov/vla