DSNC Elections: Get Out the Vote!
Matt Kimsal
Davis Square Neighbors,
Elections for the first official Board members of your Davis Square Neighborhood Council are right around the corner. In addition to encouraging your participation at the ballot box, we encourage everyone to spread the word to friends and neighbors! As a young organization, word-of-mouth and personal contact are still some of our most efficient tools for circulating our messages.
Ballots can be cast at the Somerville Library West Branch on August 16th, 23rd, and 25th. They will be tallied on the evening of August 25th as part of the routine monthly DSNC meeting.
Important information such as polling site hours, candidate backgrounds, etc. will be available at the following link: https://sites.google.com/view/davissquarenc/elections?authuser=0.
Thank you for your continued interest in our neighborhood's vitality. We look forward to seeing you at the polls!
Your neighbor,
Matt Kimsal
Carol
--
Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAEiPKR7whTiSr3gHO6u2D2rFarTN2sHXQZR_ueAU6D0S8n9mww%40mail.gmail.com.
JOSIAH AUSPITZ
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/506543094.3661806.1754742917475%40mail.yahoo.com.
jlau...@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2025 2:46 PM
To: Carol <crego...@aol.com>; Carol' via Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>; Matt Kimsal <matt....@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DSNC] DSNC Elections: Get Out the Vote!
rona twofisch.com
Hello Josiah,
The voting starts this Saturday, August 16 at the west branch library.
RE: how you will be voting
We are doing ranked choice voting. Your ballot will allow you to rank your choices, up to the total number of candidates. You will be ranking your choices for general board membership and for each officer position.
The counting will take place after the polls close on August 25th at 6 PM. That’s during our regular meeting time at the Somerville Community Baptist Church at 31 College Ave.
RE: the candidate’s statements
Candidates have a deadline of tonight (August 12) to submit a statement for the voters. That will be up on the website starting Wednesday. Watch the elections page for the latest information. The candidate information will be linked to their names.
Christopher Beland
> Do we get five first place votes for the five non-executive board
> members, as is the usual practice in both corporate boards and
> Somerville's at large council voting?
using Single Transferable Vote. This means we get to rank all 16
candidates (or fewer, if we have no preferences among our least-
favorite candidates).
Only the nine winners of that overall election are eligible to be
elected President, Secretary, Treasurer, and VP. There is a separate
ranking among the nominees for each of those.
> What information will candidates disclose on the ballot or
> elsewhere, beyond their belonging to one of the four quota
> categories-- property owner, renter, Davis Sq business owner, Davis
> Square business worker?
days and I don't know half the candidates. (And as a candidate myself,
I haven't been asked for any platform positions.)
-B.
Christopher Beland
older unread emails and found the candidate questionnaire. 8)
-B.
Frank Mals
In advance of Saturday’s board elections, please address the following questions so voting members can more fully understand the process and the candidates:
-Is the candidate questionairre the only chance we'll have to get information about the people we are voting for? No in-person presentations or Q &A?
-What are the questions on the questionairre?
-The notice on the DSNC website says that individuals who " ...receive services" are eligible to vote. Does that mean those who see a dentist once or twice a year for teeth cleaning but live in another town/city are eligible to vote?
-How will you get the word out to Davis Square residents, etc. about your organization, the candidates, the election in order to have true representation from the community in this election? What notices have been given thus far?
-Will candidates be expected to divulge potential conflicts of interest and/or membership in other community or activist organizations such as the Davis Square Merchants Association, Somerville Arts Council etc.)?
-The bylaws specifically state business owners and business workers must have “Physical retail or commercial location in Davis Square”.
Do all candidates running as business owners or business workers qualify under these conditions? How is this condition verified?
-The DSNC bylaws state: “The Board must include at least 1 each of: Davis Square Homeowner, Davis Square Renter, Davis Square Business Owner, Davis Square Business Worker” and that “1 person can count for multiple of those categories.”
-The DSNC bylaws do not appear to state that to be a member of the board one must be one of the categories listed above.
-By this logic it appears the minimum number of people needed to satisfy the category quota is two people. Is this a correct reading?
