Can a New York city charter require a super-majority (four-fifths) vote of the city council to enact local laws?

Plain-English summary

The City of Lackawanna's charter had been amended to require four of the five council members to approve any local law. The city attorney asked whether that super-majority requirement was consistent with State law. The AG said no.

Two pieces of State law set the framework. First, the Municipal Home Rule Law lets cities adopt or revise charters by local law (Article 4 and § 10(1)(ii)(c)). Second, § 20(1) of the same statute fixes the procedure for enacting any local law: "[n]o local law shall be passed except by at least the majority affirmative vote of the total voting power of the legislative body." The statute draws a line. A municipality cannot raise the threshold above a simple majority.

The AG pointed to Grady v Mayor and Common Council of City of Yonkers, where the Second Department held that a Yonkers charter clause requiring four-fifths approval clashed with the same Municipal Home Rule Law provision. The AG also noted that the State Legislature, not the city, decides when a super-majority is required (for example, § 21 requires a super-majority to override a mayoral veto). The charter's four-of-five rule was inconsistent with the statute and therefore invalid.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Why can't a city set its own voting threshold for local laws?

Because the State Legislature already set one. Municipal Home Rule Law § 20(1) requires that local laws pass by at least a majority of the total voting power of the legislative body. The Legislature, in carving out super-majority requirements (vetoes, certain bond actions, and so on), kept the basic threshold uniform across the State. A city ordinance cannot raise that floor.

Doesn't home rule mean a city can write its own rules?

Home rule lets a municipality legislate on a wide range of subjects, including the structure and powers of its own offices. But it does not let a municipality override a State statute that specifies how local laws must be enacted. The AG drew that line by pointing to § 20(1) and the Grady decision.

What about a veto override or other situations where a super-majority is required?

The Legislature itself can require super-majorities for specific actions. Municipal Home Rule Law § 21 requires a two-thirds vote to override a mayoral veto, for example. The point is that the trigger has to come from State law, not from a charter or local law that a municipality writes for itself.

Was a city charter the wrong vehicle, or is the rule itself unenforceable?

The AG concluded the rule itself, by whatever vehicle, was inconsistent with State law. Grady dealt with a Yonkers charter provision and reached the same outcome. A super-majority requirement on local-law enactment is invalid whether placed in a charter, an ordinance, or a procedural rule.

Could a city require a higher vote count for non-legislative actions, like a budget transfer?

The opinion did not address that. § 20(1) governs the enactment of "local laws" specifically. Other actions (budget transfers, contracts, certain appointments) are governed by their own State-law procedures. Each would need a separate analysis.

Background and statutory framework

The Municipal Home Rule Law is the umbrella statute that defines what a New York local government can and cannot do by local law. § 10 gives cities, towns, and villages a long list of subject areas they can legislate on. § 20 sets uniform procedure: introduction, public hearing where required, and the vote threshold. § 21 carves out specific super-majority votes, like veto overrides.

A city charter is itself a kind of local law (adopted under § 10(1)(ii)(c) and Article 4). A charter that purports to change § 20's procedure clashes with the Legislature's own framework, and § 20 wins.

Grady v Mayor and Common Council of City of Yonkers, 32 AD2d 961 (2d Dept 1969) is the controlling case. The Second Department invalidated a Yonkers charter clause requiring a four-fifths vote, citing § 20(1).

Citations

• Municipal Home Rule Law § 10(1)(ii)(c) (city charters may be adopted or revised by local law).
• Municipal Home Rule Law § 20(1) (majority vote requirement for local laws).
• Municipal Home Rule Law § 21 (super-majority required to override veto).
• Grady v Mayor and Common Council of City of Yonkers, 32 AD2d 961 (2d Dept 1969) (Yonkers charter four-fifths rule held inconsistent with § 20(1)).

Source

• Landing page: https://ag.ny.gov/libraries-documents/opinions/opinions-year
• Original PDF: https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/I_98-37_pw.pdf

Original opinion text

MUNICIPAL HOME RULE LAW, ART 4, §§ 10(1)(ii)(c), 20(1). A local government may not modify the procedure for enactment of local laws by requiring that local laws be enacted by a super-majority vote.

September 3, 1998
Frank L. Bybel, Esq.
City Attorney
City of Lackawanna
City Hall
714 Ridge Road, Rm. 313
Lackawanna, NY 14218

Informal Opinion
No. 98-37

Dear Mr. Bybel:
You have asked whether an amendment to the City Charter requiring the vote of four of the five City Council members to adopt a local law is consistent with State law. In our view, the Charter provision is inconsistent with the procedure for adoption of local laws as set forth in the Municipal Home Rule Law and, therefore, is invalid. City charters may be adopted or revised by local law. Municipal Home Rule Law § 10(1)(ii)(c) and Article 4. However, while local laws may relate to a wide range of subjects, there is no authorization to change the procedure for enactment of local laws. The general rule is that local laws are enacted by majority votes of the legislative body. Section 20(1) of the Municipal Home Rule Law specifically states that "[n]o local law shall be passed except by at least the majority affirmative vote of the total voting power of the legislative body." A city charter provision requiring that local laws be passed by a four-fifths vote has been found to be inconsistent with this provision. See, Grady v Mayor and Common Council of City of Yonkers, 32 AD2d 961 (2d Dept 1969). The Municipal Home Rule Law specifies when a super-majority vote is required. Section 21 (override of a veto). We conclude that a local government may not modify the procedure for enactment of local laws by requiring that local laws be enacted by a super-majority vote.

2
The Attorney General renders formal opinions only to officers and departments of State government. This perforce is an informal and unofficial expression of the views of this office. Very truly yours,

JAMES D. COLE
Assistant Attorney General
In Charge of Opinions