Editor’s note: This story is part of CNY Decides, a collaboration between Central Current and WAER Syracuse Public Media to demystify the political process and bring you the stories and information you’ll remember in the voting booth in 2026. Click here to read, watch and listen to other installments in the collaboration.

As Onondaga County decides whether to place term limits on the county executive and comptroller this November, voters will essentially get three options: 

  • Yes to 12-year limits
  • Yes to 16-year limits
  • No to any limits at all

But the question will not be framed that way on the ballot. Because New York elections law requires a majority vote to pass a referendum, placing three options in the same question on the ballot is impossible, Czarny explained earlier this year. To do so could create a plurality vote with no clear outcome. 

Instead, Onondaga County voters will vote twice. There will be two referendums on the ballot. Voters will be able to vote yes or no to 12-year limits and yes or no to 16-year limits. These votes are unconnected from each other — voters can support just one, both or neither. If neither reaches a majority of voters, there will be no term limits. Otherwise, the one with more votes in favor will become law. 

Ballots for the 2027 general election are still being designed. 

The ballots will not have instructions explaining that people can vote the same way on both referendums, said Elections Commissioner Dustin Czarny. To do so would begin to stray from the Board of Elections ministerial role and could be seen as taking a position, he said.

Youtube video

“However neutral — no matter how that language would be crafted, there would be somebody who would claim that we have taken a position on that,” said Czarny. 

Only the two questions will be on the ballot. 

“It will be up to the parties — to the legislature and the executive — to inform the public about what this means,” Czarny said. 

The elections inspectors are trained to remind people to look at both sides of the ballot, so it is unlikely that voters will miss the referendum. 

The BOE also cannot rely on elections inspectors to explain the rules of the referendum, as voters could perceive their explanations as leading or wrong, Czarny said. 

This is not out of the ordinary. With any referendum, including those at the state level, the board of elections is unable to provide further information. 

“A lot of times we get these questions on resolutions with the state,” Czarny said. “Even when it’s just one resolution, people want more information. Unfortunately, that’s just like the candidates. We don’t say who to vote for or what to vote for.” 

Last year, Onondaga County voted for term limits on the legislature by a margin of nearly 3 to 1. Of the 93,000 people who voted in that election, almost 95% voted in the referendum, said Czarny. 

Earlier in the year, the County Legislature attempted to choose between 12- and 16-year limits, in part to remove the chances of both referendums ending up on the ballot at the same time. 

When asked last June about the possibility of putting both options on the ballot, Deputy County Attorney Ryan Ockenden expressed concern. 

“We would have competing ballot propositions and if both pass you’re competing,” said Ockenden at the time. “I think we should all know better than to get into that position.”

At the time, all county legislators overwhelmingly chose to support just one of the two term limits proposals — largely along party lines. Only one legislator, Dan Romeo, voted in favor of both. County Executive Ryan McMahon also supported just one of the two proposals, arguing that the 16-year limits had more bipartisan support. 

But in the attempt to find a compromise after McMahon accidentally signed the local law creating a referendum for the term-limit law he did not support, McMahon suggested a “path forward.” He suggested putting both the 16-year referendum, his previously preferred option, and the 12-year one he had accidentally signed, on the ballot. 

By the time McMahon made his proposal, county lawyers backed it. 

At the time, legislators did not express clear support or opposition to McMahon’s proposal. McMahon’s compromise was not brought to the following legislative session in August. At that session, legislature spokesperson Ruthnie Angrand pointed to Ockenden’s previously expressed concerns. 

But eventually, after judicial intervention, the county agreed to a solution that was very close to the one McMahon had proposed. 

McMahon has repeatedly said he does not like term limits. But he also says he understands that “the will of the electorate probably, I would say, would be leaning towards a term limit proposal.” 


The lone speaker at a recent public hearing about the referendums expressed confusion about the process. That speaker used his time, instead of commenting, to ask McMahon about whether voters had the options to turn down term limits altogether.

McMahon explained that they could. 

“So there’s an option to vote them down?” the man asked. McMahon confirmed voters can vote down term limits. “I don’t know if people understand that though,” said the voter. “That they can vote both of them down.”

Asked by Central Current if he thought there was any chance that the dual referendums could split the vote, McMahon said he did not think so. 

If the electorate was interested, they would decide first if they wanted term limits, and then, if so, which option they preferred, McMahon said. 

“Overall, it gives that choice to the electorate, and then the voters will decide, and the elected politicians will live with the wishes of the voters,” said McMahon.

Read more of Central Current’s coverage

Laura Robertson is a staff reporter covering Onondaga County. Prior to joining Central Current, she lived on the edge of the Bering Strait in Nome, Alaska, where she worked as a reporter for a year. She...