Skip to content

THE AMHERST CURRENT

  • About us
  • Comment policy
  • Contributors
  • Contact
  • Councilors’ statements on the Jones Library project
  • Fact check
  • On our radar
  • Recent House Sales
  • Town Government 101
    • Your Town government
    • Overview of Town departments
    • Overview of the Four Major Capital Projects and the Financing Plan
    • Elementary school building project
    • Jones Library expansion & renovation
    • Department of Public Works facility
    • Fire Station
  • All Posts
    • Let’s separate fact from fiction
    • Only-in-Amherst stories as two newspapers merge, 1988-2003
    • The Orchard Arboretum: a little-known Amherst gem
    • Never forgotten
    • A brief history of Amherst journalism, Part One: 1977-89
    • When will my road be paved? And why is a bear on my deck?
    • Four more renowned writers who once lived in Amherst
    • Welcome, Spring!
    • Envisioning Amherst as a model of rural economic revival
    • Emily Dickinson and Mabel Loomis Todd lived nearby but their lifestyles were far apart
    • Opportunities and challenges at the two elementary school building sites becoming clearer
    • Game on! The Amherst Invitational Ultimate tournament returns
    • We need neighborhood policy; Why I like Orchard Valley
    • Elementary school building project: Community forum on May 5
    • Live-music site opens this week
    • UMass Amherst announces plan to be carbon-neutral by 2032
    • New voting map leaves District 3 with no incumbent Councilors
    • Community responder director has already had ‘huge impact’
    • Reparations group plans to document racial injustice
    • Student housing and behavior: assessing problems and solutions
    • Aging and dementia: Looking at Amherst through a different lens
    • Amherst’s new live performance venue, the Drake, opens April 28
    • Net-zero energy schools are old news in Kentucky
    • ‘Tis the season — for potholes
    • Remembering Baer Tierkel
    • What’s up with . . . ?
    • Houses of five famous writers visible on brief walking tour
    • What is a good downtown plan?
    • Public money for private property owners? Yes!
    • A civil conversation, Part 3
    • Town lifts mask mandate
    • Amherst should get more money from UMass and the colleges
    • A civil conversation, Part 2
    • Designing for education
    • Let’s declare a moratorium on moratoriums
    • Rental bylaw, garage decisions on Town Council’s to-do list
    • Town-wide solar assessment should precede solar zoning bylaw
    • Ski town?
    • Community responder program presents some challenges
    • Too big? Too expensive? Don’t panic!
    • Supporting and retaining Amherst school leaders
    • A civil conversation, part 1
    • The next two years, part 1
    • Two announcements
    • Amherst elementary school building project: update
    • The Big Money: 2021 wraps up
    • Two views on solar moratorium
    • Parking permit fee increases proposed to Town Council
    • Why is my tax bill so high?
    • The case for local reparations
    • Local farmer makes a world of difference
    • Judge decides in Town’s favor on Jones Library lawsuits
    • Public welcome to attend educational visioning workshops to assist school building effort
    • Solar on landfills and parking lots
    • A look backward and a look forward: Evan Ross
    • A look backward and a look forward: George Ryan and Stephen Schreiber
    • A look backward and a look forward: Alisa Brewer
    • ‘Twas the week before Christmas
    • Bigger pie, or smaller appetite?
    • “I do not like that man. I must get to know him better”
    • An update from the School Committee and Building Committee chairs
    • CVS option for a parking garage should not be ruled out
    • New website for the elementary school building project is launched today
    • Thinking globally, acting locally: How to respond to climate crisis
    • Public comments on community responders sought Thursday
    • Silver lining, dark cloud
    • Vote on elementary school project is not likely before 2023
    • It’s crunch time on Town Council and tempers are flaring
    • Widening the circle
    • Town receives first installment of state library grant
    • Thanksgiving
    • D4 recount: Rooney beats Ross
    • Ah, the quiet…Argh, the noise!
    • Elementary school building projects kicks into higher gear
    • Please stop whining
    • Balance, not labels, needed in our debate over development
    • On our radar
    • Surrounded by beauty
    • Extra ballots: 14 “Yes,” 2 “No”
    • How do you want your local tax dollars spent?
    • The day after the day after
    • 21 political observers offer their views on Tuesday’s election
    • Jones Library vote 65.4% Yes; Walker, Hanneke, Steinberg win; Pam, Taub, Lopes, Rooney also elected; Page, Rhodes to join School Committee (unofficial results)
    • Today is the big day!
    • Our 20 one-sentence reasons to vote ‘Yes’ on Tuesday
    • Where is the Big Money? The campaign finance story, part 3
    • Amherst, on principle
    • Climate committee chair counters charges against councilors
    • The Amherst Business Improvement District corrects the record
    • Where is the Big Money? The campaign finance story, part 2
    • Where is the Big Money? The campaign money story, part 1
    • I went from skeptic to supporter on Jones Library project
    • Councilor defends 4 colleagues after recent attacks
    • Unopposed candidates speak up
    • Candidates for Amherst School Committee speak at a recent forum
    • Jones Library Trustees announce anti-racism policy for the Building Committee
    • Is Trump coming to Amherst?
    • Two energy experts endorse Jones Library renovation project
    • Ross, Lopes, Rooney articulate their positions in D4 forum
    • Amherst needs more senior housing
    • District 3 Candidate forum
    • Rumors on library plan refuted
    • Candidate forum: At-Large Councilors
    • Music and performance venue planned for downtown
    • Candidates air views at forum
    • Downtown businesses seek renaissance
    • Climate change: What is our town doing?
    • Fiscal sustainability: Some modest proposals
    • In their own words
    • Housing for all – can we thread the needle?
    • Political parties in Amherst
    • Moving Amherst’s 6th-graders is a good idea – and gets us a new school
    • Policing alternative: how it would work
    • Deciphering downtown parking
    • Can we afford four building projects? Yes! Here’s how
    • Students face housing squeeze
    • Want action on climate? On Nov. 2, vote “yes”
    • Vital to all, but getting no respect
    • Why Amherst needs the Jones Library project ASAP
    • Let’s densify!
    • A Historic Vote is Coming on a Long-overdue Elementary School
    • A Tale of Two PACs
    • So Many Budgets!
    • Preservation and Development Can Work Together
    • Power and loathing in Amherst
    • Amherst House Prices Shoot Up
    • Don’t Fence Me In
    • Reflections on the Charter: Ranked-choice voting
    • Reflections on the Charter: Participatory budgeting
    • Hello, Amherst!

