Like most small cities in California, Albany’s mayor is currently a councilor appointed annually to the position by the city council. Measure Y proposed a change to direct election of the mayor every four years. Election would be by a majority, with the council to decide in advance of the election between a traditional runoff and IRV.

The switch was proposed because annually appointed mayors are effectively barred from the most significant regional governing bodies in the San Francisco Bay Area. It was additionally felt by some that the annual term does not provide the consistency necessary for many types of policy goals. Reasons against the switch were that the current system provides an incentive for the councilors to get along and it provides equal time for leadership on each constituency's interests. Opponents also stated that Measure Y would create a "strong" mayor, but this was inaccurate. Albany has a city manager form of government, and Measure Y did not propose any changes to the powers of the mayor.

Measure Y was placed on the ballot through a contentious process led by the current mayor, Robert Lieber. This process preempted the Charter Review Committee’s consideration.

Measure Y lost 54% to 46%. Votes for Measure Y totaled 3,305. Votes for Mayor Lieber, up for reelection, totaled 3,206. This places him third in the at-large plurality race for the three open Council seats. The reasonable conclusion is that the measure failed because it did not garner support outside of Lieber’s core supporters.

As is hopefully evident, the fate of Measure Y had little to do with IRV. Emblematic of this, electoral reform advocates in the community split in support and opposition to the measure on the basis of its main goal.

It remains to be seen what, if any, opportunity will develop, or can be created, for electoral reform in Albany in the near future.