If so would that mean that a board with two people that meet the criteria and twelve that do not would be legitimate?
-If this is the case is it correct that once the category quotas were filled the remaining board members would only need to qualify as a general member, meaning someone who lives within ½ mile of Davis Square boundaries (ie. Arlington) is eligible.
-What is the affirmative mechanism by which DSNC membership is achieved and how does one achieve it, and how is membership verified?
Regards,
Frank
Aaron Weber
--
Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/b5d8338a-6803-4287-9500-cf60f5277857n%40googlegroups.com.
brendan.ritter
Are we still looking to post flyers? I apologize for not being able to make yesterday's meeting. I'd be available to print and hang them.
Also, were there notes from that meeting? I don't see them in the Meeting Notes folder.
Elaine Almquist
- Is the candidate questionnaire the only chance we'll have to get information about the people we are voting for? No in-person presentations or Q &A?
- So far, the questionnaire is what the elections committee has requested for information on the candidates.
- I think the candidates would welcome a conversation and to answer specific questions you may have
- What are the questions on the questionnaire?
- The notice on the DSNC website says that individuals who " ...receive services" are eligible to vote. Does that mean those who see a dentist once or twice a year for teeth cleaning but live in another town/city are eligible to vote?
- As Aaron already mentioned, during conversations with our friends in Union Square and our own bylaws discussions, the intent of this qualification is to allow our unhoused neighbors who may not have a physical address but receive social services in our neighborhood to participate
- There is still a provision for anyone "determined to have a genuine local interest" in Davis Square to apply for membership. "To participate in DSNC meetings or votes, participants will complete a form with their names, addresses, email addresses, and either qualifying Member criteria."
- How will you get the word out to Davis Square residents, etc. about your organization, the candidates, the election in order to have true representation from the community in this election? What notices have been given thus far?
- So far the information is on the DSNC website, social media channels, and was announced at the last two meetings
- From the public emails, the elections committee has shared that they are planning on posting flyers in the neighborhood
- The elections committee put together a list of organizations in the area to notify
- A press release to Cambridge Day, Somerville Times, and Tufts Daily
- Any an all additional promotional ideas would I think be welcomed by the Elections committee for consideration (correct me if I'm wrong)
- Will candidates be expected to divulge potential conflicts of interest and/or membership in other community or activist organizations such as the Davis Square Merchants Association, Somerville Arts Council etc.)?
- These are both not required and not seen as conflicts to service on the board. DSNC membership is extended to people who "Regularly volunteer at an organization/agency located within the Neighborhood Boundaries"
- There is a detailed section on this in the Bylaws, Section 8.2: Conflict of Interest policy
- The bylaws specifically state business owners and business workers must have “Physical retail or commercial location in Davis Square”. Do all candidates running as business owners or business workers qualify under these conditions? How is this condition verified?
- A person interested in serving on the Board whose only qualification for membership is through their business ownership must have a "physical retail or commercial location in Davis Square"
- Owners of other types of businesses (like mine, a consulting firm I run from my home office) qualify without a retail or commercial space for membership. If they own a business without a retail or commercial space, they can qualify to run for the board through one of the other board qualifications (like me, because I also reside here.)
- The DSNC bylaws state: “The Board must include at least 1 each of: Davis Square Homeowner, Davis Square Renter, Davis Square Business Owner, Davis Square Business Worker” and that “1 person can count for multiple of those categories.” The DSNC bylaws do not appear to state that to be a member of the board one must be one of the categories listed above. By this logic it appears the minimum number of people needed to satisfy the category quota is two people. Is this a correct reading?
- Yes
- If so would that mean that a board with two people that meet the criteria and twelve that do not would be legitimate?
- The board is capped at 9 people, not 14
- By law, a 501(c)4 must have a minimum of 3 board members
- Every person who serves on the board must meet at least one of the DSNC membership categories, so there will be overlap
- Each of the questionnaires asks which category people fulfil, and of the candidates we have now, we have no "workers", but have all the rest of the categories, with multiple candidates for renting, owning, and owning businesses
- If this is the case is it correct that once the category quotas were filled the remaining board members would only need to qualify as a general member, meaning someone who lives within ½ mile of Davis Square boundaries (ie. Arlington) is eligible.
