Ranked Choice Voting (RCV)

[toboffice]

I am posting this on behalf of Sreeni Chippada, a Lexington resident who is working with other Lexington residents  to get the Town of Lexington to adopt Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for local elections.

"Dear Lexington Town Meeting Members, we are a group of Lexingtonians submitting a petition to use Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for Lexington elections. See the attached petition. We have made presentations to LDTC and LWV on how RCV works with examples and clarified their questions. Both LDTC and LWV officially support RCV for Lexington. We are planning a similar session to explain and answer any questions you may have about RCV. We are planning to have this session at 7:00 PM on one of the days between 9/18/23 – 9/22/23. Please respond back on this thread so that I can see your responses on  https://groups.google.com/g/lextmma/c/AzSd2Gt9aCg

Here is the RCV petition (attached and at the link below): https://docs.google.com/document/d/17H79Xpzpa8aMiqkGZqpR_BVz0CLfGXg1/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=102410455270311083648&rtpof=true&sd=true

[Dinesh Patel MD]

Dear Sreeni Chippada,

Forgive me to request you but can you please describe what is RCV 

Perhaps presentations you made to otgers can be posted here to understand 

What is LDTC and LWV

Will make it easy for your mission if we know ahead of time 

Thanks

Dinesh Patel

Precinct 6 tm 

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 11, 2023, at 2:06 PM, toboffice <tobO...@rcn.com> wrote:

I am posting this on behalf of Sreeni Chippada, a Lexington resident who is working with other Lexington residents  to get the Town of Lexington to adopt Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for local elections.

"Dear Lexington Town Meeting Members, we are a group of Lexingtonians submitting a petition to use Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for Lexington elections. See the attached petition. We have made presentations to LDTC and LWV on how RCV works with examples and clarified their questions. Both LDTC and LWV officially support RCV for Lexington. We are planning a similar session to explain and answer any questions you may have about RCV. We are planning to have this session at 7:00 PM on one of the days between 9/18/23 – 9/22/23. Please respond back on this thread so that I can see your responses on  https://groups.google.com/g/lextmma/c/AzSd2Gt9aCg

Here is the RCV petition (attached and at the link below): https://docs.google.com/document/d/17H79Xpzpa8aMiqkGZqpR_BVz0CLfGXg1/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=102410455270311083648&rtpof=true&sd=true

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/9ba4ab4f-b3c2-4e61-98ec-68dadeba6316n%40googlegroups.com.

<Lexington RCV_ warrant article signature sheet-AK - 08-23-2023-3.pdf>

[Meg Muckenhoupt]

Forgive me to request you but can you please describe what is RCV 

Ranked Choice Voting:

"RCV is straightforward: Voters have the option to rank candidates in order of preference: first, second, third and so forth. Ballots that do not help voters’ top choices win count for their next choice.

https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/ranked-choice-voting/

 

Perhaps presentations you made to otgers can be posted here to understand 

What is LDTC and LWV

Most likedy Lexington Democratic Town Committee and League of Women Voters.

Meg Muckenhoupt

Pct 1

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/B7B60571-C832-45EC-AF84-C690CA8E4F46%40me.com.

[Robert Rotberg]

Folks

This is very important. But, realistically, we need it for state and federal elections, not local ones.  There are often very few candidates for town offices in Lexington.

Robert I. Rotberg

TM  Pct 3

Conflict Mitigation Newsletter

robertirotberg.substack.com

Overcoming the Oppressors (2023)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAFKi9D93BmeS2QH0s2Cx5CHy6ab64KdCrzMnVBnMogMxu5WorQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Harry Forsdick]

I think Robert is right in pointing out that RCV is really useful in elections where there are many candidates for a small number of positions.  That is almost the opposite of Lexington where there are ...

Although the mathematician in me knows that this is the fair way to vote, I'm concerned that in a town where only occasionally are there more candidates than positions to fill, this will confuse people.  

In a town like Cambridge where they are governed by a City Council with nine members, there are frequently many more candidates than the number of open seats.  This is where RCV shines.

This sign shows evidence of RCV in Cambridge City Council elections.  Notice the "#1" on everybody's campaign signs?  That's asking people to vote for the candidate in the #1 position. 

It makes sense in Cambridge, Although I wish it made sense in Lexington, I don't think it does.  With our current low level of citizen participation in elections, it would cause more confusion than good.  And this would give RCV a bad reputation.

Regards,

-- Harry Forsdick

    Precinct #7

Harry Forsdick Lexington Photo Scanning Town Meeting Member Precinct 7 ha...@forsdick.com www.forsdick.com

46 Burlington St. Lexington, MA 02420 (781) 799-6002 (mobile) meet.jit.si/HarryForsdick (video) Click to see my other websites

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/942DEAD0-45B0-45A5-BAE4-483AF8B53A79%40gmail.com.

[Jyotsna Kakullavarapu]

I totally agree with Robert I. Rotberg.  Ranked Choice Voting may be valuable for state and Federal elections.  I don't see any value in local elections.  when 7 seats are open and 8 contestants who ever gets majority votes will win 7 TMM seats.  That pretty much is like ranking.... 1st 7 ranks win... Needs a presentation to LexTMMA if there is more to understand perhaps...

Jyotsna Kakullavarapu MD, MPH

TMM Pct 6 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/942DEAD0-45B0-45A5-BAE4-483AF8B53A79%40gmail.com.

[Dawn McKenna]

I would also add that our local elections are confusing enough to many. If we conduct our elections differently then the state elections, fewer people will vote.

Dawn

Dawn McKenna

Precinct 6 

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/106267846.19515.1694468913006%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Margaret Coppe]

I support RCV. Bear in mind that some towns have adopted it locally, but since it has to go to the state for home rule approval,  The reason for supporting it now is to add to those towns to  increase pressure on the legislature to pass it for the state.  

Ranked Choice Voting has a long history in Massachusetts. Today, it is has been used or enacted for local elections in Amherst, Cambridge, and Easthampton, Massachusetts, and is under study in several other communities. In addition, many colleges and universities in Massachusetts use RCV for their student government or alumni elections.

Local Elections

• Cambridge (since 1942)
• Amherst (enacted in 2018, implementation in 2021)
• Easthampton (enacted in 2019, first use in 2021)
• Alaska and Maine uses RCV statewide for state and federal elections
• New York City and 29 other cities and counties have enacted RCV for local elections
• Four states used RCV for presidential primaries in 2020
• Five states use ranked ballots to allow military and overseas voters to participate in runoff elections

Margaret Coppe

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/130719635.54567.1694478652449%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Tom Diaz]

I worked for the city of Santa Fe, New Mexico from 2015 to 2018.  During that time, ranked choice voting was adopted for election of the mayor and the city council members.  

(I agree with Dawn and others who have suggested that at the local level in Lexington, RCV addresses a problem we don't have.)

Santa Fe is one of the smallest state capitals, with only about three times as many citizens as Lexington.   Still, in the 2018 election, there were many candidates for mayor.  The office of mayor had just been changed legally to give more executive power to the  mayor.  The incumbent did not run for reelection. So all the mayoral candidates were running for an open seat.  It presumably was the kind of election where RCV would shine.

The election campaign did demonstrate one property that RCV advocates talk about.  There was rather little mud-slinging, because candidates were thinking of attracting second- and third-choice voters even if they were not someone's first choice.  So I presume; I did notice it was unusually collegial.  By the next election in 2021, that had gone away, and candidates did indulge in some outrageous charges and countercharges.

In 2018 the winner of the election was the top vote-getter, Alan Webber.  So we did not see a demonstration of another potential property, where nobody gets a clear majority and the winner is perhaps someone other than the top vote-getter.   

Not all RCV systems use the same algorithm for distribution of votes.  (Maybe we'll see some back and forth on that, here on the list.)    Before the election in 2018, most of us had a hard time explaining to citizens how it would work.   That concerned me, because of the outside possibility that a candidate would be elected by an instant runoff but many voters would not understand how it happened.

I concluded that the better system is a runoff election between the top two vote getters.  Voters get a second chance if their first choice does not win, and nobody is confused about how the system worked.

Tom Díaz

Precinct 8

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/9ba4ab4f-b3c2-4e61-98ec-68dadeba6316n%40googlegroups.com.

