California: San Francisco Board of Supervisors breaks ranks on voting system | San Francisco Examiner

Progressive members of the Board of Supervisors are considering ways to derail a proposal to eliminate San Francisco’s ranked-choice voting system. As Tuesday’s deadline approaches for supervisors to submit proposed charter amendments for the June ballot, City Hall insiders say Supervisor David Campos is considering a measure to compete with Supervisor Mark Farrell’s plan to eliminate ranked-choice voting and revert back to runoff elections.

Campos declined to discuss his thoughts Friday, but confirmed that he is thinking about such a measure.

Meanwhile, fellow progressive Supervisor John Avalos said he hopes to deprive Farrell’s measure of the six board votes needed to place it on the June ballot. “I think it might be best to make sure that it doesn’t go forward,” Avalos said. Farrell introduced his measure on Election Day, saying, “Almost a decade later, massive numbers of San Franciscans continue to be confused about our voting process in The City.”

California: How Ranked-Choice Voting Silenced 31,500 Voters | The Bay Citizen

Sixteen percent of San Francisco voters who filled out their ballots correctly and completely -- more than 31,500 people -- did not have a say in the final outcome of the city's mayoral race, according to The Bay Citizen's analysis of election results.

Their ballots were discarded or exhausted, because they did not list either Ed Lee, the eventual winner, or runner-up John Avalos as one of their top three candidates. Unlike other cities, San Francisco does not allow voters to rank all the candidates on the ballot.

Editorials: San Francisco Ranked-Choice Voting Draws Critics After Mayoral Race | Huffington Post

Ranked-choice voting was the cure for what ails American politics, boosters said. Now in use in four California cities, this new voting system was supposed to increase voter turnout, stanch the flow of special interest money and encourage high-minded, positive campaigns.

But it didn't play out that way in the biggest ranked-choice election yet - the 2011 San Francisco mayoral race. Turnout was down, the worst in a competitive race in about 35 years, as the San Francisco Chronicle noted.

Voting Blogs: A different view on whether the of ranked-choice voting in San Francisco was “effective’” | Election Law Blog

Following up on this post, Doug Johnson posted the following comments to the election law listserv, which I reprint here with his permission:

According to the November 10 numbers from the Department of Elections, the final round tally in the San Francisco Mayoral election was 79,147 votes for Ed Lee, 51,788 for John Avalos, and 48,983 “exhausted” ballots. “Exhausted” means the ballot did not contain a vote for either Lee or Avalos, thus the voter was excluded from sharing his/her preference in the final runoff.

Percentage-wise, Ed Lee won the vote of 43.4% of voters participating in the Mayoral election. John Avalos received the final vote of 28.4% of voters participating in the election. And 28.2% of voters casting ballots in the Mayoral primary were blocked from expressing their preference in the final runoff (26.9% were exhausted and 1.3% were over/under votes).

Colorado: Town fares well with first IRV election | Telluride Daily Planet

When Telluride voters hit the polls on Tuesday, they opened up a different looking town ballot. Instead of just marking their favorite mayoral candidate like usual, voters were asked to rank the candidates by first, second and third preference.

It represented the town’s first foray into instant runoff voting, a rare type of voting that’s used in elections in which more than two candidates are running for one spot, such as mayor. Instant runoff voting, or IRV, is a ranked system designed to help ensure a true majority win and eliminate the “Nadar effect” that can happen in a three-way race.

Maine: Portland declares ranked choice voting a success | wcsh6.com

Portland's first experiment with ranked choice voting is being called a success, one day after Former State Senator Mike Brennan was declared the winner. Brennan's win was announced almost exactly 24 hours after the polls closed. But so far, the biggest complaint about this first election using ranked choice voting in Portland has been that vote counting took longer than anyone realized.

In fact, the city clerk's office was still making sure the ballots were counted correctly early Thursday afternoon. The good news is, though, no one seems to be doubting the accuracy of the system or who the winner is.

California: 2 S.F. supervisors seek to end ranked voting | sfgate.com

On the day that San Francisco used ranked-choice voting for the first time in a competitive mayor's race, two supervisors called for repealing the voting system. "Massive numbers of San Franciscans continue to be confused about our voting process in the city," Supervisor Mark Farrell said Tuesday. Farrell and Supervisor Sean Elsbernd hope to put a charter amendment before city voters in June to undo ranked-choice voting.