Categories

  • Agriculture & open space
  • Amherst schools
  • Arts & entertainment
  • Business
  • Candidate panels
  • Civic engagement
  • Climate change mitigation
  • Development & Housing
  • DPW project
  • Editors' Notes
  • Elementary school building project
  • Housing
  • Jones Library
  • Local taxes
  • Natural world
  • Neighborhoods
  • Opinion
  • Public safety
  • Recreation
  • Social justice
  • Town finances
  • Town services
  • Uncategorized
  • Welcome
  • Zoning

Reflections on the Charter: Ranked-choice voting

By John Bryan

In March 2018, the voters of Amherst approved the first major changes to the Town Charter since its original adoption in 1938.  The new charter incorporated many now-familiar changes, the most significant being a shift from a Town Meeting to Town Council form of government.  A less heralded change mandated by the new charter consists of a shift to ranked-choice voting (RCV) for local elections.   In 2019, the Town Council appointed a commission to study and report on options for implementing RCV.  The Commission submitted its report last December (https://www.amherstma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/53914/RCVC_Report_2020-12-01). 

What is RCV?  Ranked-choice voting allows voters to express multiple, ranked preferences among candidates for elected office.  Unlike traditional plurality and approval voting, which requires voters to express a preference for only one candidate per electoral seat, RCV encourages a citizen to cast a vote that essentially says, “If my top choice for this position doesn’t win, here’s my second choice, here’s my third choice, . . .” with those preferences potentially influencing the eventual winner.  Under RCV, campaigns tend to be less negative, often-marginalized voices get heard, winners usually enjoy broad support among the electorate, and extremists and spoiler candidates tend to lose.  For all its problems, New York’s use of RCV this summer is producing the most diverse city council in its history.

Photo by Glen Carrie on Unsplash

The implementation of RCV in Amherst, unlike most American jurisdictions using RCV, will be complicated slightly by the predominance of multi-winner elections (elections that fill the several seats) rather than single-winner elections (such as the election of a mayor).  

In Amherst, four of the five municipal elections conducted biennially are for more than one seat:

  • Town Council (13 members: 2 from each of the 5 districts and 3 at-large)
  • School Committee (5 members)
  • Library Board of Trustees (6 members)
  • Housing Authority (3 elected members)
  • Oliver Smith Will Elector (1 seat)

The complications arising in multi-winner elections — all quite manageable — arise mainly in ballot design and in the calculation of winners from voters’ ranked preferences. These topics were addressed in the RCV Commission’s report.  It also addressed and made recommendations regarding requirements for successful adoption:  technical (new hardware and software), legal, policy (how to assess a voter’s intent if ambiguous), resources, and voter education. 

