What commissioners voted down on July 8

According to the commission minutes, the July 8 agenda included ranked-choice voting proposals, primary-election reform ideas (including “semi-open primary elections” and a “nonpartisan primary elections” concept), and ballot-access changes combining petition reform with “reducing signatures.” Commissioners then took roll-call votes on each of those proposals.

• Ranked-choice voting (three proposals): each motion failed on a 3-9 roll-call vote.
• Semi-open primary elections: the motion failed on a 1-9 roll-call vote.
• Nonpartisan primary elections: the motion failed on a 2-10 roll-call vote.
• Ballot access — petition reform: the motion failed on a 2-10 roll-call vote.
• Ballot access — reduced signature requirements: the motion failed on a 3-9 roll-call vote.

Supporters pushed for broader choice and easier ballot access

Supporters argued that changes like ranked-choice voting and open or semi-open primary approaches would help expand participation and voter choice. Testimony and public comments in the minutes also emphasized that lowering petition/signature barriers could make it easier for more candidates—particularly independents or nontraditional candidates—to get on the ballot.

Some supporters also framed the proposals as tools for “participation” and “access,” not as a partisan power grab, and asked the commission to move toward additional work studying electoral reforms.

Opponents and commissioners raised feasibility and legal-administrative concerns

Opponents and several commissioners did not just disagree on the concept—they pointed to what they described as implementation hurdles. The minutes repeatedly reflect concerns about preclearance requirements and the lack of what commissioners described as expert analysis and data needed to support moving forward.

For the primary-related proposals, the minutes reflect commissioners saying they had not had the “significant time nor money” required for elements of preclearance, while also noting the proposals had been forwarded to the New York State attorney general’s office to evaluate whether they would be acceptable for preclearance.

Public comments also included constitutional concerns, including testimony focused on how primary rules could affect party nominations and the treatment of fusion parties in New York’s electoral system.

What happens next: a study/task-force path aimed at a November 2028 ballot

After the July 8 votes, the commission discussed the need for further work rather than advancing the rejected slate. The minutes say that the commission would need a “taskforce” approach that is “fully baked” with the data needed for preclearance before being presented for approval. They also describe a goal of getting something on the ballot by November 2028, with the task force given a 2-year term if it is approved through referendum.

Separately, Investigative Post reported that the commission is poised to create a study committee to meet from early 2027 through November 2028, with the purpose of putting ranked-choice voting and other reforms up for referendum. That reporting also describes the committee as including residents and legal experts and having a budget to hire outside legal counsel.

What Buffalo residents should watch for next

If you’re tracking how election rules might change, the practical next step is to follow the commission’s agendas and minutes for the study/task-force work that could follow the July 8 rejection. That later work is where ranked-choice voting, primary design, and ballot-access requirements could resurface in a form the commission believes can clear preclearance.

Sources

• City of Buffalo Charter Revision Commission meeting minutes (July 8, 2026)
• Investigative Post (July 9, 2026) on what followed after the election-reform vote
• Unite NY press release (July 9, 2026) summarizing the commission’s rejection and stakeholder views

The memo says ranked-choice voting for Buffalo city offices would likely be legally workable, while a semi-open primary system could face a constitutional challenge. In its June 18 minutes, the commission’s chair said the goal was to hold a final vote by the end of the month.

Why the deadline matters

Spectrum News reported the commission wanted to finalize what goes on the ballot by July 20 at the latest. Buffalo’s agenda page also shows the group was still meeting on June 24. The Erie County Board of Elections must receive referendum language by August 3 for it to make the November ballot.

Investigative Post reported on June 25 that the commission had failed to agree on the ranked-choice and semi-open primary proposals and appeared to be running out of time. If the commission misses the window, the reforms would likely wait for a later cycle.

Sources

• City of Buffalo Charter Revision Commission landing page
• Spectrum News 1 Buffalo report on charter changes
• Investigative Post report on Buffalo election reform deadline pressure