--

_______________________
Thomas R. Díaz

13 Lois Lane

Lexington, Massachusetts 02420

Text: (781) 454-9946

[Avram Baskin]

Unfortunately, it will likely be a non-starter for federal elections. It started out with bipartisan support, but somehow it is turned into Republicans opposing it because it’s too woke.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 11, 2023, at 8:44 PM, Margaret Coppe <mec...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAK4ycMawoo0X%2B_vo2HmjHmWseAVDQtjbnZQ5ihYxFOpNYLhH2w%40mail.gmail.com.

[toboffice]

First, apologies to all for not properly signing my initial post on this subject. 

Second, I support RCV for the reasons Margaret Coppe cited, supported by many examples of successful adoption elsewhere.

Third, I would agree with others that one big problem facing the town is that we generally have a paucity of candidates seeking local office, along with strong long-term incumbents.  While RCV may seem unnecessary in these circumstances, I think we all might find the reverse is true: RCV could result in more candidates running for local office and play a role, even if not in changing outcomes, making clear when opinions in town are shifting, by revealing preferences as RCV can do.  In other words, RCV could address the problem of too few candidates, that others cite as a reason to pass over it, by encouraging new candidates, who under RCV, might have greater likelihood of success, if not the first time out, then perhaps the second.

Fourth, I don't think we should underestimate the capabilities of Lexington residents to understand RCV.  I have faith that residents would quickly adapt and appreciate the opportunity to exercise their vote in such a robust manner.

Todd Burger

Precinct 9 TMM and Clerk, 33-year resident

[andrei rădulescu-banu]

Let's take a practical problem. Cambridge schools have eliminated, long ago, advanced math from middle school. This is the city of MIT and Harvard, and it's yet unable to give children a quality scientific education in its public schools.

How has ranked choice voting in Cambridge solved this, or rather not solved this?

Not everything Cambridge does should be taken as a model that needs to be copied.

Andrei Radulescu-Banu,Pct 8

--

=====================

Andrei Rădulescu-Banu

86 Cedar St, Lexington MA
617.216.8509 (m)

=====================

[Avram Baskin]

I’m not following.  Rank choice voting is not about resolving specific issues, it’s about empowering voters.  The Cambridge example is like saying we should not have rank choice voting in Lexington because not everyone in Lexington agrees about the solar canopy for the police station.

Avram Baskin

Precinct 2

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CALJb0skfK6Q7GfeFdEkxzTH94BUbA_aw2GDw8uOp8dYxJmwSwg%40mail.gmail.com.

Avram Baskin
Be yourself, 
everyone else is already taken
Oscar Wilde

Donate to Support The Ukraine

[Umesh]

I expect that RCV would motivate a wider segment of Lexington's population to run for committee or Town Meeting positions. That motivation comes from interest in specific issues. For example, Lexington Public Schools eliminated homework at elementary school; shifted away from traditional grading at the middle schools; and dropped AP Physics Calculus: Mechanics at the high school. Lexington is supposed to be a high performing academic school district. RCV creates a vehicle for citizens, motivated by issues, to get involved in roles to affect change. I believe it would increase Town participation in governance - something we sorely need.

I'm for it.

Umesh Shelat, P7

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/41EB4E68-4DEB-4750-B166-3F2ED4A08DB7%40icloud.com.

[Salvador Jaramillo]

Although not really related to the issue of RCV, I thought it would be important to correct one thing Umesh mentioned in order to avoid confusion or misinformation about the high school supposedly dropping AP Physics calculus as opposed to avoiding any confusion or misinformation. AP Physics C is a calculus based, college level course roughly equivalent to a two semester physics course composed of mechanics and electricity & magnetism, it is a course that I took 4 years ago and is still being offered today at the high school, I actually currently tutor a few LHS students in the course so the high school has definitely not dropped it. 

Since my time at LHS, they have "dropped" AP Physics 1, the algebra based college level course and have instead replaced it with "honors" physics with the options to dual enroll for actual college credit through Middlesex Community College, which I feel makes a lot more sense and beneficial to students for earning actual college credit. The content has largely remained the same, it's just the name of the course was changed and was not dropped — I know all of these terms can be confusing so thought I would just try to clear that up. 

Salvador 

Precinct 5

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAC3FGDaxW-zKTHQOuJQYucLxm68JV9e3hMzK8Hv%3DrsneRSaxfg%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Salvador A. Jaramillo

Harvard College | Class of 2024

A.B. Candidate Molecular & Cellular Biology and Government

Harvard University Advisory Committee on Shareholder Responsibility

sjara...@college.harvard.edu

[Umesh]

Salvador,

Thank you for the clarification. However, AP credits serve three purposes that "honors" do not: 1) AP credits can be applied to many colleges, while the "honors" dual enrollment at Middlesex Community College do not, and 2) AP scores can be compared nationally, and more importantly, objectively - how do colleges compare a student from Palo Alto, CA (or any other high performing competitive school) who takes AP Physics 1 to a Lexington student who takes a class at Middlesex Community College (Are Lexington students being penalized?), and 3) AP scores are an explicit measure of relative objective competence, while grades in an "honors" class are not. 

My point here is not to debate the issue of the AP curriculum, but to show how differences of opinion - on at least one particular issue - can make the case for RCV as a path for interested parents to impact policy change.

Thank you for tutoring LHS students. I hope they are able to benefit from the same opportunities available to you.

Umesh, P7

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAGdb7iwCoXeGRFVYhTDXJQ6W%3D%2B0mUXBdYZQFEq7VJDh9O_FQDA%40mail.gmail.com.

[andrei rădulescu-banu]

The time to adopt ranked choice voting was at the ballot box, in 2020, at the state referendum. Voters rejected it, 55%, not because they are conservative - gosh, this is a pretty progressive state! - but because it would have complicated voting unnecessarily.

There's a few localities, e.g. Boston, that are trying to now pass that at the city or town level.

Avram talks about ideological push against this. Supporters, in Boston, are Boston Teachers Union, Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, MassLandlords and Our Revolution Massachusetts. Opponents are the Mass Fiscal Alliance.

So yes, the sponsors are on the left, opponents are on the right.

My advice would be to not view this through ideological blinders, and to do what is right for Lexington. If there isn't a practical problem to solve, here, in our community - then, this is not justified.

Andrei

[Kathryn Roy]

Andrei,

I would preface this with "in my opinion" " but because it would have complicated voting unnecessarily."

It has worked out in several locations https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/ranked-choice-voting-information/#where-is-ranked-choice-voting-used

I think the more people have experience with it, the more comfortable they are with it.

I do think it overly complicated for town meeting elections, where so few run, but everyone could just ignore RCV and vote once for who they want. 

Approval voting is simpler and more effective. https://electionscience.org/library/approval-voting-versus-irv/

Kathryn Roy

382 Marrett Rd
617 548 9240 | Kat...@precisionthinking.com

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CALJb0skA%2BHJY2w4W%3D-5WVo183g8AU8j-fagMgcBOFadZpSnU0A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Harry Forsdick]

Below is an explanation of how RCV works. I offer this up understanding that there may be slight differences in how RCV is implemented.

My purpose in sending this to the list is to encourage those advocating or rejecting RCV to present their arguments referencing how RCV actually works.

So, for example, someone who says “RCV encourages / discourages XYZ”, I’d like to know exactly why this might be true in terms of the process of the new protocol for voting and counting votes.

Thanks, 

— Harry Forsdick

     Precinct #7

So, here is the explanation of how RCV works:

Ranked choice voting is a voting system where voters rank candidates in order of preference. Instead of only selecting one candidate, voters have the option to rank multiple candidates from their most preferred to least preferred. Here's a simplified explanation of how ranked choice voting works: 

 1. Voters rank candidates: Voters mark their preferred candidates by assigning them rankings, such as first choice, second choice, and so on. They can rank as many or as few candidates as they want. 

 2. Ballot counting: In the initial count, first-choice votes are tallied for each candidate. If any candidate receives an absolute majority (more than 50% of the first-choice votes), they are declared the winner. 

 3. Eliminating the least popular candidate: If no candidate has an absolute majority, the candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated from the race. The ballots of those who ranked the eliminated candidate as their first choice are reexamined, and their votes are redistributed to their next-ranked candidate who is still in the race.  

4. Recounting and eliminating: This process of eliminating the least popular candidate and redistributing votes continues until one candidate receives an absolute majority of the votes. 

