Ellen on 2023 Election
In the February 7th Cottonwood Heights City Council work session “2023 Election” discussion, council members deliberated on whether to continue within the Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) 2021-2026 Pilot Program or go back to conventional primary & general election voting.
The mayor opened the discussion by stating that ‘there will be no consensus today’. He favors watching the developments both on the anticipated costs and on what the State Legislature may do while in session (through March 3). The mayor and Council Member Petersen stated dissatisfaction with RCV. (During the business session that followed, a few citizens made public comments airing their desire that CH abandon RCV.)
Councilman Newell’s remarks regarding RCV fostering easier access for citizens who desire to run for public office without the higher time and cost commitment of conventional primary & general election voting methods. Councilman Bracken shared data that RCV was received positively by the majority of voters in 2021 and other supportive evidence favoring RCV. My remarks related to RCV combating polarization and extremism, and how it encourages candidates to reach out across perceived partisan divides while campaigning are some of the benefits of RCV.
According to a Y2 Analytics survey conducted after the 2021 Election:
86% “very to somewhat satisfied”
81% “easy to fill out”
90% “instructions were clear to somewhat clear”
88% “confident their ballot would be counted”
Also discussed were cost factors for cities indicating their willingness to continue with RCV. I understand that in the mayoral race of 2017, election cost for CH ran approximately $40,000. CH cost in 2021 (mayoral year & first year of RCV) was approximately $28,000. With SLCO looking to post a flat $15,709 charge for RCV plus a sliding scale of “allocated costs” depending on how many cities within SLCO participate, I will share examples of possible scenarios: CH election cost could be as high as $46,376 if we are the only RCV city or as low as $27,761 if there are three SLCO cities.
Based on verbal indications at this time, this is where I understand “RCV pilot cities” are at:
Those planning NOT to continue in RCV pilot: Taylorsville, Holladay, Draper, Sandy, Herriman, WVC
Cities who are leaning YES to continue: SLC, Millcreek
Undecided cities: Cottonwood Heights, South Salt Lake
A new bill seeking to curtail RCV through its mandate requiring cities to “Vote on the RCV Vote” is HB 171. Given RCV Pilot Program cities would have to hold an election to see if their voters choose to continue with the program for 2023. The time, effort and cost would, likely, be prohibitive to continue the RCV Pilot Program for any given city.
This is untenable and ridiculous. As elected representatives, and with previous vote of elected representatives to participate in a multi-year pilot program, it is egregious for the State Legislature to dictate such onerous requirements. I asked my council colleagues to direct CH lobbyists to oppose HB 171 but could get no support. I believe that ULCT (Utah League of Cities and Towns) should oppose HB 171 based on the over-reach of State authority towards municipalities.
The pilot program is to gather data on Ranked Choice Voting. Let the data be collected by conducting the pilot as planned.
It is my wish that SLC, Millcreek and South Salt Lake join Cottonwood Heights in opposing HB 171 in a unified fashion on principal of letting cities decide for themselves.
The deadline to notify SLCO Elections Office of our choice for the 2023 election process is April 28th, which pushes close to the June 1-7 filing period if we were to choose to leave the RCV program. I am urging my colleagues to thoroughly research and prepare to make our decision no later than March so that our citizenry can plan and act accordingly in support of candidates or to run for office themselves.
For me, fair, just, equitable and accessible election of representatives is a process of paramount importance.