- Yes
- What is the affirmative mechanism by which DSNC membership is achieved and how does one achieve it, and how is membership verified?
- The membership application process is detailed in the Bylaws
- The elections committee is working on the eligibility confirmation process with support from the best practices learned by the Union Square Neighborhood Council, and includes checking addresses against our interactive map, checking property ownership with the Assessors Office, business ownership with the MA Corporations Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth's office, and they may decide to accept other forms of verification like the list of registered voters from the City of Somerville, a volunteer confirmation email from a non-profit, proof of relation with a service organization such as a letter or email, a business card or pay stub for workers, a utility bill or driver's license, etc.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAF%3Dbbnr2TyHuU_OOBp7WkB2766uCqrnrCF9Ld57fjcBf77V9mA%40mail.gmail.com.
JOSIAH AUSPITZ
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/CAEK62JdpaANBhQb3sUVk5%2Bt70SG3FhbYauNMnTA7oR4yqK-_Hw%40mail.gmail.com.
Christopher Beland
Frank Mals
Elaine thank you for responding to my questions. I appreciate it. I also appreciate the hard work of the election committee during this process. However, I think too much was taken on too fast in the run-up to this election.
Because the Somerville’s neighborhood councils are entrusted with far more power and responsibility than neighborhood councils in other communities, the integrity of elections (especially the first election) are paramount. The power to negotiate Community Benefit Agreements is far reaching and consequential. Community Benefit Agreements will shape Davis Square far beyond our time here. In some cases CBA’s will involve significant sums of money.
CBA’s could create win-win scenarios if negotiated in good faith and through good process. However, if a CBA negotiation is flawed due to bad faith, lack of inclusion, or a myriad of other potential pitfalls there could be winners and losers. The only way to reduce the chances of a win-lose CBA is to have a truly inclusive executive board arrived at via a rock-solid election.
For the reasons below I have serious concerns with this election:
1. Some voters were denied the opportunity to vote. This is clear-cut and we don’t need to go into the details. But this should never happen. I have a feeling the turnout for this election will be low enough that the results might be affected even if the number of people denied the opportunity to vote might be two or three people.
2. The category options on the candidate questionnaire should match the categories in the bylaws. For example, the bylaws require a business owner to have a storefront. The checklist on the questionnaire doesn't reflect this.
3. There is only one candidate that qualifies as "business worker". And voters on the first day of voting wouldn’t have known she was a business worker because her questionnaire answers weren’t posted yet. Some voters were not able to vote accordingly if the business worker category was important to them.
4. When voting commenced three candidates did not fill out the questionnaire. Several candidates left questions blank. How can we make informed choices under these circumstances?
5.Membership in other organizations or groups: While membership in another organization or group might not constitute a conflict of interest, it should be required that candidates disclose their membership in any community organization or group, so voters have a complete understanding of who they are voting for.
6. At a minimum, individuals who live in another municipality and do not own property or currently work in Davis Square daily should be ineligible to serve on the Board or vote in Council elections. The current eligibility language contains loopholes that can be easily exploited. For example, large groups could vote in favor of a CBA because they stand to gain substantial short-term benefits from the agreement or its related project. We should consult with members of the USNC to learn whether they feel their own eligibility rules were too loose.
7. An election without an in-person q&a session with candidates is not sufficient. This process has been rushed. We don't know enough about the people we are voting for.
8. "The elections committee is working on the eligibility confirmation process with support from the best practices learned by the Union Square Neighborhood Council, and includes checking addresses against our interactive map, checking property ownership with the Assessors Office, business ownership with the MA Corporations Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth's office, and they may decide to accept other forms of verification like the list of registered voters from the City of Somerville, a volunteer confirmation email from a non-profit, proof of relation with a service organization such as a letter or email, a business card or pay stub for workers, a utility bill or driver's license, etc."
Did this happen?