 5. Electing the winner: The candidate with the majority of the votes after the redistribution process is declared the winner. 

[er...@michelsonshoes.com]

You’ve described RCV in the simple scenario of one person being elected for a position.

 

How would RCV work in the situation of multiple candidates running for multiple open positions for the same office? Do all candidates need to accumulate a majority of votes to be elected?

 

Eric Michelson

Precinct 1

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CABKvzKoJ44av-sGf9tQ9AtNidm_x4xsqJBBER618_L-ZrEePEg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Noah Michelson]

This video is a good reference for the how one form of RCV, single tranferrable vote, works. At 2:28 it covers how elections with multiple open positions works. 

Noah Michelson

Precinct 1

“Hexagons are the bestagons!”

On Sep 12, 2023, at 12:07, er...@michelsonshoes.com wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/001901d9e593%2435481550%249fd83ff0%24%40michelsonshoes.com.

[Irene Dondley]

Sometimes Lexington actually has competitive races and that is when RCV could be effective. I like to use some actual numbers.

Let's assume there are three people running for one seat, a liberal, a moderate and a conservative. Each voter ranks them regarding their preference.  Let's say there are 100 people voting and in order to win, you need  >50% of the vote. The results of the election might be:

Liberal 35 votes

Conservative 40 votes

Moderate 25 votes

In a traditional election,the Conservative would win.

I believe with RCV, the Moderate's 2nd choice votes would be distributed. Let's say the second choice was 20 votes for the Liberal and 5 for the Conservative. In this case, the Liberal would win. I think this result would better reflect the choice of all the voters rather than the traditional way we do vote counting. 

When people vote for third party candidates, their vote is pretty much wasted in our two-party system. Furthermore, by voting for a third party candidate, they may actually be hurting the candidate they would rather see win. Think Ralph Nadar. RCV avoids this problem by letting them vote for their first choice, but still have a voice in choosing the eventual winner.

Also RCV avoids the problem of having to have a runoff election in which the turnout will be a different set of voters and of course is an added expense.

--Irene

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/2892F44D-EF58-410B-83A7-9D713E23608F%40gmail.com.

[gjb...@rcn.com]

I would appreciate it if one of the sponsors of RCV would point out the specific town elections in the past  10 years where it could have changed the result.  I can see where it would be helpful on the state level or even if Lexington decided to become a city with a mayor and city council, but it seems like a complication for a town meeting/select board type government.  If you want to send a message to the state, perhaps contacting our reps and state wide officials directly would be more useful.

Gloria Bloom, P4

[Avram Baskin]

The last election I remember where Rank Choice Voting might have been a factor was the election to fill a school committee seat vacated by Bill Hurley (apologies if I got his first name wrong).  I think 12 people ran for the open seat.

Avram Baskin

Precinct 2

On Sep 13, 2023, at 5:00 PM, gjb...@rcn.com wrote:

I would appreciate it if one of the sponsors of RCV would point out the specific town elections in the past  10 years where it could have changed the result.  I can see where it would be helpful on the state level or even if Lexington decided to become a city with a mayor and city council, but it seems like a complication for a town meeting/select board type government.  If you want to send a message to the state, perhaps contacting our reps and state wide officials directly would be more useful.

Gloria Bloom, P4

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/2011059401.48839674.1694638823792.JavaMail.zimbra%40rcn.com.

[Kathleen Lenihan]

I believe it was 7.

Kathleen Lenihan 

Pct 4 and one of the 7

On Sep 13, 2023, at 6:06 PM, 'Avram Baskin' via LexTMMA <lex...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

The last election I remember where Rank Choice Voting might have been a factor was the election to fill a school committee seat vacated by Bill Hurley (apologies if I got his first name wrong).  I think 12 people ran for the open seat.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/5403EBFC-7182-474E-8383-ABC683EC4816%40icloud.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

What happens if a voter votes for the same candidate in all 3 choices?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/5403EBFC-7182-474E-8383-ABC683EC4816%40icloud.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

RCV would not have changed the 2016 School Committee race.  None of the other candidates has run again as far as I know.  

NEERJA JUNEJA BAJA 50 93 62 64 81 61 80 47 65 603

MELISSA A.M. CUNNINGHAM 20 17 19 27 23 24 49 22 15 216

KATHLEEN M. LENIHAN 147 281 231 333 222 288 202 235 211 2150 

YURY MASHKOVICH 14 11 8 10 17 13 9 28 15 125 

STEPHEN W. McKENNA II 52 64 30 84 82 105 87 80 82 666 

BURC ORAL 8 25 11 8 13 18 8 8 6 105 

HENGAMEH M. TARAZ 30 51 35 65 70 76 56 70 47 500 

Ruth Thomas, 4

[Avram Baskin]

It’s my understanding that rank choice voting isn’t applied to the aggregate vote totals, as in Irene’s example.  It’s applied to each individual ballot.  A new total is calculated based on how each person voted.  I think that most (maybe all) people will only rank candidates who align with their personal beliefs.  So, in a town that is predominantly liberal, the winner would likely still be liberal, even if it’s not the person who got the most votes the first time around.  You do not have to rank the candidates.  In a two person race between a liberal and a conservative, you would only vote for the candidate who you align with politically.

Avram Baskin

Precinct 2 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAApLQ7FBxxymyyUAp-sKHxnzcKv-mg009%2BLTY-fgYm1a%2Bzua0A%40mail.gmail.com.
<hqdefault.jpg>

[Irene Dondley]

Here's a real life impact of RCV in the Alaska election that had Palin as a candidate. It resulted in losing the seat to a Democrat. If I am reading this correctly, the person who came in last had their votes redistributed.

https://reason.com/2022/11/28/in-alaska-ranked-choice-voting-worked/

" To see how this works in practice, let's look at Chris Bye, who finished last in the first round of vote counting. He received 4,560 first-place votes. After being eliminated, those ballots were re-distributed to the other candidates. Begich was the second choice of 1,988 Bye voters, so he received those ballots for the second round. Palin was the second choice of 1,064 Bye voters, and Peltola was the second choice for 1,038 of them."

--Irene

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/8578F185-94E8-403D-A98B-D4AE69FB5C98%40icloud.com.

[Mark Manasas - Precinct 2]

A few thoughts

- If we dumb down democracy to the lowest level it will die. 

Democracy needs educated voters to survive. In the 1820s many states were changing their voting laws to allow non-landholding white men a vote. The Lyceum movement, which took off in the 1830s was in large part due to the concern that the uneducated "common man" was going to destroy the new fledged democracy of the United States. The Lyceum movement would evolve over time to include and influence abolition and suffrage - giving a wider swath of the population the right to vote.

- Be the change we want to see

I have heard our representatives say that it is easier to change policy at the state (and presumably national) level when several "progressive" towns enact policies first. RCV seems like a great example of this. If we think it is a good idea at the national level, why don't we start locally? 

I am enjoying this discussion!

mark manasas pct 2

see also lexlyceum.org (note opinions are my own and not necessarily those of the Lexington Lyceum Advocates0

[Meg Muckenhoupt]

Umesh - Dual enrollment classes absolutely DO count for college credit - and it can be easer to get credit for those classes than APs at some schools.

You can learn more about the Massachusetts program here: 

https://www.mass.edu/strategic/cdep.asp

Lexington doesn’t emphasize this program, but it’s used in many school districts.

Meg Muckenhoupt

Precinct 1

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAC3FGDYkEsS9hdwE1wnYtqvFGgNr-g4haxAF4UX3ANfjMOfrMA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Umesh]

Meg,

Not true. Why would more selective schools accept college credit from less selective schools? As an example, UCLA accepts AP credits (3+), but not necessarily community college credits.

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Umesh Shelat, P7

[Umesh]

... for high school students.

[Ruth Thomas]

Colleges and universities now look at the whole student and not just AP courses passed.

UCLA

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAC3FGDb3SSoC9ZjUzeydhpVTOH%3DTE2drVuL7m1Cuisqg_EXmtg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Lauren Black]

Umesh,

While I’m not sure this is germane to our work as town meeting members, I feel the need to add to this discussion given my own knowledge of the matter. Speaking as a college professor who has advised many undergraduate students and seen credits transferred and counted from a wide variety of schools (including community colleges), I would have to disagree with your assertion. In most universities, as long as the department/ advisor agree that the credits are relevant to their degree and they are transferred from an accredited college or university they generally will count.

