CR 06-032 Revision of City Charter Ord 05-958
March 6, 2006
Council Report 2006-032
REVISION OF CITY CHARTER
ORDINANCE 2005-958
Proposed Action
Staff recommends that the Council approve the following motion: Approve Resolution 2006-019
rejecting Ordinance 2005-958. and recommending its return to the Charter Commission for revision.
This action will return Ordinance 2005-958 to the Charter Commission for possible revisions.
Overview
The Hopkins Charter Commission voted, on November 15, 2005 to recommend the adoption of
Ordinance 2005-958 by the Hopkins City Council. This ordinance would adopt ranked choice, or
'instant runoff,' balloting for the Mayor and Council.
The Hopkins City Council considered this ordinance at a public hearing on January 17 and again at
a Council Worksession on February 28. During those meetings it became apparent that the language
in Ordinance 2005-958 was flawed and could result in a Council candidate receiving a majority of
the first choice votes but not being elected.
Since the City Council cannot amend an ordinance proposed by the Charter Commission, it is
necessary for the Council to reject the ordinance in order for it to be further considered by the
Charter Commission.
Primarv Issues to Consider
. What changes are being recommended in the Charter?
. What is Ranked Ballot Voting?
. What is the problem with Ordinance 2005-958?
Supporting Information
. Analysis ofthe issues.
. Alternatives
. Resolution 2006-019
. Ordinance 2005-958
es A. Genellie
ssistant City Manager
"
Council Report 2006-032
Page 2
Analvsis ofthe Issues
What changes are being recommended in the Charter?
In 2004, the City Council, on the recommendation of the Charter Commission, established a
Alternative Voting Task Force to "obtain, study and evaluate data on alternative voting methods
for use in Hopkins." The Task Force presented a report to the Charter Commission, which
recommended that the Charter Commission consider adopting ranked choice, or 'instant
runoff,' balloting. This method of voting requires that winning candidates have a majority of
the votes.
At its September meeting, the Charter Commission voted to authorize the staff to draft a
resolution and Charter amendment, implementing ranked choice balloting for the Mayor and
Council using two passes of ranked choice balloting for the two council seats.
On November 15, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council
approve Ordinance 2005-958 adopting ranked ballot voting for the Mayor and Council. Ranked
ballot voting would be used in the 2007 election assuming that the City Council determines that
it is technically and financially feasible.
What is Ranked Ballot Voting?
Ranked ballot or "instlllt runoff" voting is a method of ensuring that the winning candidate
receives a majority of the votes. It provides an alternative to plurality and runoff elections. In a
plurality election, the highest vote getter wins even if s/he receives less than 50% of the vote. In
a runoff election, two candidates advance to a runoff if no candidate receives more than 50% in
the first round.
Voters rank candidates in order of choice: 1, 2, 3 and so on. It takes a majority to win. If anyone
receives a majority of the first choice votes, that candidate is elected. If not, the last place
candidate is defeated, just as in a runoff election, and all ballots are counted again, but this time
each ballot cast for the defeated candidate counts for the next choice candidate listed on the
ballot. The process of eliminating the last place candidate and recounting the ballots continues
until one candidate receives a majority of the vote. With modern voting equipment, all of the
counting and recounting takes place rapidly and automatically.
What is the problem with Ordinance 2005-958?
Because there are two 'Council Members elected at large in Hopkins, any ranked ballot voting
system must allow for two equal first choice votes. The process outlined in Ordinance 2005-958
would instead have Council Members elected based upon a majority of a single first choice
vote. After a first Council Member receives a majority, the process would be repeated a second
time to elect a second Council Member.
Council Report 2006-032
Page 3
This system can result in an outcome where a candidate receives a majority of the two equal
first choice votes but fails to get elected. Based upon the record, this was not the intention of
the Charter Commission.
Alternatives
1. Do not approve Ordinance 2005-958 for first reading and send the proposed ordinance back to
the Charter Commission for further action.
2. Approve Ordinance 2005-958 for first reading.
Staff recommends Alternative #1.