9. Ranked Choice method: Chris states that Lee raises “a number of issues we may wish to revisit when discussing improvements next year. I agree with Chris that we may need to make improvements but I think the shortcomings rise to a greater level than just tweaking next year.
Again, I appreciate the hard work of the election committee and admire the candidates who were willing to put their name forward. I know that we all care deeply about Davis Square. There is no need to rush this process or just wait to fix things next time.
Regards,
Frank
JOSIAH AUSPITZ
On 08/23/2025 6:42 PM EDT 'JOSIAH AUSPITZ' via Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com> wrote:Thanks to both Elaine and Frank for such a careful Q&A.When I voted on Saturday, I was impressed with the clarity and adroitness with which the ballot materials presented the three-fold task entrusted to the ranked-choice method:1. to select on the main ballot a nine member board consisting of four executive and five non-executive members;2. to use the main ballot to prequalify executive candidates for four additional ballots for president, vice president, secretary and treasurer;3. to assure that the five non-executive members cover among them four quota categories: homeowner, renter, Davis Square business owner, Davis Square business worker.
For these three tasks, we get only one first place vote, one second place, and so on until up to 14 ranked choices if, as in the DSNC case, there are 14 total candidates.There was no disclosure in the ballot materials on how the votes would be tabulated.
As Arrow's Impossibility Theorem on multiple preference voting was once a topic of scholarly interest to me, I followed the link in our bylaws and one or two further links to understand how the DSNC votes will be tabulated.The tabulation method when one has a single first place vote for a nine-person board requires certain adaptations from the more familiar bottom-up method of vote transferability used for a single congressional seat. In the case of Maine, for example, if no candidate wins a 50% majority in a multicandidate race, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and each ballot that specifies a second place preference is transferred upward accordingly as if it were a first place vote. The elimination and upward transfer process is repeated as needed until someone reaches the 50% threshold.By contrast, for a nine-member board where voters get only one first place vote, a Hare Minimum (named for its author) is set as the threshold of victory at the total number of votes cast divided by the number of offices to be filled. For the nine-member DSNC board the Hare Minimum is one-ninth (11.11%)of the total first-place votes cast, instead of the 50% threshold for a single congressional seat.
Thus, if 90 total first place votes are cast on the main DSNC ballot, any candidate receiving 10 votes or more is considered elected. But here there is a significant adaptation: any additional votes a candidate receives beyond the 10-vote threshold--the Hare Surplus-- are transferred downward in accordance with each surplus ballot's ranking to candidates who have not yet achieved the Hare Minimum. If after all the downward transfers have occurred, nine board candidates have not achieved the 10-vote threshold, the down-ballot elimination and upward vote transfer of the Maine example comes into play to fill out the entire slate.To repeat, in our 90-vote example if Candidate A receives 15 first place ballots, five of these--the Hare surplus-- are ultimately transferred to the next ranked candidate who has not yet made the Hare threshold. The actual five surplus ballots are drawn blindfolded at random adding a lottery element to the tabulation.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/1266305967.568520.1755988972347%40connect.xfinity.com.
Christopher Beland
> 4. When voting commenced three candidates did not fill out the
> questionnaire. Several candidates left questions blank. How can we
> make informed choices under these circumstances?
candidates don't respond to newspapers or NGOs when they send
questionnaires for profiles or endorsement. Not everyone shows up at
debates. Lack of effective campaigning by one or more candidates does
not invalidate the election. You can always choose not to vote for
someone if you feel they weren't transparent enough during the campaign
or you simply don't know enough about them from their answers. The
election committee gave candidates a deadline several days before
voting started to submit their statements; unless someone on the
election committee tells me otherwise, I assume any late arrivals were
due to candidates not paying attention to email or just not putting in
effort to make the deadline.
By August 13, you had a link to the official questionnaire and a
suggestion from Elaine that candidates would be willing to answer any
specific additional questions you had. You could have then (and can
still now) email this list with specific questions and invite
candidates to answer.
> 5.Membership in other organizations or groups: While membership in
> another organization or group might not constitute a conflict of
> interest, it should be required that candidates disclose their
> membership in any community organization or group, so voters have a
> complete understanding of who they are voting for.
amendment to the bylaws at any point during the many months we were
discussing them.
