No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Home Rule in New York State
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Extract
Home rule in the United States has for many years been confined to the states west of the Mississippi. As late as 1920 Ohio and Michigan were the only eastern states giving their cities autonomy. Since that date, however, there has appeared a tendency in the larger urban industrial states to treat cities more generously. New York in 1923 and Pennsylvania in 1924 have now joined the ranks of home-rule states. But many of the largest states, for example, Illinois, still give no such power to their municipalities, while in Massachusetts it can still be said that cities have the same legal status as “an infant, an idiot or a lunatic.”
The addition of New York to this group has just been rendered certain. On September 2, the court of appeals of the state rendered a unanimous decision declaring the home-rule amendment to have been validly adopted. This ended two months of uncertainty caused by the decision of the appellate division of the supreme court in New York City that the home-rule amendment was not validly a part of the constitution and that all state and local legislation passed under its aegis was void.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 1925
References
1 Browne v. Board of Estimate and Schieffelin v. Mills. The court after special hearing issued an advance opinion sustaining the amendment. There was some need for haste owing to its bearing upon the September primaries. A month later, October 6, the court gave its opinion and decided the other question raised by these cases. See infra, p. 703.
2 Assembly Journal 1884, pp. 571, 1262.
3 Chapter 127, Laws of New York 1912.
4 Chapter 374, Laws of New York 1916.
5 Chapter 264, Laws of New York 1916.
6 Chapter 577, Laws of New York 1916.
7 Chapter 456, Laws of New York 1916.
8 Chapter 781, Laws of New York 1913.
9 Chapter 247, Laws of New York 1913.
10 Chapter 444, Laws of New York 1914.
11 Article by Tanzer, Laurence A. in State Bulletin, March 1922.Google Scholar Mr. Tanzer as counsel for various of the civic organizations in the state drafted the amendment.
12 Chapter 366, Laws of New York 1924, as amended by Chapter 397, Laws of New York 1925.
13 1. Abolishes a branch of the local legislative body, or changes the form or composition of such body, or changes the voting power of any member thereof;
2. Changes the veto power of the mayor;
3. Changes the law of succession to the mayoralty;
4. Abolishes an elective office, or changes the method of removing an elective officer, or changes the term of or reduces the salary of an elective officer during his term of office;
5. Abolishes, transfers or curtails any power of an elective city officer, except for the purpose of transferring the powers or duties of one branch of the local legislative body to the other, or to some other local authority;
6. Creates anew elective office;
7. Changes a provision of law relating to public utility franchises;
8. Changes a provision of law relating to the alienation or leasing of city property;
9. Changes a provision of law relating to the membership or terms of office of the civil service commission of the city;
10. Reduces the salary of a city officer or employee which has been fixed by a state statute, and approved by the vote of the qualified electors of such city;
11. Provides a new charter for such city.
14 1. Removes or raises any limitation of law on the amount in which the city may become indebted, or on the amount to be raised in any one year by tax for city purposes, or for any city purpose;
2. Removes restrictions of law as to issuing bonds or other evidences of debt;
3. Applies to or affects the maintenance, support or administration of the educational system in such city, or a teachers' pension or retirement system in such city;
4. Changes the number or term of office of the members of the county board of supervisors, chosen as such, in such city, under the official title of supervisors;
5. Applies to or affects any provision of the labor law or the workmen's compensation law.
6. Changes any provision of the tenement house law.
7. Applies to or affects existing powers of the state comptroller in relation to auditing or examining municipal accounts or prescribing forms of municipal accounting.
8. Applies to or affects any provision of law providing for regulation or elimination of railroad crossings at grade or terminal facilities within the city.
9. Applies to or affects any provision of law relating to the property, affairs or government of a county or counties.
15 Article 6, Section 18.
16 Admiral Realty Co. v. City of New York, 206 N. Y. 110 (1912) and In re McAneny v. Board of Estimate, 232 N. Y. 377 (1922).
17 Schieffelin v. Mills and Browne v. Board of Estimate, supra.
18 People ex rel. Einsfeld v. Murray, 149 N. Y. 367 (1896); Excise and Option Law, Ch. 112, Laws 1898.
19 One interesting problem that was suggested some years ago when the amendment was pending sheds some light on the exact operation of the independent state and local jurisdiction. Water supply is undoubtedly a municipal affair. But this would not permit a city to go beyond its limits to secure a water supply. The City of New York, however, has purchased huge tracts on both sides of the Hudson River extending even into the Catskills about a hundred miles away. The legislature could not, however, pass a special law permitting New York City to go beyond its limits for water supply because of the nature of the subject. It would seem that the only way the legislature could extend the power and retain a modicum of control would be to pass a general law giving all cities such power subject to the approval of some state body, such as the state conservation commission.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.