Under San Francisco's system, voters can pick up to three candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives a majority of first-pick votes, the last-place candidate is eliminated and the second-choice votes of those who voted for him or her are then allocated. This process continues until a candidate ends up with a majority of votes.

California: S.F. ranked-choice voting hurts progressive backers | sfgate.com

Under San Francisco's traditional voting system, interim Mayor Ed Lee and Supervisor John Avalos would be headed for a December runoff in which stark contrasts could be drawn between the moderate longtime bureaucrat and the progressive former social worker. It would have been interesting, but it's not going to happen.

Under San Francisco's ranked-choice voting system - in use for the first time in a competitive mayor's race - Lee won with less than a third of first-place votes. Ironically, it's Lee's supporters who are calling for the end of ranked-choice voting. And Avalos and his backers believe it's a beneficial system that should continue.

Maine: Portland Still Counting Ballots in Mayoral Race | mpbn.net

On Election Night, Maine’s largest city popularly elected a mayor for the first time in eight decades. But who that person is won’t be publicly-known until later tonight, a day after the polls closed. Josie Huang has more. The city used a time-intensive electoral process called ranked-choice voting that’s has never been tried in Maine until now. Also known as instant run-off, it’s used in the U.S. by a dozen or so cities, such as San Francisco and Minneapolis.

Ranked choice voting is supposed to produce a winner that most voters can get behind, even if the candidate wasn’t their top choice. It works like this: Voters rank their favorite candidates, and the winner is whoever gets at least 50 percent of first-place votes. That was extremely unlikely to happen in Portland, where a staggering 15 candidates vied to be mayor.

Minnesota: Ranked voting in St. Paul: mostly trouble-free, with a few quirks | TwinCities.com

Alone among his political peers, Green Party candidate Jim Ivey sang the praises of ranked-choice voting as he walked door to door in Ward 2, trying to win first- and second-place votes in an attempt to unseat long-standing St. Paul City Council member Dave Thune. Now, the same process Ivey championed effectively will leave him at the mercy of supporters of Cynthia Schanno and Sharon Anderson, the two most conservative candidates in his five-way race.

As the two weakest vote-getters in the Ward 2 election, the last-place finishers will be dropped from tallies next week during rounds of "elimination"-style vote-counting. Voters who selected the last-place candidates still get to be heard, as their second-choice picks are released into the next round of vote-counting. That leaves Ivey, who came in second of five candidates, dependent on those second-choice votes to survive elimination when counting resumes next Monday. Thune holds a solid but not insurmountable lead in first place with 39 percent of the vote, while Ivey holds 27 percent and fellow candidate Bill Hosko holds 26 percent. Only two will proceed to the following elimination round.

California: Ranked Choice Put To The Test In San Francisco Mayor Race | NPR

Voters in San Francisco will use a system called ranked-choice voting, or instant runoff, to elect a mayor on Tuesday. The city is one of many around the country, including Portland, Maine, and Telluride, Colo., using the system, which allows voters to rank their favorite candidates; the winner is determined using a complicated mathematical formula. Ranked-choice voting, which eliminates the need for primary elections, will be put to the test in San Francisco where 16 candidates are on the ballot.

At a city senior center recently, elections worker John Draper explained the system to some elderly voters, assuring them that it was simple. "We just want to ask ourselves: Who do we want to win this election; Who is our favorite candidate? And vote for them in the first column," Draper said.

California: San Francisco uses complex rank-vote system in mayoral race | The Associated Press

Karla Jones knows that voting in the upcoming election for San Francisco mayor won't be as simple as completing the arrow next to one name. She'll have to pick a first, second and third-choice candidate. "It's more choices to make and now you've got to get to know three of them," Jones said on the first day City Hall opened for early voting in the Nov. 8 election for the city's mayor, district attorney and sheriff.

Jones was there to pick up some brochures that explain the ranked-choice voting system — also known as the instant runoff — so she could better understand the process before returning to cast her vote. "It's good for the city in terms of cost, but it's harder on the voter," Jones said with a sigh. "I've got to go home and study now."