> 6. At a minimum, individuals who live in another municipality and do
> not own property or currently work in Davis Square daily should be
> ineligible to serve on the Board or vote in Council elections.
during the bylaws drafting process. People who agreed with this
position were not in the majority.
> The current eligibility language contains loopholes that can be
> easily exploited. For example, large groups could vote in favor of a
> CBA because they stand to gain substantial short-term benefits from
> the agreement or its related project.
short-term interests, even though we might all be better off if people
voted their long-term interests. People who work in the construction
industry in Davis Square might vote for a CBA in the hope of getting a
construction job. People who work in the music industry in Davis Square
might vote against a CBA in the hope of scuttling redevelopment and
keeping The Burren open continuously. Residents may vote against a CBA
because they don't want to deal with noise and traffic and dust during
construction. Residents may vote for a CBA because the developer has
promised free ice cream for a whole week. It's up to them. If you don't
want them to do so, use your right to free speech and convince them to
do otherwise.
> We should consult with members of the USNC to learn whether they feel
> their own eligibility rules were too loose.
actually inspired by our broader criteria for CBA elections, and
complaints from residents just outside their boundaries. They did not
go as far as we have, but this is why they expanded the voting district
for the CBA on the Somernova project, which was on the edge of their
jurisdiction.
> 7. An election without an in-person q&a session with candidates is
> not sufficient. This process has been rushed. We don't know enough
> about the people we are voting for.
for campaigning) was too short, you could have offered a bylaw
amendment at any point during the many months we were talking about
them.
If you think lack of Q&A is such a huge problem that it invalidates an
entire election, you could have offered a bylaw amendment requiring
that. You could also have joined the election committee and organized
one.
> There is no need to rush this process or just wait to fix things next
> time.
gathered signatures for a zoning change. If we throw out our whole
election and incorporation process, we will be unable to engage with
that developer if they move forward in the coming weeks or months.
DSNC membership has been complaining that there are major substantive
issues in the neighborhood (everything from public safety in parks to
broken sidewalks) we don't have the bandwidth to talk about because we
have been stuck talking about our election process and other
incorporation matters. I think there would be a lot of anger if the
election process that has been democratically approved gets thrown out
and we go back to being stuck.
-B.
Carol
Please see the email I received today from one of my neighbors. Should be up for a discussion for future elections.
Carol
Begin forwarded message:
On Sunday, August 24, 2025, 2:44 PM, Carol <crego...@aol.com> wrote:
Hello Ann,There is no remote voting at this time. It is in person. The DSNC will be looking at this in the future. I will pass along your email for future discussions.Carol
On Sunday, August 24, 2025, 9:43 AM, Ann Greenawalt <ann.gre...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Carol,Is there any form of remote voting? I'm guessing not but thought I would check. We are out of town with family during this voting period and my husband and I would love to participate in the voting. Thanks so much.Best,Ann Greenawalt
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/506543094.3661806.1754742917475%40mail.yahoo.com.
Frank Mals
Frank
rona twofisch.com
This is Rona. I am a member of the small volunteer army that has gotten this election off the ground. My answers to what Frank has been talking about with Chris Beland are below in purple. Frank’s comments are in black. Chris, as a candidate, is not privy to the materials and work that the election poll watchers have created and are using for this election.
From: daviss...@googlegroups.com <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
On Behalf Of Frank Mals
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2025 4:33 PM
To: Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [DSNC] DSNC Elections: Background on our voting system
I am not concerned that the DSNC incorporation process may be incomplete before the application for a development on Highland Ave moves along the process. There are many in the DSNC that are concerned.
I am concerned that people went to the polls and were denied the opportunity to vote even though they showed up at 12:55pm when we were told the polls would be open until 1:00pm. This has been resolved to the satisfaction of the people who came at the tail-end of voting on Saturday. They were provided ballots and they voted. The election logistics committee agreed that they were physically there during the posted hours and their votes will be counted. You can write to them if you don’t believe me.
