AgdaPkt 2018-09-24 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

last -place finishers are re -allocated to second choice votes until one of the candidates accumulates a majority of the votes cast for the office. In practice, the current voting systems limit the voters to ranking only their top three candidate preferences, and the winning candidate accumulates a majority of the voters who still have one of their top three in the mix, rather than a majority of voters casting ballots in that election. The dynamics of ranked choice voting can offer traditionally unrepresented protected class voters the opportunity to elect their preferred candidate when polarized voting is occurring (much like by -district elections), but it does not eliminate the cost and other challenges of a citywide campaign. Ranked choice voting is not a `safe harbor' from California Voting Rights Act litigation. It may deter some plaintiffs from bringing a lawsuit, and it is easier to defend than at -large voting, but that defense remains a risky and expensive proposition. And ranked choice voting in elections that are conducted by the County Registrar requires the County to have and agree to use special vote - counting machines that are state -certified to count ranked choice voting ballots. In a "Cumulative Voting" system voters retain the ability to cast three or four votes for City Council Members each election cycle, just as they do in the City's current at -large system. The difference is that the voter may cast all three or four available votes for a single candidate. The theory is that a traditionally unrepresented protected class in a polarized voting environment could focus all of their votes on electing one or two representatives to the City Council, while the majority voters who traditionally elected the entire City Council would continue to divide their votes among their three or four preferred candidates. Cumulative voting has been a remedy in a handful of Federal Voting Rights Act lawsuits in jurisdictions outside of California — most recently ten years ago in Port Chester, New York. As with ranked choice voting, the election mathematics and dynamics can empower a traditionally unrepresented protected class, but the citywide election costs and other challenges remain; cumulative voting is not a `safe harbor' from California Voting Rights Act litigation; and the County Registrar must use specialized vote -counting systems to count cumulative voting ballots. When Santa Clarita attempted to move to a cumulative voting system, however, the California Secretary of State informed the city and the court that under existing law the Secretary could not certify any vote -counting system for cumulative voting, and that certification is required before any vote -counting system can be used in the state. Mission Viejo recently entered into a new court -approved litigation settlement agreement with Mr. Shenkman agreeing to move to a cumulative voting system, but they have not yet figured out whether they will be able to address these issues (and Mission Viejo missed the `safe harbor' time window, so the city faces a legal bill far in excess of the $30,000 cap provided by Elections Code Section 10010).