Covid-related restrictions on meetings delayed the Commission’s report submission and the Town Council’s unanimous approval until last December, but adoption still requires a special legislative act, which the Council proposed last February.  Representative Mindy Domb and Senator Jo Comerford co-sponsored “An Act Relative to the Implementation of Elements of the Charter for the City Known as the Town of Amherst” (https://malegislature.gov/Bills/192/H777).  The Joint Committee on Election Laws held a hearing in late June (https://malegislature.gov/Events/Hearings/Detail/3803).

In a recent conversation, Rep. Domb expressed hope that the Committee will advance the bill this fall to the other House and Senate committees, and that the full legislature will pass the bill into law before the end of the current session next July, enabling implementation in fall 2023.  Passage is not assured, especially in the shadow of last November’s failure to pass Issue 2, which would have approved RCV statewide.  That failure does not directly affect Amherst’s adoption of RCV for local elections, but some incumbent legislators — who may shy away from approving an alternative to the system under which they won — could use the statewide results to suggest that RCV lacks popular support.  They would be wrong.  Some 78 percent of Amherst voters approved Issue 2.  In the meantime, based on legal advice from the Town’s attorney, the Council must propose an interim preservation of the Town’s traditional electoral process until RCV can be approved by the legislature and implemented by the Town.  (The charter does not have the power to change voting procedures for state and federal elections.) 

I mentioned voter education, which is among the most important factors in moving toward a fall 2023 implementation.  RCV, even when done well, is complicated and not as easily explained as simple approval voting (our current method).  Some of the terminology (such as “fractional surplus vote”) has the potential to spook reasonable people and incite conspiracy theorists (“What ever happened to one-person, one-vote?”).  Add to that the use of software to aid in counting and allocating votes, and we could have an environment primed for exploitation by sore losers.  (By law, recounts must be done by hand.)  Recent disputes locally and nationally illustrate that for RCV to succeed and avoid court challenges, we will need robust, professionally produced voter education programs to instill confidence in the system and in those running it.

So, will RCV be worth all this effort?  I believe so.  Witness the State of Maine where, in 2010, only 37.6 percent of voters elected Paul LePage as governor in a five-candidate race.  In 2016, after six years of his incendiary rule, the voters of Maine adopted RCV. RCV might also have prevented Donald Trump from becoming the Republican nominee for president in 2016. In the early primaries, he was winning in large candidate fields with pluralities in the low 30 percent range among less fringe candidates like John Kasich, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and Chris Christie, whose combined percentages were higher.  Under RCV, Trump might have received 35 percent of first-rank votes, but the remaining 65 percent of voters might have ranked him last, ultimately denying him the nomination.  RCV is the anti-fringe approach to governance.

Photo by Tiffany Tertipes on Unsplash

The New York City mayoral primary this summer delivered an unfortunate blow to the reputation of RCV, as the public waited two weeks after the polls closed to learn who won.  The reporting delay was attributable to other factors, but RCV got the blame. The rollout of any new voting system entails glitches.  Many will remember the confusing “butterfly ballot” in Florida’s 2000 presidential election, which may have given the nation eight years of George Bush instead of Al Gore.  When Minneapolis first implemented RCV a dozen years ago, the hand count of some 70,000 votes also took about two weeks.  Experience and machine counting have since reduced the counting process there to two days. And RCV has been used successfully for more than a century in Australia, Ireland, and Scotland.  In Massachusetts, Cambridge has used it since 1941.

True, RCV won’t compensate for a field that lacks competent, committed candidates from whom to choose.  But once understood, RCV may draw to the field candidates who previously believed they had no hope of winning because they aren’t bomb-throwers.  Sometimes everyone’s second choice is better than several factions’ different first choices.   And that’s a good thing.

[Editors’ note: The RCV Commission Members were Tanya Leise (chair), Jesse Crafts-Finch (vice-chair), Susan Audette (ex officio), John Bryan, Ellen Lindsey, Rob Robertson, and Peggy Shannon.]

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted on August 23, 2021August 22, 2021Author The Amherst CurrentCategories Civic engagement

Post navigation

Previous Previous post: Want action on climate? On Nov. 2, vote “yes”
Next Next post: Editor’s Note
Blog at WordPress.com.
  • Follow Following
    • THE AMHERST CURRENT
    • Join 301 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • THE AMHERST CURRENT
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: