Loading...
06-06-06 Charter Commission Regular MeetingCITY OF HOPKINS CHARTER COMMISSION AGENDA June 6, 2006 6:30 p.m. Hopkins Center for the Arts Upstairs Conference Room 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting 4. Consideration of Communications 5. Old Business • Instant Runoff Elections 6. New Business 7. Adjournment ATTACHMENTS: • Minutes of the April 25, 2006 Charter Commission meeting • Proposed ordinance regarding Ranked Ballot Voting UNAPPROVED Minutes of the Hopkins Charter Commission April 25, 2006 The Hopkins Charter Commission met on March 28. 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%o-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. UNAPPROVED 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 91 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 a ranked -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 adjourned by unanimous consent. 2 DRAFT #2 4/26/2006 CITY OF HOPKINS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE 2006—*** 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 The eat-rd-ate-Tec-elv4:nq +e effiee ^l ^"t^'. 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. Strikethroughs and underlined language represent changes discussed at the April 25 Charter Commission meeting. This section needs to be amended if any voting system, other than plurality, is adopted. The proposed amendment is split into two parts. Single seat elections (Mayor and special elections for a single Council Member) and multiple seat elections. This not only provides more clarity but could allow for a partial implementation of Ranked Ballot Voting. Part of the difficulty of implementing RBV is the cost of either acquiring new voting machines or reprogramming existing voting machines. (See Section 4.06) 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. This a decision that the Commission needs to make as to whether they want to consider the possibility of separate implementation. DRAFT #2 4/26/2006 (a) For the purposes of this section: (1) a majority is defined as 500 of the ballots cast plus one; (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. but siEips a -ank, the vetryr's vete shall be - - -- -- r - -- -- - 1 i - i t..._.� _ a- 1 ,. �, 3- - ,-, 11 - 11 If a voter casts a ranked -choice ballot but skips a rank, the voter's choices after the blank rank shall not be counted. (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. 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." The Commission decided what to do with ballots where a position is skipped, e.g. a voter marks a ballot for the first choice, skips Alternative #1, and then marks AlternstivP O. 2 DRAFT #2 4/26/2006 (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 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 A majority is based upon choices on the ballot for City Council the total number of ballots candidates shall both be considered as the first or highest ranked choice; (3) a cast in the election. This candidate shall be deemed "continuing" if the would include write-ins as candidate has not been eliminated; ( 4 ) a well as blank ballots. ballot shall be deemed "continuing" if it is The definition of a not exhausted; and ( 5 ) a ballot shall be majority would remain the deemed "exhausted," and not counted in further same throughout the staaes of the tabulation, if all of the ,.,,,,,,t;,,R raaarcllecc of candidates chosen on that ballot have been eliminated or there are no more candidates whether any ballots were indicated on the ballot If a ranked -choice "exhausted." 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. 3 DRAFT #2 4/26/2006 I-f—a-- teas-t-s-e-r-a n k ewe h e l e e-ball-e but skips a -Lank , the v et e r-Tvete- h a-1 l be If a voter casts a ranked -choice ballot but skips a rank, the voter's choices after the blank rank shall not be counted. (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 The Commission decided what to do with ballots where a position is skipped, e.g. a voter marks a ballot for the first choice, skips Alternative # 1, and then marks Alternative.0. 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 =, 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. 4 DRAFT #2 4/26/2006 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 candidates and transferring their votes to the next -ranked continuing candidates shall be repeated until two candidates receive a majority of the votes from the continuing ballots or there are only two continuing candidates. (e) In the eventof a tie between two or more candidates after any round of counting, the candidate to be eliminated shall be determined by lot. 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 This language has been municipal election in November 2007 and all proposed to allow the subsequent elections unless the City Clerk Council to defer certifies to the City Council no later than implementation should the four months prior to an election that the cost of acquiring or Department will not be ready to implement programming machines be ranked -choice balloting for single seat and/or excessive. The Council multiple seats in that election. Such would have the final say in certification must include the reasons why the Department is not ready to implement ranked- whether cost or any other-- choice balloting. The City Council shall have reason is sufficient to delay the ability to accept the certification or to implementation. order the Department to implement ranked - choice balloting. E