Minnesota: St. Paul ready to give Ranked Voting its first try | MinnPost

St. Paul voters will make history in three weeks when they vote for their favorite candidate in the City Council elections. And some will then vote for their second favorite. And third. Maybe fourth.

Welcome to Ranked Voting, also known as Instant Runoff Voting, the new way to count ballots that's coming to the council elections in St. Paul on Nov. 8.

Advocates say it's a way to ensure more voter participation and eliminate the need for a primary election. It also means that a candidate who wins in each of the city's seven wards will have a majority of the votes cast, unlike what we've seen in recent Minnesota gubernatorial elections with third-party candidates.

Voting Blogs: Portland Maine’s Instant-Runoff Mayoral Election: Innovative Voting, Constitutional Questions | State of Elections

On November 8, 2011, Portland, Maine residents will vote for mayor for the first time in nearly a century. For the past 88 years, Portland’s city councilors annually appointed the mayor. However, last year Portland residents voted to popularly elect the mayor. The impetus behind the change is the hope that an elected mayor will carry more political clout in Augusta, the State Capitol. This sudden creation of a very powerful political figure is drawing lots of attention from academics assessing the potential political impacts.

However, the election changes more than just Maine’s political balance and who chooses the mayor. It also establishes a controversial voting procedure for how the mayor is chosen. The 2011 mayor race will use instant-runoff voting (IRV), which encompasses voters’ preferential choices. Here’s how IRV works: each voter votes for as many candidates as he wants, ranking them from his first to last preference. The instant runoff ballot might look like this. Once the votes are collected, voters’ first choices are tallied. If any candidate carries more than 50% of the vote, then that candidate wins. However, given that there are 16 candidates in Portland’s mayoral race, it is extremely unlikely that one candidate will carry the necessary 50% of the vote. If no candidate has more than 50% of the vote, then the candidate receiving the lowest number of first place votes is eliminated, and his votes are redistributed to the candidates his voters ranked as their second choice. This process is repeated from the bottom up until one candidate carries the necessary majority.

Editorials: A Critical Spotlight Shines on Ranked-Choice Voting | NYTimes.com

Steven Hill is not on San Francisco’s November ballot, but few actual candidates have been as influential, or controversial, in this year’s election.  Mr. Hill, an author and public speaker, is considered the guru of ranked-choice voting, a system that creates an instant-runoff by having voters select their top three favorite candidates in order of preference. The system was adopted in San Francisco in 2004, but this election is the first time it will be employed in a competitive mayoral race in the city, since Gavin Newsom ran without serious opposition in 2007.

Mr. Hill, who travels the world promoting changes in electoral systems, said that ranked-choice voting improved turnout, saved money by avoiding expensive, and usually poorly attended, runoff elections and encouraged politicians to reach out to more-diverse constituencies. “You need both a strong core of support to avoid being eliminated in the first round, plus a broad base,” Mr. Hill said.

The system has made campaigning more complex. If no candidate gets a majority, the person at the bottom of the poll is dropped and the second and third choices of his supporters are added to the tallies of the remaining candidates. This continues until someone reaches 50 percent. In some cases, candidates who were not the first choice of a large majority of voters have been elected.

California: Zany instant runoff race in San Francisco gives voters thousands of choices | Ventura County Star

The city that is home to the crookedest street in the world is this fall witnessing what surely could be the zaniest election in America. There are 16 people running for mayor and hardly a gadfly in the bunch. The field includes the current appointed mayor, two county supervisors, a state senator, the public defender, the city attorney, the assessor-recorder and three former supervisors.

Each is eligible for up to $900,000 in public financing, so none will be starved for campaign funds. Even those who find themselves dropping in the polls will be able to keep battling through Election Day.

When voters receive their ballots, they will have not one, not two, not even just 16 choices to make. Rather, under the instant-runoff voting system that is being used for the first time in a San Francisco mayoral election, they will have 3,360 distinct ways they could fill out their ballot.

Maine: Portland Prepares for Voting Experiment in Crowded Mayoral Race | MPBN

This November, Portland is undertaking a type of voting never tried in Maine before. Its next mayor will be chosen by a process by which voters rank their choices in the order of preference. But that could be quite the task for both the voters and the city officials preparing for the election, given a crowded field of candidates. It now stands at 19 with former state senator Ethan Strimling announcing his bid for mayor today.