Lauren Black

TMM Precinct 8

Sent from my iPhone so please excuse the brevity, misspellings, and poor punctuation.

On Sep 16, 2023, at 11:38 AM, Umesh <ush...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAC3FGDb3SSoC9ZjUzeydhpVTOH%3DTE2drVuL7m1Cuisqg_EXmtg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Umesh]

Lauren,

I’m simply going by what I see online: the number and caliber of colleges that accept Middlesex Community College credits versus those that accept AP Physics 1 (thousands). 

Furthermore, is a passing grade at MCC sufficient to transfer credits? Competitive schools like Tufts and Wellesley require a 4 and 5 respectively. As I mentioned, AP scores are nationally recognized and standardized, so students can compete, objectively, on a fair playing field. MCC grades are not. 

Umesh, P7

[Vicki Blier]

Rank choice voting directly concerns Lexington Government  in that Lexington could opt for it, and there are people already interested in pursuing it for our town.

BUT we have stumbled into a discussion of details about AP/Honors/College Credits that will not come before Town Meeting and is an issue under the control of the School Committee, not Town Meeting.

As List Moderator I ask that this discussion be discontinued on this list.

(My apologies for the delay in making this request... It's a holiday for me and I had guests.)

Vicki Blier

TMMA List Moderator

781-862-1804 Landline First

617-549-3207 Mobile

    

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAC3FGDaLoVTHj5ghK-Z%2BG1SSFC%3Dp3o%3D9d2%2Bfy%2BGF%2BTBZLoCP0g%40mail.gmail.com.

[b...@metaprosystems.com]

I am working closely with Sreeni Chippada who is collecting signatures to
advance a Citizens’ Petition to pass RCV in Lexington. Sreeni will be at
various spots in Lexington hoping to collect signatures to get this issue
before STM in the fall. He will need 100 signatures to advance this issue.
Sreeni can be reached at schi...@gmail.com <mailto:schi...@gmail.com>
or by phone at 508-397-9998. We would like to get as many TMMs to sign as
possible. Contact Sreeni to arrange a time to sign. He will come to your
place if you desire.



Some people may remember me as a strong advocate of RCV at the State level.
I worked to try to get Question 2 passed in 2020, I was disappointed when it
failed to pass, although it did pass in Lexington. While I agree that it is
more critical in State elections than here in Lexington. I believe it is
important that we pass this in Lexington.



A lot has been said about this issue already so I won’t repeat all the
arguments, but I will mention a couple of things. While most Lexington
elections recently have had just enough candidates or one more than needed
there have been exceptions. I remember some years ago we had an open seat
for Select Board and there were five candidates. But it is really the future
that matters not the past. I can imagine a case where there is an open seat
for SC and there are five candidates, but only one who wants to eliminate
“Serious Talks.” I can imagine that one candidate winning with 30% of the
vote.



RCV also eliminates the temptation for “bullet” voting. For TM we get seven
votes. There is one candidate who is your favorite: a friend, relative or
yourself. Under the current system you might want to vote for your favorite
only; voting for any other candidate could work against your favorite. Under
RCV you would rank your favorite one and your other choice two to seven.
Your favorite is not disadvantaged.



Please feel free to message me with any questions or concerns.



Bob Avallone

Town Meeting Member

Precinct 8

[b...@metaprosystems.com]

An update – Volunteers will be collecting signatures for the RCV Petition
from 1 to 3 at Stop and Shop and Walgreens, Friday.

Bob Avallone

Town Meeting Member

Precinct 8

From: lex...@googlegroups.com <lex...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of

[b...@metaprosystems.com]

I would like to announce that the sponsor of the Citizen’s article, Sreeni
Chippada, has obtain the necessary signatures to get the issue on the Fall
Warrant. It will read as follows:



To determine whether the Town will authorize and request the Select Board
to petition the

General Court for Home Rule Legislation to elect Town offices using Ranked
Choice Voting

or take any other action relative thereto.



We are trying to gauge the level of support, so if you have not weighed in
yet, please email me offline as to your opinion, Yes, No or waiting to hear
the debate, no need to give a reason.



If you have any questions, you can email to this list or just me, and I
will answer you or obtain an answer.

[shei...@rcn.com]

I’m a definite “no” on rank choice voting. This is a ridiculous proposal.
We can barely get enough people to run for town offices and he wants Ranked
Choice Voting??? It makes no sense at all for town elections.



Steve Heinrich

617-780-5115 (mobile)

shei...@rcn.com

From: lex...@googlegroups.com <lex...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of
b...@metaprosystems.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 4:24 PM
To: 'LexTMMA' <lex...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [LexTMMA] Ranked Choice Voting (RCV)

[Avram Baskin]

Does anyone have an example in the last twenty years when more than two people ran for the same seat?  The only one I can think of is when Bill Hurley resigned from the school committee and there was an election to complete his term.

Avram Baskin
Be yourself, 
everyone else is already taken
Oscar Wilde

Donate to Support The Ukraine

On Sep 26, 2023, at 4:56 PM, shei...@rcn.com wrote:

I’m a definite “no” on rank choice voting.  This is a ridiculous proposal.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/001d01d9f0bb%24f0a0c940%24d1e25bc0%24%40rcn.com.

<winmail.dat>

[Irene Dondley]

Avram,

You can find election results here, https://www.lexingtonma.gov/629/Election-Results

This page goes back to 2014 and there is a link on that page that goes back to 1933.

In 2017, there were three people running for 2 seats on the Select Board and 2 people running for 1 seat for School Committee (not an issue for RCV).

It's not an issue of whether we have many contested elections, it is because we could have a contested election and RCV could make a big difference. I think Bob Avallone said it well when he pointed out that if we had three or more people running for the School Committee and one was very conservative, that person would have a good chance of winning without RCV and that would likely not reflect the feelings of the community.

--Irene

Precinct 5

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/50BE2422-3D23-4606-AC45-2FEFB2932DD9%40icloud.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

What do voters do if they really just want to vote for one of the candidates in a 3-candidate race?

Ruth Thomas, 4

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAApLQ7GDRNcEJT-V4JdoyDbXcxjJ18_%2BPm5y4d0-i%3DtB8HmUsA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jeanne Krieger]

They vote for only their candidate. If   their candidate is eliminated they have forfeited their opportunity to register a vote in the election.

Jeanne

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgwQt_OuzzBTpy9e-%2BFoDMqu6qSSYgjkMJHnLzjgis9DVQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Masha Traber]

I’m for it.  Wish we had it for all elections

Masha Traber. Pct 5

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 26, 2023, at 7:39 PM, Jeanne Krieger <krieg...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAB1B-3YGTjov%2BCpyS75iU8%3DAqn1qpv%3DLBNTO_LGkEPLxfzfpGA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

Can voters vote for their candidate in all 3 slots--lst, 2nd, 3rd choices?

[Robert Rotberg]

No.  That’s not how it works.

Conflict Mitigation Newsletter

robertirotberg.substack.com

Overcoming the Oppressors (2023)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgxcwce6LqC13H-4XUt-%3Dxr%3Dz14GjcDqeKAitiuYk%3DjbGQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

The voting machines are programmed to not count same name 2nd and 3rd choices?  

[Vicki Blier]

Ruth-

Your second vote is only applied if your first choice candidate gets eliminated. Your third vote is only applied if your first and second candidates are eliminated.
SO--- if you use your first choice candidate for your first, second and third votes, and your first choice 

candidate gets eliminated, then your second and third votes would be applied to a candidate that has already lost.

In other words, you are accomplishing nothing.

Vicki Blier

Pct. 9

781-862-1804 Landline First

617-549-3207 Mobile

    

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgxcwce6LqC13H-4XUt-%3Dxr%3Dz14GjcDqeKAitiuYk%3DjbGQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

Thanks for the clarification. 

[Diana J. Donovan]

I apologize if this has already been addressed, but one of the recent emails triggered the question:

Are our current voting machines capable of handling ranked choice voting with a software change/upgrade, or are we going to have to invest in new technologies to accommodate this potential change?

Diana Donovan

Precinct 9

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgyvdgJe%2BLP8ma3nRbgu0gtZ0_6wjqAmTj5D%3DnRGmD4y1A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bob Balaban]

Apparently all that's needed for our existing Dominion tabulators is a software upgrade to handle RCV

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAO0EJmWr88V5UDHg0xixx5W6aRbKcfn%2BH4%2BtktYpSaaBEm8VJQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Find Bob's blog at http://www.bobzblog.com

[Bob Balaban]

You can vote for 1 or for as many as allowed. For example, in a Town Meeting election, there are generally 7 or 8 seats that you can vote for. You can vote for 1, or 7.

If you vote for more than 1, you rank the others according to preference

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgwQt_OuzzBTpy9e-%2BFoDMqu6qSSYgjkMJHnLzjgis9DVQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bridger McGaw]

I'm not swayed.  Lexington doesnt need to pursue RCV at this juncture.  I appreciate it at the State Level, there it makes more sense.  Instead, we could save all this time and money and effort that could be spent on RCV in Lexington and instead focus on other matters with our resources.  Increasing voter participation? I love the idea of getting more people to participate in the democratic process in our community. Maybe that would be a better first step.

Appreciate the dialogue and policy discussion.

Bridger

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAB0V1PJUQchin8wgFfeUJzb73TjtHsvgAnWOQLWG149ZJ4MteA%40mail.gmail.com.

[b...@metaprosystems.com]

It is my understanding that the current voting machine can handle RCV with a software upgrade.

 

Bob Avallone

Town Meeting Member

Precinct 8

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAO0EJmWr88V5UDHg0xixx5W6aRbKcfn%2BH4%2BtktYpSaaBEm8VJQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ryan Wise]

I will be voting in favor.

RCV is simply a better way to vote.  Most importantly, in an age of increasing polarization, RCV strengthens the middle of the spectrum against the extremes.  It encourages candidates to win by broadening their appeal, not just by exciting turnout of their core.  It has minimal downside -- if a voter chooses to cast their vote for only one candidate, as they have done in the past, they are no worse off than they are today.

The biggest obstacle to implementing RCV at every level has been unfamiliarity, confusion and fear.  The lowest-risk way to address that is by trying it at the local level.  If you want RCV for state and federal elections, letting everyone learn how it works locally is a good way to start.

And yes, RCV will prove relevant in Lexington as well.  It's impossible to know what would have happened in any previous election, but there are likely candidates.  A Select Board election a few years ago has already been mentioned.  Had this year's write-in candidacy for Planning Board been launched earlier, RCV could very well have proven decisive.  Even for Town Meeting, some precincts were closely contested in this latest election -- notably Precinct 7, whose 7th-9th places had 118, 100 and 100 votes respectively.

Ryan Wise

Precinct 6

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/00b301d9f150%24d8bbe310%248a33a930%24%40metaprosystems.com.

[Tom Shiple]

On this one I'm following the dictum "be the change you wish to see in the world".  I think RCV is a better way to hold elections, so let's get some experience with it at the local level.

Tom Shiple

Precinct 9

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/1209369725.7869651.1695828568524%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Ricki Pappo]

I am of the same thinking as Mr. Shiple. Without RCV, Maine would never have been able to replace a very difficult governor. I have always believed that RCV was the best way to truly reflect the votes of the electorate. While I don't see it as necessary for Lexington's local election, I do believe we should get used to using it. And, since I think it's the best way for a voting system, I am willing to have it in Lexington. 

Ricki Pappo

Pct 2

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAK6YrbcV%3DadKo%2Bno%2B3fZwtyNggWPC35Lk-myS5AhVaCCvVQkLA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Deepika Sawhney]

In many ways our current system of elections at the local level can be made more equitable as well as serve the changing needs of our community. 

For example: 

• Incumbents have an overwhelming advantage, with very few new candidates coming to the fore if there isn't an empty seat to be filled. 
• Incumbents also have the honor of leading the ballot paper on the top of the list, a prime spot!
• Last names by alphabetical order give John Brown a boost which isn't merit based, while a John Smith lingers at the bottom. 

In my opinion, an RCV process, while not a panacea, may mitigate such effects. Newcomers can be hopeful of getting at least third or fourth choice votes and not an ignominious 0! And of course I am highly appreciative of my fellow town meeting members for engaging in this discussion.

Best

Deepika Sawhney nee Ahluwalia

(and had the incumbent advantage last in 2020)

:)

Precinct 6 

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 5:22 PM Tom Shiple <tsh...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAK6YrbcV%3DadKo%2Bno%2B3fZwtyNggWPC35Lk-myS5AhVaCCvVQkLA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Margaret Coppe]

In Arlington, candidates are listed randomly, or by drawing names, which avoids the issues Deepika raises.

Also, Arlington and Bedford hold municipal elections on Saturday, which theoretically increases turnout. Saturday elections may not be feasible in Lexington as that is the Jewish sabbath.

The point is that there are already many different ways of holding elections.

Margaret Coppe

Precinct 8

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAPkBqNn_AqG6mO3pXLwJVjoDsj%2BS4jvU%2B3ELcTcFjfztOGP0OA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Irene Dondley]

I don't understand the advantage to waiting to implement RCV or what the disadvantage is to implementing it now. Is there a large cost associated with implementing it? There is a chance that RCV would increase voter participation and even increase the number of people who are willing to run. What is the downside?

--Irene

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAD9ViUPTaaxWWU7pQyDnsqoCFeSFHL4%2BfhBt6yUmNS3xn1QHoA%40mail.gmail.com.

[andrei rădulescu-banu]

We could elect people randomly. Worked well in Athens, BC. It's called a Lottocracy.

Andrei Radulescu-Banu, Pct 8

[Tom Diaz]

Regarding Irene's question: the downside is that the system is more complicated and does not solve a problem.  Think about the number of explanations members have made on this list, explaining to others how the system works and what justifies it.  Multiply that many times, for voters who don't get it right off the bat and may or may not get an explanation from an RCV fan.

This is as opposed to: go to the polls and vote for the candidate of your choice.    In our Lexington elections, the top vote getters win races.  The top 7 or so vote-getters in a precinct get the Town Meeting seats.  If there is one Select Board seat up for election, the top vote-getter gets it no matter how many candidates there are.   If there are two seats, the top two vote-getters are electe.

Could  RCV mean that the Select Board seat is won by someone who gets an instant-runoff majority but was not the top vote-getter?   Why would that be better?

The system we have now, in my opinion, encourages multiple candidates to run for that seat, because of the fact that it is a first-past-the-post election.  New people can get onto a governing board without necessarily having a majority of votes cast.     This is part of the reason I don't buy the idea that RCV encourages more people to run than would otherwise run.    If someone wants to advocate for requiring a majority of votes, I would prefer a simple run-off election between the top two candidates.  Everyone understands what is happening without a lot of explanation, and the winner is the top vote getter an also has a majority.

We definitely have a problem, in many years, of having too few candidates for our local government jobs, but I doubt RCV will improve that situation.  And in the meantime I think lots of people will be trying to explain how the system woks and why we're doing it.

Tom Díaz

Precinct 8

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAApLQ7H1dfJzfUZi90U-yOZZWwpeGphCiRskUp0y4impxxabSg%40mail.gmail.com.

--

_______________________
Thomas R. Díaz

13 Lois Lane

Lexington, Massachusetts 02420

Text: (781) 454-9946

[Ruth Thomas]

The first time I won an election to Town Meeting my home-made sign read: "Vote Last First" with a rough drawing of the "ballot"--we used voting machines with levers then!

For the next election, I, now an incumbent, obviously had to make a new sign, which I still have and hold, because I believe election day at the polls should be festive and colorful--a great way for voters to see candidates in person and maybe even have a chat.

In Annual Town Elections 2014-2023, no one is showing 0.  That would be unlikely since the person, if serious about running, would have voted for themself!  

Anyone can collect the requisite signatures and become a candidate.  It might and should require some effort to win, even going door-to-door, which I have done for many elections.  Just ask Sandro about the time Tanya and I encouraged him to leap over snow banks to reach front doors--"you can do it, Sandro"----"but my back!"

Incumbents may have pride of place on the ballot, but if you look at election results, you'll discover incumbents, including myself,  don't always win!

Ruth Thomas, 4

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 6:00 PM Deepika Sawhney <sawhney...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAPkBqNn_AqG6mO3pXLwJVjoDsj%2BS4jvU%2B3ELcTcFjfztOGP0OA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Scott Burson]

I agree with Tom. A run-off election between the top two vote getters, if no one initially gets a majority, is clean and simple. I don't have any confidence that, in the hypothetical instance of a select board race with ten candidates polling roughly equally, RCV will yield the preferred candidate.

Scott Burson

Precinct 9

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAMFDu-HyvUczTS%2BDVjn0fqWN2Bw26otG9RuggW9Y4UkhuSijTQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

Scott Burson: " A run-off election between the top two vote getters, if no one initially gets a majority, is clean and simple."

But it will cost.  Holding elections is not free (can't remember figure--is est. $21,000 about right?).

And will voters come out a second time?

Ruth Thomas, 4

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/745759651.91374.1695907413504%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Irene Dondley]

Many of our local elections are for 2 seats. How does a runoff work in this case? You would have to have at least 4 people running. If you only have 3 people running for 2 seats, then the top vote getters are in without a runoff and you certainly wouldn't run the election with the same three people. With TM, I would love to rank who I want to win. There are some people I really hope will win and then there are some people I'm fine with, but maybe not as enthusiastic about.

I don't think it is a problem if a person with fewer votes in the first round ends up not getting elected. How many people in 2000, voted for Ralph Nadar, but if they could have ranked their choices, would have marked Gore as their second choice. Gore would have won and that would better reflect the political leanings of voters.

I think if Cambridge and Maine and Alaska, etc. can figure out RCV, then I think Lexington will be able to figure it out as well.

--Irene

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgy8GEGSNkdAcKnTnr8wgvR11qP7hvoxS0_6wqO6U6Fpqg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Todd O. Burger]

I plan to support RCV for Lexington for 3 reasons:

1. The cost to implement is negligible
2. I have faith voters will adapt to use it to their advantage, eventually producing better election results (as well as training them for its eventual possible use in statewide elections)
   
3. This is s a change that "Does No Harm", fosters thoughtful voting, and helps to build support for a statewide implementation

-Todd Burger, Precinct 9

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lextmma/ApkGbOCtFpw/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CADvQVgy8GEGSNkdAcKnTnr8wgvR11qP7hvoxS0_6wqO6U6Fpqg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Glenn Parker]

On 27 Sep 2023, at 18:32, Tom Diaz wrote:

Regarding Irene's question: the downside is that the system is more complicated and does not solve a problem. 

I think those are both very subjective points. I could just as easily argue that RCV is less complicated, and that it solves a problem we often ignore.

Is RCV more complicated? Right now, with our current first-past-the-post election system, voters often face a serious and difficult dilemma when deciding who to vote for. In a basic election for a single seat, they can vote (exactly once) for their favorite candidate, one who may not be widely favored to win, knowing that their vote is probably a losing proposition. Or they can vote (exactly once) for a candidate who they “think can win”, even though it denies support to their real favorite. It is neither an easy nor uncomplicated process, and voters must often rely on subjective data to shape a choice between devotion and practicality.

There is a massive potential for regret, regardless of your choice. Perhaps your favorite “could have won” if you had only supported them. Or someone totally unacceptable to you could win, because the bulk of votes were split between two similar candidates (the Nader effect).

Under RCV this dilemma and the potential for regret is minimized, if not totally eliminated. You simply vote for who you want to win, rather than voting for who you “think can win”. Obviously, most voters go into a polling place knowing who they want to win. But most voters also know something about the other candidate(s), and how well they would be satisfied with one of their less preferred candidates. So, you just keep voting for who you want to win, until you run out of “acceptable” candidates.

Does RCV solve a problem? The main argument seems to be that we don’t have enough candidates running for office in Lexington to justify a transition to RCV. The argument can just as easily be run in reverse, that we have a dearth of candidates because we don’t use RCV. A lot of residents look at our list of major boards and committees and think, “Well, there’s no way I have a chance against ‘the machine’.”, i.e., the group of well-funded and well-connected incumbents who run things. Why make the sacrifices required to launch a long-shot campaign when the chances are so poor?

And they’re right, because first-past-the-post voting creates a barrier to entry that strongly favors the machine. Note that I speak from direct personal experience here. RCV lowers the barrier to entry for new candidates because they do not have to make the case for an overwhelming vote in their favor, which first-past-the-post elections demand. In other words, they don’t have to convince voters that their individual votes will not be wasted (see above).

Could  RCV mean that the Select Board seat is won by someone who gets an instant-runoff majority but was not the top vote-getter?   Why would that be better?

Yes! That is exactly what RCV could accomplish, and (obviously?) such a result would better represent the majority of the voters.

As representatives of the voters, it behooves all Town Meeting Members to better educate themselves about RCV: https://voterchoicema.org/ It seems that this evolution in our voting system will require a grassroots leadership, rather than a top-down approach. When communities implement RCV and demonstrate its effectiveness, voter confidence will increase and pressure will eventually bubble up to the state level.

Glenn P. Parker, Pct. 3
glenn....@lexingtontmma.org

[Tom Diaz]

I suggest RCV proponents give us an example.  How would the RCV algorithm have worked in an actual previous election?  I realize you can't necessarily say would would have emerged on top, but how would the algorithm actually count votes in a Lexington election.

I looked back in the records for an election having more candidates than available seats.  The 2017 town election is one.  In the Select Board race there were three candidates for two seats:

1.  Do blanks count toward the total number of votes cast (I would think so)?

2.  In this case, as is common, no candidate has a majority of votes cast.

3.  Am I right in assuming the RCV algorithm would keep going until one of the candidates has a majority of votes cast?  Please remind us how that works.

4.  Does the algorithm also get a shot at the second-place candidate, or not?

That same year, there were two School Committee elections.   There was one for a three-year term, which Kate Colburn won with a majority of votes cast.  There was also a race for a one-year term, with seven candidates for the seat plus a nontrivial number of blanks (meaning that number of voters voted for none of the above candidates).

Kathleen L was elected with a plurality but not a majority of votes cast.   So again, how does the algorithm go to work?  Maybe start with ballots that list Mr. Oral as the first choice.

Thanks,

Tom Díaz

Precinct 8

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/D8741B9B-F140-4A76-998C-82C8D2927CD8%40comcast.net.

[Scott Burson]

So as I understand RCV, in Tom's hypothetical school committee race, Burc Oral, as the lowest vote getter, is eliminated, and his #2 ballot selections are redistributed to the remaining voters. If that results in a candidate with a majority of votes cast, we have a winner. Otherwise we repeat the process with other candidates until we get a winner. I know nothing about the politics of Burc Oral or Yuri Mascovich, but let's say for the sake of argument, they were strong proponents of removing LGBTQ material and programming and supporting materials from the schools. (You can pick another issue; my point for this hypothetical is that the lowest vote getters are most likely to represent fringe opinions in the community. I get that they may just be unknowns, but stick with me.) What is the value of redistributing the votes of fringe candidates to remaining candidates? I strongly doubt it is representative of the community, and it seems to me an arbitrary way build a majority. 

Scott Burson

Precinct 9

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAMFDu-G%3D5W8ao6Vo7a4OskWkS-2Hc9mnz1QDzVYn0%2ButN%2B4EOQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Umesh]

Scott,

It may not be representative of the community, but it would more accurately represent the views of those who vote. My belief and hope is that this in turn would increase voter turnout, and over time, RCV would be more representative of the community.

Best,

Umesh Shelat, P7 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/209152224.140419.1696002968467%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

To take up Scott's message, look at the ATM 2023 Election Results

https://www.lexingtonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8347/March-6-2023---Annual-Town-Election-PDF

Note the number of people in many precincts who apparently just put themselves on the ballot for TM and did nothing in terms of making their views known to anyone.  Add in the apparent write-ins (other). The RCV proponents are complaining that none of these folks had a chance of winning because of the voting system.  With RCV all these folks would have got themselves on the ballot and the algorithms would have had to work through them all.  No one would know what they stood for and why they were throwing their hats in the ring.   The same would be true for the town-wide offices.

That's one reason why I am not overly enthusiastic about RCV in local elections.

The second reason is that I don't want to be forced to settle for a second choice.

As to Glenn's remarks on "the machine."  There are several so-called machines in Town.  They all run campaigns for candidates of their choice and provide a lot of information for voters, information that is often absent from "loner" candidates, altho serious TM candidates may mail postcards,  show up at LWV Candidates nite, etc.  As to Glenn's "lost" election and contention that he would have won with RCV, I can only say that the outcome of that SB election were my choices--Ciccolo and Lucente, two candidates representing different voter views and therefore representing, I would submit, most of the Town.