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION 2006-019
Whereas; the Hopkins City Council recognizes that alternative voting systems, such as ranked
ballot voting, may improve voter turnout and reduce negative campaigning; and
Whereas, in 2003 the City Council recommended that the Minnesota HA V A State Plan
committee require any new voting equipment, purchased with Federal Funds, have the
ability to handle ranked ballot voting;
Whereas, in 2004 the City Council endorsed the establishment of an "Alternative Voting Task
Force" to consider alternative voting systems such as ranked ballot voting; and
Whereas, the City Council supports any voting system that attempts to insure that the winner of
an election has been endorsed by a majority of the voters and avoids the election of an
individual that a majority of the voting population does not wish to have elected; and
Whereas, the City Council further supports the traditional method of electing City Council
members which has multiple candidates running for multiple offices; and
Whereas, the City Council has determined that the language in Ordinance 2005-958 may result
in a candidate supported by the majority ofthe voters not being elected;
Now therefore be it resolved that the Hopkins City Council rejects Ordinance 2005-958 but not
the concept of ranked ballot voting. Be it further resolved that the City Council
encourages the Charter Commission to consider adopting new language regarding
implementing ranked ballot voting in the City of Hopkins.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins this 6th day of March 2006.
By
Gene Maxwell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Terry Obermaier, City Clerk
CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE 2005-958
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS
UPON RECOMMENDATION OF THE HOPKINS CHARTER COMMISSION
PURSUANT TO M.S.A. CHAPTER 410.12, SUBD. 7
The City Council of the City of Hopkins, upon recommendation of and
from the Hopkins City Charter Commission does hereby ordain and
thus amend and adopt the following changes, deletions, and
amendments of or from the following chapters and sections of the
Hopkins City Charter:
Section 1. Section 2.03, is amended as follows:
Subdivision 3. After the City general election, the City Council
shall, at their next regularly scheduled meeting, meet as the
canvassing board and declare the results of the election. ~
c3ndid3to roooi~ing the highcot number of ~otOD for 3 @3rticu13r
offioe is elected. If the election results in a tie, then the
winner should be determined by lot in the presence of the Council
acting as the canvassing board.
Section 2. Section 4.04, is added as follows:
SEC. 4.04. INSTANT RUNOFF ELECTIONS.
(a) For the purposes of this section: (1) a candidate
shall be deemed "continuing" if the candidate has not been
eliminated; (2) a ballot shall be deemed "continuing" if it is not
exhausted; and (3) a ballot shall be deemed "exhausted," and not
counted in further stages of the tabulation, if all of the
candidates chosen on that ballot have been eliminated or there are
no more candidates indicated on the ballot. If a ranked-choice
ballot gives equal rank to two or more candidates, the ballot shall
be declared exhausted at the point of the ballot when such multiple
rankings are reached. If a voter casts a ranked choice ballot but
skips a rank, the voter's vote shall be transferred to that voter's
next ranked choice.
(b) The Mayor and members of the City Council shall be
elected using a ranked-choice, or "instant runoff," ballot. The
ballot shall allow voters to rank a number of choices in order of
preference equal to the total number of candidates for each office;
provided, however, if the voting system, vote tabulation system or
similar or related equipment used by the City and County cannot
feasibly accommodate choices equal to the total number of
candidates running for each office, then the Director of Elections
may limit the number of choices a voter may rank to no fewer than
three. The ballot shall in no way interfere with a voter's ability
to cast a vote for a write-in candidate.
(c) If a candidate receives a majority of the highest
ranked choices, that candidate shall be declared elected. If no
candidate receives a majority, the candidate who received the
fewest highest ranked choices shall be eliminated and each vote
cast for that candidate shall be transferred to the next ranked
candidate on that voter's ballot. If, after this transfer of
votes, any candidate has a majority of the votes from the
continuing ballots, that candidate shall be declared elected.
(d) This process of eliminating candidates and
transferring their votes to the next-ranked continuing candidates
shall be repeated until a candidate receives a majority of the
votes from the continuing ballots.
(e) The members of the city council shall be elected
sequentially. After the first candidate is elected, the votes shall
be recounted, with any ballots marked for the already elected
candidate now counting for the next ranked candidate on each
ballot.
(f) In the event of a tie between two or more candidates
after any round of counting, the candidate to be eliminated shall
be determined by lot.
(g)
campaign
runoff,"
The City Clerk shall conduct a voter education
to familiarize voters with the ranked choice or, "instant
method of voting.
(h) Ranked choice, or 'instant runoff,' balloting shall be
used for the first municipal election in November 2007 and all
subsequent elections unless the City Clerk certifies to the City
Council no later than four months prior to an election that the
Department will not be ready to implement ranked choice balloting
in that election. Such certification must include the reasons why
the Department is not ready to implement ranked-choice balloting.
The City Council shall have the ability to accept the certification
or to order the Department to implement ranked-choice balloting.
Section 3. The effective date of this ordinance shall be ninety
days after publication.
First reading: January 17, 2006
Second reading: February 7, 2006
Date of Publication: February 16, 2006
Date Ordinance Takes Effect: May 18, 2006
By
Gene Maxwell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Terry Obermaier, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
City Attorney Signature
Date