… With a vigilant eye on the growing roster of candidates, the city is planning voter education workshops with the League of Women Voters ahead of the Nov. 8 election. And it's prepared to sign a contract this week with a DC-based election balloting company called True Ballot, which has experience with ranked-choice voting.

"We want to identify any of the possible pitfalls and avoid any kind of voter confusion on the day of the election," says city spokeswoman Nicole Clegg. Clegg says that if someone gets a simple majority of first choice votes--that'd be 50 percent plus 1 vote--the person wins.

Utah: GOP leader Nelson seeks election overhaul – recommends instant runoff voting | The Salt Lake Tribune

The vice chairman of Utah Republican Party wants state lawmakers to study an “instant runoff voting” system that he says could prevent third-party candidates from “spoiling” elections. Lowell Nelson told the Legislature’s Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee Wednesday that such systems allow voters to list their second choice among candidates, as well as their favorite.

If no candidate receives a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who had supported that eliminated candidate would then have their “second-choice” votes given to remaining candidates to help one of them achieve a majority.

Utah GOP Chairman Thomas Wright said the state party has taken no position on instant runoff voting, and that Nelson is promoting that on his own. Nelson said Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, was interested in the idea, and asked him to make a presentation about it.

Minnesota: Ranked-voting system to debut in St. Paul City Council elections in November | TwinCities.com

In November, voters in the St. Paul City Council election will be able to choose up to six candidates per seat, ranked in order of preference. In other words, downtown residents could conceivably vote for all five candidates who have filed to run for office in Ward 2.

Nov. 8 will mark the city's first experience with the new "ranked voting" system, otherwise known as "instant run-off voting" or "ranked-choice voting," which was supported by voters in a ballot question last year. As a result, Ramsey County, which is contracted to coordinate the city's elections, is gearing up for significant changes from politics as usual, and candidates, too, have had to adjust.

For starters, the new system has eliminated political primaries. Votes are tallied on Election Day, and if no candidate has 50 percent of the vote plus one vote, the weakest vote-getter is dropped from the results.

California: San Francisco mayoral election to change shape as ranked-choice voting debuts | San Francisco Examiner

Gone are the days when voting was as simple as voting for the best person you most want to see serve. When voters head to the polls on Nov. 8, they will be asked to vote for not only who they want to win the most to serve as San Francisco’s mayor, but also their second and third choices.

For a chart detailing how ranked-choice voting played a role in Jean Quan's surprise Oakland mayoral election victory, click on the photo to the right.

This way of voting for San Francisco’s mayor has yet to be tested in a citywide race — this is the first time what is known as ranked-choice voting will come into play in the race for The City’s top post.

California: Appeals court upholds ranked-choice vote for San Francisco | San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco’s ranked-choice voting system is constitutional, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday in rejecting a challenge by a former candidate for supervisor.

Ron Dudum, a small-business owner who lost to now-disgraced former Supervisor Ed Jew in 2006, sued San Francisco election officials in federal court last year. He claimed that the city’s system violates the Constitution by denying thousands of voters a voice in elections and allows candidates to win without getting a majority.

Maine: Ranked-choice balloting is wild card in Portland mayor’s race | The Portland Press Herald

The chance to be the city’s first elected mayor in generations is attracting a long list of candidates who also will have the distinction of being the first Maine politicians content to be a voter’s second or third choice, thanks to ranked-choice voting. Ten candidates have registered with the city so far, meaning they are free to raise money and build a campaign organization.

The ballot is expected to get even more crowded in the coming weeks, with candidates attracted by the full-time job — it will pay about $66,000 a year — the four-year term, some limited powers and the ability to set precedents.

Editorials: Carl Bialik: The Mathematical Debate Over Instant Runoff and Other Alternative Voting Systems | Wall Street Journal

My print column this week examines the debate over voting systems that theorists and reformers have backed to replace the system prevalent in the U.S. and many other places, in which each voter gets one vote and the candidate with the most votes wins. Among possible alternative systems include some where voters rank candidates and others where they assign candidates scores.

