Elections in Durham are omnipresent. In the odd years, city council and mayoral races take center stage, whereas the county commission, school board, state, and federal races ramp up in the even years.
The marathon election schedule can be exhausting for nearly everyone involved, politicians and voters alike. That schedule could change substantially in the coming years.
At Durham City Council’s work session last week, Durham Board of Elections (BOE) Chairman David Boone and Elections Director Derek Bowens presented a slate of possible changes to council and mayoral elections that—if adopted—could reshape Durham politics. The four changes under consideration are: moving council elections to even-numbered years, creating a “true” ward system, extending the mayor’s term to four years, and eliminating the primary in favor of a single, nonpartisan general election.
A main driver for reconfiguring municipal elections in Durham would be cost. The city of Durham is responsible for reimbursing the county to administer the primary and general elections for mayor and council in odd years. Those costs have jumped from $374,000 in 2017 to over $800,000 in 2023 and 2025. Over the past five years, the total cost is $3,248,786. This doesn’t include costs to administer ballots for the 614 Wake County and 42 Orange County residents who live inside Durham city limits, which totalled $20,754.27 in 2025.
Here are the potential changes the City Council discussed.
Eliminating the Primary Election
That feeling of déjà vu where you just cast a ballot for Durham City Council in October, and then turn around less than a month later to return to the polls—it’s not just you.
Durham holds nonpartisan primaries and general elections for mayor and City Council. A member of any political party can file to run in the primary election, after which the top two vote-getters compete head-to-head in the general election in November. Rarely do the outcomes change after the primary; the winner in October tends to hold on three weeks later.
Eliminating the primary in favor of a single general election would substantially reduce administrative cost and electoral “exhaustion”—as council members put it—from back-to-back elections so close together, councilors said.
The change received broad support from the City Council members during the discussion, and seems like the most likely change to be adopted in the coming years.
Adopting a “True” Ward System
Three of the seven seats on the Durham City Council are ward seats; candidates must live in their ward, but voters citywide cast ballots in those races. The remaining three seats are at-large; candidates can live in any part of the city and are elected by voters city-wide. Under a true ward system, only residents of a ward would vote on their ward’s councilmember.
When Durham’s ward system was first implemented, the assertion was that having council members from different parts of the city would diversify the board and prevent a concentration of power from one particular area. But because everyone votes in all ward races, residents can be out-voted by the general public.
The ward system can give voters a false sense of representation, councilors said during the meeting. City councilor Chelsea Cook took the idea a step further, suggesting that all six seats should move to a true ward system, shrinking the size of each ward’s footprint and making it easier to stay engaged with the councilor’s specific constituency.
“Three wards to represent a city of this size feels just overwhelmingly not appropriate because folks are not truly represented if they’re bulked into with a third of the city,” Cook said.
Fellow councilor Matt Kopac, who assumed the Ward 1 seat last November, said he’s open to the true ward system, but held reservations about the motives for the change.
“I want to make sure we’re clear on the rationale and the criteria for moving to that, to make sure that it’s really based on data for the outcomes we’re hoping to achieve and not just the feelings we may have about that change,” Kopac said.
Councilor Carl Rist said he had “serious concerns” after talking with city councilors from around the country who warned that true wards could create “parochial” representatives who care more about their specific districts on issues like zoning cases, rather than acting as a team for the city at large.
During the discussion, Kopac also expressed openness to expanding the number of seats on the city council, an idea floated during public comment by former City Council member Jacquline Wagstaff, and went as far as saying the city should consider fully merging with the Durham Board of County Commissioners, similar to Charlotte-Mecklenberg. The City of Durham and Durham County have attempted board mergers twice before, in 1974 and 2000.
Extending Mayoral Terms from Two to Four Years
While the mayor has a few additional responsibilities, the position is ultimately one of seven votes as a member of the City Council. But sitting at the head of the table comes with a drawback; a year after stepping into office, it’s right back to campaigning to keep your job. In Durham, mayors are elected every two years, while their council colleagues get four-year terms.
Durham’s current mayor, Leonardo Williams, as well as Kopac and Rist spoke in favor of moving the mayor’s term to four years. Williams called the compressed election cycle “exhausting” while Rist said it was “crazy” to run on such a tight schedule.
Councilor Nate Baker and Cook pushed back, saying that two-year terms for the mayor gives voters more frequent opportunities to express their approval or dissatisfaction with the city’s top office.
“I understand that it’s difficult to run an election … if you’re doing a good job in your governance that is part of campaigning as well,” Cook said.
Raleigh, Cary, and Morrisville operate with four-year terms for mayor. Chapel Hill is the only other municipality with a two-year mayoral term.
Moving to Even-Numbered Election Years
Moving municipal elections to even years would reduce election reimbursement costs by 70% or more, according to Boone. The BOE already administers ballots in even years for numerous federal and state elections, which tend to draw more voter participation because of the high visibility of the big ticket races. The switch could boost voter turnout in local contests. Since 2017, odd year general elections averaged 18.66% turnout compared to 64.03% for even years.
But most of the council stood in opposition to the proposal.
Councilor Shanetta Burris said local candidates, particularly women, could have a harder time fundraising if they have to compete in an expanded field of races. Baker added that he is “vehemently against” moving to even-year races, saying local candidates would be overshadowed by the top of the ticket. Baker and others also said the odd years are an opportunity to register voters and educate the public leading up to federal and state elections, and frees city councilors to campaign on behalf of higher officer seekers in even years.
“I get the exhaustion factor of having elections every single year, but I also think that it’s almost like democratic maintenance that when we pound the pavement in odd years, we are making sure that people are registered to vote,” Baker said.
The City of Raleigh switched to even-year elections between 2019 and 2022, and turnout has steadily risen. Mary-Ann Baldwin won with 20,832 votes in 2019 and 71,521 in 2022, while her successor, Janet Cowell, won with 132,315 votes in 2024.
What comes next?
The City Council would have to get state legislative approval to move from even to odd year elections (which Raleigh did in 2022), but could amend the city’s charter to administer the other changes. No timeline has been given for the council to take action.
Mayor pro tem Javiera Caballero, who presided over much of the discussion in the mayor’s absence, said regardless of what changes council members consider, Durham voters should be the ones to make the ultimate decision.
“To me,” she said, “it would be a modernization of municipal elections and we would put everything in front of the voters and let voters decide.”
Comment on this story at [email protected].