Loading...
Memo- Ranked Ballot VotingMemorandum To: Charter Commission From: Jim Genellie Date: August 22, 2006 Subject: Ranked Ballot Voting The Hopkins City Council rejected the first Ranked Ballot Voting ordinance, Ordinance 2005-958, at its March 6 meeting. The Hopkins Charter Committee met on April 25 and June 6 and drafted a revised ordinance that tries to resolve some of the issues raised by the first ordinance. Attached is a draft of the new ordinance as well as a comparison of the old ordinance with the new ordinance. Some of the major changes between Ordinance 2005-958 and the new draft ordinance include: • The new ordinance is split into a single seat section and a multiple seat section. This is done to make the counting easier to explain. • The method for electing City Council candidates has been revised: o the first two choices on the ballot for City Council candidates are both considered as the first or highest ranked choice o the revised ordinance establishes what happens if more than two candidates receive a majority of the highest ranked choice votes o the revised ordinance establishes that once a candidate reaches a majority he/she is elected regardless of whether during subsequent counts one or more candidates receive more votes. • The City Council has been given the option of implementing ranked choice voting for single seat elections and/or multiple seat elections. Attachments: • Draft of June 6, 2006 Ranked Ballot Voting Ordinance • Comparison between Ordinance 2005-958 and the new draft ordinance • Minutes from the April 25, 2006 Charter Commission meeting • Minutes from the June 6, 2006 Charter Commission meeting • Examples of RBV ballots CITY OF HOPRINS IiENNEPIN 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. ~2 ^~~;^^ ;~ ^~^^+^~'. 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. New Ordinance language is in blue. Below is a comparison between the Ordinance 2005-958, which the City Council rejected, and the proposed new ordinance that the Charter Commission wishes the Council to review. This section is the same. 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. 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. (a) For the purposes of this section: (1) a majority is defined as 50 0 of the ballots cast plus one; (2) a candidate shall be deemed "continuing" if the candidate has not been eliminated; (3) a ballot shall be deemed "continuing" if it is not exhausted; and (4) 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 choices after the blank rank shall not be counted. Changes: The new ordinance is split into a single seat section and a multiple seat section. This is done to make the counting easier to explain. It also allows for a possible separate implementation of RBV for single seat races versus multiple seat races. • A majority is defined as " as 50% of the ballots cast plus one. Ballots where two candidates have been ranked the or where a ranking was skipped are considered as "exhausted." (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. (b)The Mayor shall be elected using a ranked- choice, or "instant runoff," ballot. This method will also be used for special elections for a single seat on the City Council. 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 City Clerk 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. Except for the language referencing single-seat elections, this section is the same. (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. (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 a candidate and transferring the votes of that candidate to the next- ranked continuing candidates shall be repeated until a candidate receives a majority of the votes from the continuing ballots or there is only one continuing candidate. These sections are essentially the same. ---~".`- d electe 11 ouncil Shall d e the votes sha of the city date is electe ady elected The member e first cared }red f °r the d date °n each 1 After ball°ts mar ranked can (e) th sequential y• with any or the next candidates recounted` ountin~ f en tw° °r m© im1nated shall be candidate now c tie betwe nt °f a andidate t° be e ball°t• In the ~ untin~- the c (f) round of after any by 1°t- be determined Ged with the following' ' s language is repla SEATS . Thi I©NS _ M~LTIpZE s ~T R~~CFF ELECT 1) a mad°ri st two 05 . INSTA is Section - e - ( (2) the f 1 both on 1 SEC, 4- oses of t lus sha For tie pure ballots caeca p it candid~hoice: (3) a (a) 5Q ~ of th City C ranked date has ,~ as f °r t hid defined he ballot s °r hest " if the cad "c°ntinuinq choices • ° eyed as the erred ~` continu shall be de 1 be deemed be c°ns to shall be de (~) a ballo a ball°t Sha es of the t a candi een eliminat udsted; and (in further s ~ on that ba nd°icated not b is not e read not count andidates c ore candidat ual rank to exhausted, if all °f th there are n° llot dives a ed ex.~austed tabulation- ted or p1ce b decl een elimina a ranked-ch 11ct shall be le rankings are b hav the ballot, didates, the ben such mult1p two °r motet ©f the ballot a rank` the at the p°in ballot but ski be counted reached- c,hp1ce k Shall not ked- er casts a r rn the blank ran elected usishall a of shall be .ballot If r ° ch°ices to Council ot. The f Vote of the City ~, ball der o runoff , in or each embers or ~~ instant er °f clz©ic fs candidate vote yanked-choice to rank a nto al number t°, nq systems t used by the ow v°ters t° the the vo uipmen ual to all equal ver- if ted eq ces eq preference oVided- howe imilar or rely odate ch°~- ice, then f five: pr Stem, or s asik'ly acc°mm for each °VOter may tabulation sy fe ounty Cannot ndidates runni of ch©ices a n° way City and C umber °f ca't the number allot Shall e for a write-in Clerk may ee. the t°tal n lima The to cast a vot the City o fewer than r sr ability rank fey with a vote °f the t d inter e . ce1ves a mad 1 be declare a candidate didates re aces steal eiVe or m°re can those candid far C°unc1s rece1V1ng the (c) I f one ked chp1ces, o candidate candidate highest r If more tha ©ts cast- the ed elected' °f the ball declared elect ma7 °r Bytes shall b'e i mast I ,I I 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. An elected candidate can never be eliminated. 