State and Federal elections are different--they are less of a free for all, candidates and their "machines", i.e., campaigns, let voters know where they stand on issues, etc.  The citizens article for the STM pertains only to Town elections.

Ruth Thomas, 4

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAC3FGDZXdPuwNp7yD2it9vUnNS55uukpE-bEaXrzL6i%3DMjsWcA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Glenn Parker]

On 29 Sep 2023, at 14:19, Ruth Thomas wrote:

The second reason is that I don't want to be forced to settle for a second choice.

Here’s the thing. Elections are all about forcing choices because (eventually) somebody has to win. Insisting on ones “first choice or nothing” in an election may seem righteous, but practically speaking “nothing” is not a choice on the ballot. And if you don’t vote, others will simply make a choice for you.

When you have a single vote to cast, the winner might not be your second or even your third choice, but you’ll still be forced to settle for the results. RCV gives you more votes to use at your discretion. You can vote, or you can let someone else decide.

As to Glenn's "lost" election and contention that he would have won with RCV, …

OK, wait a sec. I made absolutely no assertion about whether I could have won if RCV was used, and given the particular candidates it probably would not have mattered. After that election, I was satisfied with my performance and fairly sanguine about the results. BTW, I found the whole process to be a profoundly educational and emotional experience. I learned a great deal about Lexington, and almost as much about my own internal political compass.

My point was that, when considering whether to run for office (in the wake of the disastrous 2016 elections), the challenge of winning a first-past-the-post election in a three way race against two far, far better-known candidates weighed heavily against my running. If RCV was used, it would have been an easier decision, and I assert this would be true for future potential candidates. So, if you seriously want more people to run for office, then think about reducing the challenge of running for office by adopting RCV.

[Glenn Parker]

On 29 Sep 2023, at 11:56, 'Scott Burson' via LexTMMA wrote:

I know nothing about the politics of Burc Oral or Yuri Mascovich, but let's say for the sake of argument, they were strong proponents of removing LGBTQ material and programming and supporting materials from the schools. (You can pick another issue; my point for this hypothetical is that the lowest vote getters are most likely to represent fringe opinions in the community. I get that they may just be unknowns, but stick with me.) What is the value of redistributing the votes of fringe candidates to remaining candidates? I strongly doubt it is representative of the community, and it seems to me an arbitrary way build a majority. 

Scott,

Elections are a mechanism to choose leaders. They are not a test of moral superiority. We use elections because they tend to produce leaders who will be widely accepted as legitimate representatives of the voters, even when they don’t perfectly represent our personal views.

The very simple logic of RCV is that if more than 50% of voters decide that an issue like, say, the presence or absence of LGBTQ materials in public schools, will dominate their choices when voting, then the candidate(s) who advocate for these voter’s views should win. I must insist that this is a fundamental aspect of our democratic system. Focusing a sensitive issue does not change the arithmetic.

For those, like me, who are concerned about LGBTQ issues, we need to convince voters about how vital it is to provide access to suitable information about gender and sexuality to public school students, and about the need to maintain a welcoming atmosphere for everyone.

In the end, we have to trust voters. We (should) win elections by winning votes, not by making sure the vote counting squelches unpopular opinions.

[Harry Forsdick]

As long as we are asking the proponent for this citizens article to answer some questions about the article here is a question:

With RCV voting, how is the counting done for a position with multiple openings?  One such position might be for the Select Board or School Committee.  Another position that is guaranteed to have multiple candidates for multiple seats is for Town Meeting Member. 

My question is how do I vote for Town Meeting Members in my precinct. Do I vote 7 #1 votes for the 7 candidates I most prefer, and #2, #3 and #4 for the remaining candidates?  Or, do I vote #1, #2. ... #10 for all of the candidates?  Would the results be any different?

Of course the same set of questions apply to other positions like Select Board or School Committee where there are frequently 2 open slots.

Thanks,

-- Harry Forsdick

    Precinct #7

Harry Forsdick Lexington Photo Scanning Town Meeting Member Precinct 7 ha...@forsdick.com www.forsdick.com

46 Burlington St. Lexington, MA 02420 (781) 799-6002 (mobile) meet.jit.si/HarryForsdick (video) Click to see my other websites

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/682BCD39-D4E3-4CB9-AED0-B0F9A1C39425%40comcast.net.

[Irene Dondley]

Harry,

Noah posted this video many posts ago. He says that the handling of multiple open seats is covered at minute 2:28.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI

And I'd like to add that I agree with what Glenn wrote.

--Irene Dondley

  Precinct 5

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CABKvzKqhiv5avJeL-xg6H%3DDvmg1A7gro-Dkaq5qAj4wGNiVAZA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ruth Thomas]

This video illustrates two troubling aspects of RCV voting: its hideous complexity and its promotion of identity politics.

Ruth Thomas, 4

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CAApLQ7GdMdj%2BbHUXgQJpPs9ukxGE8K-OvhkWabGpge3KRyqPDA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Glenn Parker]

On 1 Oct 2023, at 12:19, Harry Forsdick wrote:

My question is how do I vote for Town Meeting Members in my precinct. Do I vote 7 #1 votes for the 7 candidates I most prefer, and #2, #3 and #4 for the remaining candidates?  Or, do I vote #1, #2. ... #10 for all of the candidates?  Would the results be any different?

Harry,

For each election on a ballot using RCV you get one set of votes ranked from 1 to N. The spring ballot in a Lexington TM precinct presents a single Town Meeting election to fill 7 seats. It’s one election, not seven separate elections.

So, you would get 7 votes ranked from 1 to 7, and you could use each of those votes once for a single TM candidate. The same basic model would apply to Select Board and School Committee elections. They are all single elections for multi-seat bodies.

There are several implementations of RCV, essentially multiple ways of redistributing “unused” votes, but they all work by finding candidates with support from some minimum percentage of the voters (usually 50%). For multi-winner elections, the preferred and most common method is Proportional RCV (see https://www.rcvresources.org/types-of-rcv):

Proportional RCV is considered best practice for filling multiple seats using RCV. It is used for a multi-winner contest, such as city council, when more than one individual is elected at-large or for district elections with multiple representatives. The voter experience is the same as single-winner RCV, where voters rank their choices in order of preference. First choices are then counted to determine if any candidates have enough votes to win, also known as the threshold. The threshold is determined based on the number of seats to be filled. Any candidate crossing the threshold is declared elected.

After the first round of counting, we can determine whether additional rounds of counting are needed to fill each seat up for election. If an elected candidate has a surplus—more votes than necessary to win—those votes are transferred to the next rankings on those ballots. In a round where no candidate crosses the threshold, the last-place candidate is eliminated, and their votes transfer to the next-ranked candidate on each ballot. This process continues until all of the seats are filled.

Choosing a specific RCV implementation could wait until after the the Town affirms its desire to use RCV, but I hope the Town would choose something like Proportional RCV as described above.

Below is a mockup I made suggesting what a full and correctly filled in RCV ballot for TM might look like. I’m not an election official or expert, this is just a way to illustrate the voting system.

There are five incumbents and five new candidates. A voter placed a single mark in each numbered column from left to right, starting with two new candidates that they most wanted to win, then distributing the rest of their votes to incumbents. Note that no two marks occupy the same column or row. It’s the same number of marks (7) that would have been used with our current voting format, they’re just spread out more.

It would have also been valid to leave some columns unmarked starting from the right side of the table, implying that the voter didn’t care who won the remaining seats.

[Glenn Parker]

On 1 Oct 2023, at 16:05, Glenn Parker wrote:

There are several implementations of RCV, essentially multiple ways of redistributing “unused” votes, but they all work by finding candidates with support from some minimum percentage of the voters (usually 50%).

A small correction, for a seven-winner election, I think the minimum voter threshold would actually be 14.28% (1/7th), not 50%.

[gjb...@rcn.com]

What about write in candidates?  Suppose I don't like 4 of the candidates.  Can I write in 4 names?  Suppose there are only 5 candidates for 7 seats (that happens).  Can I write in 2 names?  Or do we lose the right to write in a candidate if we choose RCV?

