Comments on: IRV & Single Transferrable Vote Win in All 4 Ballot Measures http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/11/08/irv-single-transferrable-vote-win-in-all-4-ballot-measures/ Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:44:36 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Chris J. http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/11/08/irv-single-transferrable-vote-win-in-all-4-ballot-measures/comment-page-1/#comment-22065 Chris J. Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:23:33 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/11/08/irv-single-transferrable-vote-win-in-all-4-ballot-measures/#comment-22065 Another correction: the Davis measure is Measure "L" rather than "J". Another correction: the Davis measure is Measure “L” rather than “J”.

]]> By: Bob Richard http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/11/08/irv-single-transferrable-vote-win-in-all-4-ballot-measures/comment-page-1/#comment-21804 Bob Richard Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:52:25 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/11/08/irv-single-transferrable-vote-win-in-all-4-ballot-measures/#comment-21804 A question about Pierce County, WA. Since all offices there are single-seat, wouldn't a better comparison be to the Australian lower house (rather than Senate) and the Irish presidency (rather than legislature)? A question about Pierce County, WA. Since all offices there are single-seat, wouldn’t a better comparison be to the Australian lower house (rather than Senate) and the Irish presidency (rather than legislature)?

]]> By: Bob Richard http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/11/08/irv-single-transferrable-vote-win-in-all-4-ballot-measures/comment-page-1/#comment-21802 Bob Richard Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:48:43 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/11/08/irv-single-transferrable-vote-win-in-all-4-ballot-measures/#comment-21802 Two corrections on Davis: (1) this was an advisory vote rather than a binding one, and (2) Davis doesn't have an elected mayor or any other elected executive offices. The measure only affects city council. The council is currently elected at large, so the comparison to Cambridge, MA is appropriate. But a few influential folks want to put district elections on the table along with ranked voting. As a general law city, Davis must now (1) decide on a charter proposal, or (2) ask the legislature for an exception to the existing law governing general law cities, or (3) support legislation allowing ranked voting for all jurisdictions. In all three cases, another vote will be required. Activists in Davis are emphasizing option (1). Two corrections on Davis: (1) this was an advisory vote rather than a binding one, and (2) Davis doesn’t have an elected mayor or any other elected executive offices. The measure only affects city council.

The council is currently elected at large, so the comparison to Cambridge, MA is appropriate. But a few influential folks want to put district elections on the table along with ranked voting. As a general law city, Davis must now (1) decide on a charter proposal, or (2) ask the legislature for an exception to the existing law governing general law cities, or (3) support legislation allowing ranked voting for all jurisdictions. In all three cases, another vote will be required. Activists in Davis are emphasizing option (1).

]]>