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 a candidate and transferring the votes of that candidate to the next-ranked continuing candidates shall be repeated until two candidates receive a majority of the votes or there are only two continuing candidates. (e) 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. Changes: This is the multiple seat section of the new ordinance. Much of the language is the same as the section that deals with single seat elections. The major differences include: the first two choices on the ballot for City Council candidates shall both be considered as the first or highest ranked choice it establishes what happens if more than two candidates receive a majority of the highest ranked choice votes it establishes that once a candidate reaches a maj ority he/she is elected regardless of whether during subsequent counts one or more candidates receive more votes. Voter education Instant shall conduc ra ked-choice or- e e Shall be Clty Cl voters with the tg~ f a iliar~.z ball°t~ng 11 meth ting• a campaign od °f vo `1nStant run° ember 2p0~ ~tdhe City run°f f - ce ~ or on N©V t° chp1 f1es tha the Ranked ~ci al elects Clerk cent lecti°n t toting (h} .he first mu unless the Clt riot tO an ked-ch°ice b sons whY e1e ©ns the ran tea df°rt use sequent c r1 than four m° to implemust include Dice ball°t1 aq ion Sub no late be ready tion m ked-ch of 1c council t will not of ica lenient ran e the cer oting• Departmen ecti°n' Such ready t° imp ilitY t° acc -pch°ice ball in that ~ ment is n©ll have tY1e ab ement ranked the DeP ~ Council e srtment tO Zmp n shall The t er the D p ba11ot1 g and ord °r t runoff vember 2~~~ the ~instan No to ked choicer ° al electi°n e1erk certi section that Ran .rnun1C1p C1tY an e (b~ for the f lrst unless the riot to d-ch°ice s e t be used ent electi mon ran u ° than f°ur to implemen is in that the all subse no later ready le Sea whY Council not be multip reasons City rtment wi11 seat and/or t include th ch°ice ball°ting- nked the Depa for single cation mus t ra t the ballotin~3 of i t° implemen t© accep ement ranked- cer elect1°n S ish n°t ready have the ab1 tme t t° snip Departmen Council sha order the Depar The City tio,n or to certi eiballotin.g . crj,O'" c iven the option of council has been g m,~ltiple seat elections. at the City • section is ~ le seat elections ~ ox he Drily change tO this voting for sing T ed choice iYnplementing rank DRAFT #3 6/6/2006 DRAFT OF CHARTER AMENDMENT IMPLEMENTING RANKED BALLOT VOTING with comments . 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. 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 - SINGLE SEAT. (a) For the purposes of this section: (1) a majority is defined as 50% of the ballots cast plus one; (2) a candidate shall be deemed "continuing" if the candidate has not been eliminated; (3) a ballot shall be deemed "continuing" if it is not exhausted; and (4) 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 choices after the blank rank shall not be counted. A majority is based upon the total number of ballots cast in the election. This would include write-ins as well as blank ballots. The definition of a majority would remain the same throughout the counting regardless of whether any ballots were "exhausted." 1 DRAFT #3 6/6/2006 (b) The Mayor shall be elected using a ranked-choice, or "instant runoff," ballot. This method will also be used for special elections for a single seat on the City Council. 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 City Clerk 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 a candidate and transferring the votes of that candidate to the next-ranked continuing candidates shall be repeated until a candidate receives a majority of the votes from the continuing ballots or there is only one continuing candidate. (e) 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. SEC. 4.05. INSTANT RUNOFF ELECTIONS - MULTIPLE SEATS. (a) For the purposes of this section: (1) a majority is defined as 500 of the ballots cast plus one; (2) the first two choices on the ballot for City Council candidates shall both be considered as the first or highest ranked choice; (3) a candidate shall be deemed "continuing" if the candidate has not been eliminated; (4) a ballot shall be deemed "continuing" if it is not exhausted; and (5) 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 choices after the blank rank shall not be counted. 