Which brings up another question - can the current voting machines recognize hand writing?  I don't think so.  That means we would need a grid voting format as Glenn has illustrated (since it is sometimes hard to tell a 4 from a 9 or a 5 from a 6 depending on the voters writing style) and if write ins are allowed, we would need even bigger grids, since when my first seven choices are eliminated there could still be candidates  that would be my 8th or 9th choice to receive my vote.

And as for redistributing extra votes, how do you decide who has the extra votes to redistribute? Not everybody who voted for candidate 1 votes for the same person in the number 2 slot.

Gloria Bloom, P4

[Irene Dondley]

I think a voter doesn't need to be concerned with how the software works to redistribute the votes. It's interesting to think about, but it is really in the weeds for the voter. The voter marks the ballot with their choices ordered and that seems pretty straight forward. 

No concern for recognizing numbers since the grid would only have rows added for write-ins just as there is now, but no numbered columns would need to be added since the most votes you get is 7. Having numbered columns would cut down on mistakes. If a voter marks their ballot incorrectly, the machine would spit it out and they would get two more tries.

--Irene Dondley

  Precinct 5

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/1043198338.29058432.1696192987659.JavaMail.zimbra%40rcn.com.

[andrei rădulescu-banu]

On Sun, Oct 1, 2023 at 5:21 PM Irene Dondley <imdo...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think a voter doesn't need to be concerned with how the software works to redistribute the votes.

 

Irene, you also said that candidates who get very few votes are Mickey Mouse candidates. Upthread, someone used Burc Oral and Yuri Mascovich as mock fringe candidates. Glenn Parker said that this article can be passed without understanding how it really works - as long as it is called RCV.

1. Please don't puppeteer the names of perfectly good citizens. Kudos to them for trying to run for office. It should be encouraged, not chided.

2. Never pass a law that is not fully understood. We could, in theory. It's not good practice. The advice given by Town Counsel, the Select Board, other government officials should channel us to pass clear, well explained legislation.

3. The election law should not make the climb difficult for any new candidates. Being fringe, or unpopular is in the eye of the beholder. If there's a court decision curtailing someone's rights - then, they can't run. Otherwise, new candidates have equal rights under the law with long-serving, popular Town Meeting members.

Andrei Radulescu-Banu, Pct 8

--

=====================

Andrei Rădulescu-Banu

86 Cedar St, Lexington MA
617.216.8509 (m)

=====================

[Irene Dondley]

Andrei,

I never said that. I said some people will write-in Mickey Mouse as their choice. I said that because that is what some people actually write-in.

Irene Dondley

Precinct 5

[Glenn Parker]

On 1 Oct 2023, at 16:43, gjb...@rcn.com wrote:

What about write in candidates? Suppose I don't like 4 of the candidates. Can I write in 4 names? Suppose there are only 5 candidates for 7 seats (that happens). Can I write in 2 names? Or do we lose the right to write in a candidate if we choose RCV?

That is a great question, especially since a lot of RCV explainers don’t seem to cover write-ins, but the answer is clear. In RCV, write-ins are definitely allowed, and they are no less viable than in the current voting system. I definitely should have included 7 write-in slots on my RCV TM ballot mockup. Oops!

Here is an article from July 2023 discussing the recent RCV primary for City Council in NYC, which included write-ins in the results: https://fairvote.org/heres-what-happened-in-new-yorks-rcv-elections/ (spoiler alert: all the write-ins were discarded).

Which brings up another question - can the current voting machines recognize hand writing?

No, they can’t, and write-ins are already counted by hand in Lexington when necessary.

I don't think so. That means we would need a grid voting format as Glenn has illustrated (since it is sometimes hard to tell a 4 from a 9 or a 5 from a 6 depending on the voters writing style) and if write ins are allowed, we would need even bigger grids, since when my first seven choices are eliminated there could still be candidates that would be my 8th or 9th choice to receive my vote.

With RCV, you would still only get seven votes for TM, just like you do now. The TM voting table will have to include 7 rows at the bottom for write-ins, but no extra columns are needed, and voters will only be writing in names, not numbers.

And as for redistributing extra votes, how do you decide who has the extra votes to redistribute? Not everybody who voted for candidate 1 votes for the same person in the number 2 slot.

There are lots of very good videos explaining how extra votes are distributed. Here’s one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQC6tmr7nbk

Now, I wanted to mention a key technical point that is often glossed over.

Keep in mind that when an RCV vote is being tallied, the system has complete voting data for all ballots. When a candidate has more than the minimum winning threshold of ballots, it is called a surplus. The vote tallying software selects a subset from those winning ballots. That subset is sized to contain the minimum winning threshold of ballots, and this subset of ballots is assigned to the winning candidate. The remaining ballots are the surplus. These surplus ballots are redistributed to their 2nd choice. Of course, not everybody has the same 2nd choice, and surplus ballots are usually redistributed to multiple 2nd-choice candidates, but all the data to manage this correctly is available during the tallying process.

The question you might (should?) be asking is, how exactly is that subset of winning votes chosen? Because, it really could affect the results. And the answer is a bit complicated. One method is to simply choose a random subset, but that option breaks down when small-time elections don’t provide enough votes to ensure a representative sub-sample. Election researchers have been working on alternatives to random selection for decades (RCV is not a new idea). One option they’ve come up with is the “Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method” (WIGM), which I will not attempt to summarize here. There’s been a fair amount of study to validate it, and WIGM seems to work well enough.

Amherst, MA published its Ranked Choice Voting Commission Report which recommends WIGM. It goes into more of the technical details without getting too deep into the math.

Check out their RCV mock ballot, which does include rows for write-ins.

Another standout in this report was that, for legal and technical reasons, preliminary voting results from RCV elections are generally not available on the night of the election.

[Glenn Parker]

On 1 Oct 2023, at 19:40, Glenn Parker wrote:

That is a great question, especially since a lot of RCV explainers don’t seem to cover write-ins, but the answer is clear. In RCV, write-ins are definitely allowed, and they are no less viable than in the current voting system. I definitely should have included 7 write-in slots on my RCV TM ballot mockup. Oops!

Here’s a new and (hopefully) improved RCV TM ballot mockup. There are two significant changes:

1. Seven additional rows at the bottom of the table allow a full write-in slate.
2. Three additional columns at the right allow up to 10 ranked choices.

I was incorrect when I wrote you would only get 7 votes for TM under RCV. Looking at the Cambridge City Council specimen ballot, they allow for up to 15 choices when electing a 10-seat City Council. Note that in their specimen ballot there are a whopping 22 registered candidates, plus 10 write-in rows, but they do not allow for the maximum 32 ranked choices. The logic seems to be that you can choose 10 plus a few more, in case up to half of your top choices are discarded.

For single-seat elections, the number of choices seems straightforward. An RCV ballot would normally allow voters to rank all registered candidates for a single-seat, plus one write-in.

I don’t think there is any hard and fast rule about how many choices to allow for a multi-seat election in RCV, but there are practical constraints related to printing a ballot and preparing the software. I think this is the sort of detail the Town would have to work out when implementing RCV. We could just as easily allow for 9 or 11 choices, but probably not 17.

The marks on the mockup ballot indicate that the voter has chosen a write-in candidate (Syd) as their first choice. I would expect write-in candidates to appear first in a voter’s list of choices.

The voter has also ranked two new candidates (Fin and Gal) for a total of 9 choices.

[Harry Forsdick]

I remember a couple of things from my time living in Cambridge when I was a graduate student. And then, of course

Cambridge people figured a couple of things about RCV:

1. The #1 vote is the most important vote

2.  It makes sense to bullet vote (just vote #1 for one candidate) 

Unfortunately, I don't remember why for either of these two strategies and I have a cold now which is preventing me doing a lot of deep thinking…

Oh this is going to be fun!  Sort of like cap-ology in professional sports.

— Harry

    Precinct #7

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LexTMMA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lextmma+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/4A0FA9D6-5736-46A0-920E-11E003FA9B42%40comcast.net.

[b...@metaprosystems.com]

Harry

 

There is no advantage to bullet voting under RCV as I understand it. You cannot disadvantage your number one choice, by voting for additional choices.

 

Bob Avallone

Town Meeting Member

Precinct 8

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lextmma/CABKvzKo%3DQUXSCBw-RrXHAYVtW8E9gHg%2BrQP86-3PseDC24zQvQ%40mail.gmail.com.