-The official DSNC questionaiire and a questionnaire from a 3rd party are not the same thing. These candidates are volunteering their time and might not have had enough time to complete the questionnaire in the compacted timeline they were given. This is just more evidence that the process was too short. You can choose to not rank people who did not make an effort that you respect.
-The meeting in which candidates were nominated was 7/28. The election commenced on on 8/16. That is not a month as you state, it's only 18 days between candidate nominations and voting. Considering what has transpired I think it's obvious that was not enough time. Voters who needed more time have the opportunity to vote until 6 PM tomorrow night. That makes 27 days, with three polling times.
-The Somerville ordinance for Neighborhood Councils states that elections must be open, inclusive, and duly democratic. For obvious reasons a scenario in which construction workers or musicians pack the polls in pursuit of self-interest is the opposite of inclusive. The letter of the law might not be in violated but the spirit of the ordinance certainly would be. I appreciate your candor as a candidate in expressing that your are comfortable with an outcome like this.
As someone who has put in hours and hours to make this election run, I need to stop you right here.
1. I find you very dismissive, at best, and downright insulting, at worst. There is no evidence that anyone is packing the polls with “construction workers and musicians”. How dare you, sir?
2. Open, inclusive, and duly democratic: Flyers are all over the Square. Candidate questionnaires are on line and also printed at the polling place. Press releases went out to all the local papers. Local social media groups were informed. The membership has been kept informed through the group email list, several times a week (we are trying not to nag).
-Fair point that some of the other concerns should've been brought up sooner. They will be going forward. This is a first run through an election based on a new set of bylaws. Anyone who qualifies for membership of this organization could have been there when the election rules were set up. This is a disruptive time for you to be micromanaging things that had already been decided and are being implemented with close attention, in good faith.
Rona
--
Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org ·
https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/4aa1522a-16ec-4ad8-a4e5-ade132193609n%40googlegroups.com.
JOSIAH AUSPITZ
COMMENTS BELOW IN CAPS.
> On 08/24/2025 1:42 AM EDT Christopher Beland <bel...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>
> (Those uninterested in the nuances of different voting systems may want to skip this email.)
>
> On Sat, 2025-08-23 at 18:42 -0400, 'JOSIAH AUSPITZ':
> > No system of voting is perfect, but compare all of the above to a
> > straightforward allotment to each voter of nine first place votes for
> > the nine seats. With or without a further ranked vote overlay this
> > would better enable us, individually and collectively, to assemble
> > our own distinctive version of the balanced and inclusive slate
> > required by the Somerville ordinance. With up to nine votes each
> > voter can make an affirmative and balanced statement using first
> > place votes to qualify both executive and non-executive candidates,
> > and to satisfy the required quotas from the residential and business
> > communities.-- all without incorporating a potentially capricious
> > lottery element.
>
>
>
> Re the "vote for 9" alternative: The reason I proposed Single Transferable Vote (which is what got adopted) rather than "vote for 9" is to make the board proportionally representative, rather than majoritarian. (That's what I think is the most balanced and inclusive.)
AT THE RISK OF BEING PEDANTIC...
ONE FIRST PLACE VOTE PER OFFICE IS NOT 'MAJORITARIAN' BUT RATHER, AS USED IN SOMERVILLE FOR AT-LARGE COUNCILORS, 'FIRST PAST THE POST' TIMES THE NUMBER OF OFFICES TO BE FILLED. WHEN I HAVE UP TO FOUR VOTES FOR CITY COUNCIL, I AM EMPOWERED TO MAKE MY OWN BALANCED TICKET WITHOUT PREFERENTIAL RANKING. THE ONLY STRATEGIZING WOULD BE 'BULLETING'--VOTING FOR FEWER THAN FOUR CANDIDATES.
> For example, let's say there are 10 candidate for 9 seats. Under a "vote for 9" system, if 88% of voters have candidates #1-9 in their 9 votes, those 9 will be elected as a unified slate. But this would leave the 12% of voters who strongly prefer candidate #10 without a voice on the board.