Instant runoff, the focus of my column, has gotten the most traction so far. But some mathematicians point out that the system could give rise to various troubling results. Two significant ones: Voters who decide to shift their support from one candidate to a second can hurt that second candidate; and voters can get a worse outcome if they choose to show up to the polls, inadvertently helping their least-favorite candidate (the no-show paradox). Robert Z. Norman, Dartmouth College professor emeritus of mathematics, has simulated three-candidate elections in which each candidate has at least 25% of support and finds that each of these apparent paradoxes occur about one in five times.

Editorials: Editorial: Mixed Member Proportional system deserves to survive referendum | NZ Herald News

The result of a British referendum on its electoral system shows how remarkable it was that New Zealand adopted MMP – and how much referendums are influenced by the mood of the moment. British voters have chosen to retain first past the post by 68 per cent to 32 per cent for a proposal called the Alternative Vote.

The result is devastating for electoral reform in Britain, burying the subject for another generation in the view of most commentators, and immediately devastating for Britain’s third party, the Liberal Democrats. The referendum was their main purpose in joining a coalition with the Conservatives.

Maine: New Voting System Debated in Maine Legislature | MPBN.net

Diane Russell’s goal is to enable Mainers to vote for their favorite gubernatorial candidate, rather than against their least favorite. “We want to make sure that the person elected to run our state shares the values of the vast majority of this state,” said Russell.

Her bill would enable voters to list candidates in order of preference – something that she feels would make the process more democratic if none of them get more than 50 percent of the vote, as often happens. In the case of no clear winner, a so-called “instant run-off” takes place, whereby the weakest candidate is eliminated, and his or her votes are re-distributed using the voters’ second choice candidates. This process continues until one of them has more than 50 percent of the vote. This system, she says, gives voters more choice, enabling them to go for the candidate they like the most rather than having to vote strategically.

United Kingdom: AV Referendum: Voters Deliver Comprehensive Defeat To The Yes Campaign | eGov monitor

After a long and twadry campaign on both sides where partisan politics and persoanlities took centre stage, the UK electorate has rejected the Alternative Vote (AV) system by a thumping majority of 67.9% to 32.1%. The final vote tallied at 6,152,607 voted Yes to the Alternative Vote, while 13,013,123 voted No, according to the official Electoral Commission announcement.  Only 10 areas in the UK including Islington, Camden, Hackney and Lambeth in London voted for the change to AV.

This hurts the Liberal Democrats and Nick Clegg –  the referendum was the prize for joinining a coalition that would have to make tough decisions, hoping a Yes vote would change the political alignment of the country.  Instead, they got a crushing defeat and at the hands of the Prime Minister David Cameron. Mr. Cameron joined the campaign barely a month ago and in one month the polls went from favouring Yes to a massive win for the NO campaign.

Hawaii: Hawaii lawmakers table runoff-voting bill | Staradvertiser.com

A proposal to impose “instant runoff” voting in county elections has been tabled at the state Legislature this year. House and Senate members decided late Thursday night to defer the measure.

“We got some late information on the cost,” said Rep. Gil Keith-Agaran, the House Judiciary Chairman and lead negotiator on the bill. “I think we’d like to take this up during the interim and consider maybe bringing it back next year.”

Hawaii: Honolulu City Council: No Instant Runoff Voting | Honolulu Civil Beat –

Un-American, ill-advised and expensive. The Honolulu City Council has a long list of reasons as to why state lawmakers ought to kill a move meant to improve its current voting system.

Council members on Wednesday passed a resolution urging state lawmakers not to pass House Bill 638, which would bring instant runoff voting to Honolulu and other counties. The measure is two steps away from passing with state representatives set to discuss it in a conference committee Thursday morning.

Colorado: Fort Collins Colorado voters say no to ranked voting | The Coloradoan

Fort Collins voters are not interested in changing how the city runs its elections. Voters on Tuesday rejected a ballot proposal that would have had the city adopt a ranked-choice voting system in municipal elections designed to ensure that winning candidates enjoy the support of a majority of those casting ballots.

The proposal, which was endorsed by several local politicians and political organizations, fell well short of getting a majority of support, failing with 38.63 percent of voters in favor and 61.37 percent opposed.