2 DRAFT #3 6/6/2006 (b) 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 City Clerk 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 one or more candidates receives a majority of the highest ranked choices, those candidates shall be declared elected. If more than two candidates for Council receive a majority of the ballots cast, the two candidates receiving the most votes 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. An elected candidate can never be eliminated. If, after this transfer of votes, any candidate has a majority of the votes from the continuing ballots, that candidate shall be declared elected. This language is necessary to account for a situation where more than two candidates receive a majority of the ballots cast. (See 1981 election) COUNCIL MEMBER 1981 Ellen Lavin 895 70% Jim Shirley "~la, , 56% Paul Slaton 657 51% TOTAL BALLOTS CAST 1,277 Once a candidate reaches a majority, she/he is elected. (except for the above example.) Even if this elected candidate is overtaken during the continuing count, they remain elected. (d) This process of eliminating a candidate and transferring the votes of that candidate to the next-ranked continuing candidates shall be repeated until two candidates receive a majority of the votes or there are only two continuing candidates. (e) 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. 3 DRAFT #3 6/6/2006 SEC. 4.06. INSTANT RUNOFF ELECTIONS - IMPLEMENTATION. (a) The City Clerk shall conduct a voter education campaign to familiarize voters with the ranked-choice or, "instant runoff," method of voting. (b) 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 for single seat and/or multiple seats 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: Second reading: Date of Publication: Date Ordinance Takes Effect: By Gene Maxwell, Mayor ATTEST: Terry Obermaier, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Signature Date 4 Minutes of the Hopkins Charter Commission Apri125, 2006 The Hopkins Charter Commission met on April 25. Present were Commission members Dorothy Boen, David Day, Roger Gross, Fran Hesch, Steve Lewis, and Emily Wallace-Jackson. The meeting was brought to order at 6:35 p.m. by the Chair of the Commission, Roger Gross. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting Commissioner Hesch moved and Commissioner Day seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the March 28, 2006 meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. Old Business Ranked Ballot Voting Mr. Genellie presented a draft of a proposed Charter amendment ordinance. The Commission discussed the various sections of the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Lewis asked whether the language would allow for a separate implementation of ranked ballot voting for single seat elections, such as the Mayor, versus multiple seat elections, such as the City Council. The Commission discussed the advisability of pursuing this option. Mr. Genellie pointed out that part of the difficulty of implementing RBV is the cost of either acquiring new voting machines or reprogramming existing voting machines. It is possible that other jurisdictions might adopt RBV, thus making implementation less costly. However, if the other jurisdictions adopt RBV and their machines are only programmed for single seat elections, the City of Hopkins could still experience significant costs in programming machines for multiple seat elections. The Commission decided to continue to examine the possibility of separate implementation. The Commission discussed the concept of a majority. The Commission determined the following: A majority would be 50% plus 1 of the total ballots cast in an election. The majority for the mayoral election would be the same as the majority for Council election. In a Council election, it is possible to have more than two candidates receive a majority of the first or highest choice votes. This occurs because each ballot contains two first or highest choices that are counted equally. Whenever this occurs the elected candidates will be those receiving the highest number of votes. That once a candidate achieves a majority they are declared elected regardless of whether their ultimate vote total is surpassed during subsequent counts. This possibility must exist in order to allow for a candidate who wins a majority of the votes on the first count to be insured of being elected. The Commission discussed what to do with ballots where the voter skipped a rank on the ballot. For example they vote for two first choices and then chose a candidate for Alternate #2 but leave Alternate #1 blank. The Commission determined that this ballot would be treated the same as a ballot where two candidates are both listed as Alternate #1. The tabulating machine would return the ballot giving the voter a chance to correct the vote. If a voter casts cranked-choice ballot but skips a rank, the voter's choices after the blank rank shall not be counted. Finally the Commission discussed how the tabulation of votes would be reported. The Commission determined that in addition to reporting who the winning candidates are, the number of votes that each candidate received in every round would be reported. The Commission decided to set the next meeting for Tuesday, June 6 at 6:30 p.m. Adjournment Commissioner Hesch moved and Commissioner Wallace-Jackson seconded the motion to adjourn. The meeting adj ourned by unanimous consent. 2 UNAPPROVED Minutes of the Hopkins Charter Commission June 6, 2006 The Hopkins Charter Commission met on June 6. Present were Commission members Dorothy Boen, Roger Gross, Fran Hesch, Steve Lewis, Bob Miller, Jerre Miller and Emily Wallace-Jackson. The meeting was brought to order at 6:36 p.m. by the Chair of the Commission, Roger Gross. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting Commissioner Bob Miller asked for a clarification of the discussion regarding what to do with ballots where the voter skipped a rank on the ballot. For example, when voting for two Council Members, a voter chooses the two first choices and then chooses a candidate for Alternate #2 but leaves Alternate #1 blank. After discussion the Commission reconfirmed that the voter would be given a chance to correct the ballot but if submitted such a ballot would be treated the same as if the voter had made no Alternative choices. Commissioner Boen moved and Commissioner Hesch seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the April 25, 2006 meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. Old Business Ranked Ballot Voting Mr. Genellie presented a revised draft of the proposed Charter amendment ordinance. The Commission discussed the various sections of the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Bob Miller initiated a discussion of section 4.04 (a) If aranked-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. Commissioner Bob Miller argued that this should be considered an invalid ballot. Other Commissioners argued that as long as the equal ranking occurred after there was a valid ranking, for example if the voter voted for one candidate as the first choice and two candidates as the second choice, that the vote for the first choice candidate should be counted. Commissioner Bob Miller moved and Commissioner Jerre Miller seconded a motion that whenever a ballot gives equal rank to two or more candidates, that ballot should be declared invalid. UNAPPROVED Commissioner Boen, Nay; Commissioner Gross, Nay; Commissioner Hesch, Nay; Commissioner Lewis, Nay; Commissioner Bob Miller, Aye; Commissioner Jerre Miller, Aye; Commissioner Wallace-Jackson, Nay. The motion failed. Commissioner Bob Miller said that he thought that the wording in Section 4.04 (d) was confusing. After a brief discussion, the Commission decided on the following changes to this section: (d) This process of eliminating ~ a candidate and transferring ~e~ the votes of that candidate to the next-ranked continuing candidates shall be repeated until a candidate receives a majority of the votes from the continuing ballots or there is only one continuing candidate. The Commission then discussed the issue of separate implementation of ranked ballot voting for single seat elections, such as the Mayor, versus multiple seat elections, such as the City Council. Mr. Genellie reviewed the arguments for separate implementation: i.e. that part of the difficulty of implementing RBV is the cost of either acquiring new voting machines or reprogramming existing voting machines. It is possible that other jurisdictions might adopt RBV, thus making implementation less costly. However, if the other jurisdictions adopt RBV and their machines are only programmed for single seat elections, the City of Hopkins could still experience significant costs in programming machines for multiple seat elections. One argument against separate implementation would be that the Mayor would be elected using ranked ballot voting while the Council Members would be elected by plurality. Commissioner Gross asked for a motion on the question. Commissioner Hesch moved and Commissioner Bob Miller seconded a motion to give the City Council the option to have a separate implementation of Ranked Ballot Voting for single seat elections. The motion was approved unanimously. The Commission then discussed the next steps to be taken. After discussion, Commissioner Bob Miller moved and Commissioner Hesch seconded a motion to present the draft ordinance to the City Council at the next available Worksession, with the understanding that if the Council finds no significant issues with the ordinance, the Charter Commission would reconvene to adopt a resolution recommending the adoption of an ordinance that would amend the City Charter to allow Ranked Ballot Voting. The motion was approved unanimously. Adjournment Commissioner Jerre Miller moved and Commissioner Bob Miller seconded a motion to adjourn. The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent. 2 Ranked Ballot Voting -Single Seats Rank candidates in the order of preference. You do not have to rank all the candidates is Choice 2" Choice 3r Choice Adams ~ O O Burr O O O Clay O O O Write-In O O O is Choice 2" Choice 3r Choice Adams ~ O O Burr O O ~ Clay O ~ O Write-In O O O 1 S Choice 2° Choice 3r Choice Adams ~ O O Burr O ~ O Clay O ~ O Write-In O O O is Choice 2" Choice 3r Choice Adams ~ O O Burr O O ~ Clay O O O Write-In O O O Correct ballot. Voter has a valid first choice. Correct ballot. Voter has a valid first, second, and third choice. Incorrect ballot. Voter has a valid first choice but the second choice will not be counted. Incorrect ballot. Voter has a valid first choice but the third choice will not be counted. Ranked Ballot Voting -Multiple Seats Rank candidates in the order of preference. You do not have to rank all the candidates 1 S Choice 1 S Choice 2n Choice 3rd Choice Adams ~ O O O Burr O O O O Clay O O O O Douglas O ~ O O Write-In O O O O 1 S Choice 1 s Choice 2n Choice 3rd Choice Adams ~ O O O Burr O O ~ O Clay O ~ O O Douglas O O O ~ Write-In O O O O 1 S Choice 1 s Choice 2n Choice 3rd Choice Adams ~ O O O Burr O O ~ O Clay O O ~ O Douglas O ~ O O Write-In O O O O 1 s Choice 1 s Choice 2n Choice 3rd Choice Adams ~ O O O Burr O O O ~ Clay O O O O Douglas O ~ O O Write-In O O O O Correct ballot. Voter has two valid first choices. Correct ballot. Voter has two valid first choices and a valid, second, and third choice. Incorrect ballot. Voter has two valid first choices but the 2nd choice will not be counted. Incorrect ballot. Voter has two valid first choices but the 3rd choice will not be counted.