>
> Under STV, if 12% of voters put candidate #10 as their first choice, that candidate will get elected. The remaining 8 seats will be allocated to the other 88% of voters and candidates #1-8. Candidate 9 won't get a seat, but there are already 8 members of the "88%" faction on the board, which is actually more proportional to its voting strength.
SOMEBODY HAS TO LOSE A CONTESTED ELECTION. I SEE NO WARRANT FOR THE IDEA THAT THE WINNERS AS A GROUP AUTOMATICALLY CONSTITUTE A 'FACTION.' IN THE EXAMPLE GIVEN A 12% VOTE-GETTER MAY OR MAY NOT BE ELECTED IN A 9X SYSTEM DEPENDING ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE VOTES FOR OTHER CANDIDATES. SINCE THERE ARE 9X MORE FIRST PLACE VOTES THAN UNDER STV IT IS NOT UNLIKELY THAT ALL 10 CONDIDATES WOULD RECEIVE MORE THAN THE 12% HARE MINIMUM.
THIS EXAMPLE ALSO NEGLECTS THE DSNC COMPLICATION OF INTRODUCING CROSS-CUTTING CATEGORIES FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND QUOTA SLOTS. IN EFFECT, IN RANKING CANDIDATES THE DSNC-STV VOTER IS IMPLICITLY RANKING QUOTA ROLES AND OFFICES, A BURDEN THAT A PURE STV SYSTEM IS NOT DESIGNED TO BEAR.
>
> (In practice, of course, voters rarely fall into cleanly divided camps, so lower-ranked candidates may tend to be elected by a melding of overlapping preferences.)
>
>
> Re officers: The weirdness about having to decide how highly to rank our picks for offices like Treasurer against our other choices for general seats is also due to the design strictly maintaining proportionality. For example, if there is a group of like-minded voters that represents 1/9th of the electorate, they can only guarantee a winner for *one* seat. Say these voters really like the ideas of both candidate #4 and candidate #8, but only candidates #3 and #4 are running for Treasurer.
>
> Should voters rank #4 higher than #8? If #4 is a better representative, that's an easy call. If #8 seems better, than voters can decide: is having #4 as a representative instead of #8 worth giving #4 a chance to be Treasurer? (#4 will still need to win the Treasurer election against #3 if they also win a board seat.) The voting system doesn't let this 1/9th minority guarantee #8 gets a seat *and* #4 can run for Treasurer because that would be giving them two seats, and they only have enough voting strength to guarantee one seat. The same is true for majorities: a 5/9ths voting faction gets to determine 5 seats. They *don't* get 5 seats *and* a 6th seat for their favored Treasurer; the aggregation system decides whether their preferences indicate they collectively want their favored Treasurer in as one of their 5 seats.
>
THE KEY PHRASE HERE IS 'THE AGGREGATION SYSTEM DECIDES.' THERE IS A BLACK BOX ASPECT TO THIS THAT IS LESS TRANSPARENT THAN A STRAIGHTFORWARD 9X BALLOT IN WHICH, IN THE EXAMPLE GIVEN, THE VOTER WOULD BE EMPOWERED TO CAST UNDILUTED VOTES FOR BOTH #4 AND #8.
ARE DSNC VOTERS AWARE THAT IF UNDER STV THEY VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE WHO JUST MAKES THE HARE MINIMUM THEIR FURTHER PREFERENCES ARE IRRELEVENT? ONLY HARE SURPLUS BALLOTS GET TRANSFERRED, BY LOT.
> Re randomness: There are two main types of STV: the one with random draw that I chose because it seemed easier to do in person and understand; and fractional transfer, which is nice because it avoids random events, but involves a lot more math. One of the things I'll be looking for on tally night is whether the random draw is something people dislike strongly enough to justify talking about a switch.
A SWITCH TO A BLACK BOX FRACTIONAL METHOD IS EVEN LESS INTUITIVE THAN THE CURRENT DSNC METHOD. ANY RECONSIDERATION WOULD BE BETTER ADVISED TO DISCUSS WHETHER FOR OUR PURPOSES THE NINE VOTE METHOD, WITH OR WITHOUT A FURTHER RANK CHOICE ELEMENT, IS A MORE INTUITIVE AND EMPOWERING ALTERNATIVE.
I REGRET THAT AT THE RECENT MEETING AT WHICH BYLAWS WERE APPROVED THE FINAL VOTE WAS CALLED PREMATURELY TO EXCLUDE OPEN DISCUSSION OF THE STV VOTING METHOD, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY ONE VOTE AT A MUCH EARLIER MEETING OF ABOUT TWO DOZEN. (AS THAT WAS MY FIRST DSNC MEETING, I DID NOT FEEL QUALIFIED TO VOTE AND THEREFORE ABSTAINED.)
LEE
>
> -B.
Christopher Beland
> -The official DSNC questionaiire and a questionnaire from a 3rd party
> are not the same thing. These candidates are volunteering their time
> and might not have had enough time to complete the questionnaire in
> the compacted timeline they were given. This is just more evidence
> that the process was too short.
an official questionnaire. Voters might be given the candidate's name,
address, party, and whether or not they are an incumbent, but it's
generally left up to private organizations like media outlets and NGOs
to ask questions and publish the answers. It's great that for our
neighborhood, the election committee put in the work to ask questions
and publish answers, and didn't just leave it up to candidates and
voters and interest groups to figure that out. But a healthy democracy
also needs independent civil society groups and activists.
The way to make sure your high-priority questions were included in the
official questionnaire, if you think that's very important, would have
been to join the election committee and make suggestions.
But I think major stakeholder groups like Davis Square Village have
plenty of traction to get the attention of serious candidates. The two-
month election clock started at the end of June. DSV could have spent
all of July putting together a list of questions and sent it out right
after the candidate list was set on July 28, in time to get responses
before voting started.
The election schedule for next year is already set in the bylaws, so
you can start thinking about that now if you really need more than 30
days to do a thing which it seems could be done in a few hours worth of
meetings.
> -The Somerville ordinance for Neighborhood Councils states that
> elections must be open, inclusive, and duly democratic. For obvious
> reasons a scenario in which construction workers or musicians pack
> the polls in pursuit of self-interest is the opposite of inclusive.
> The letter of the law might not be in violated but the spirit of the
> ordinance certainly would be. I appreciate your candor as a
> candidate in expressing that your are comfortable with an outcome
> like this.
they might vote a certain way doesn't sound inclusive either; I'd
rather win or lose an election fair and square.
In city, state, and federal elections, certain voters "pack the polls"
as well...because they care passionately about an issue or candidate.
This is called "turnout" and "getting out the vote" and is generally
considered a good thing.
When abolishing rent control was on the statewide ballot in 1994, was
it unfair that landlords were allowed to "pack the polls" and vote for
it? Was it unfair that renters were allowed to "pack the polls" and
vote against it? Was it unfair that people who are neither got to vote
on a matter that didn't personally affect them? Or should they have
been the only ones to decide it?
All of our elections are biased by passionate interest groups showing
up and a lot of indifferent or otherwise busy people not bothering to
vote. We could fix this bias by making voting mandatory. Or we could
just not have elections, and run our democracy with sortition (picking
a representative sample of people at random to make decisions, like we
do with jury duty). But I think it's a stretch to say the DSNC process
is substantially less democratic than our current government elections.
In the meantime, the good news is that there are tens of thousands of
residents in Somerville, Cambridge, Medford, and Arlington who are
eligible to vote in DSNC elections. Dozens or even hundreds of self-
interested people can be swamped by an effective "get out the vote"
effort on the the "right" side, whatever you think that might be.
-B.
geniehainsworth
jlau...@comcast.net
Josiah Lee Auspitz
17 Chapel Street
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2025 12:25 PM
To: Davis Square Neighborhood Council <daviss...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [DSNC] DSNC Elections: Background on our voting system
Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.
rona twofisch.com
After we see how this runs, we’ll know a lot more. Then we can have a constructive conversation about what works for our nonprofit.
Rona
Ann Camara
Davis Square Neighborhood Council
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/222681939.694190.1756163903933%40mail.yahoo.com.