Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-05-22 CRC Agenda Packet_Special Meeting Date:Wednesday, May 22, 2024 Time:6:00 p.m. Location:City Hall, Bldg. #A, Executive Conference Room #103 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista Charter Review Commission Special Meeting Public Comments: Public comments may be submitted to the Charter Review Commission in the following ways: In-person comments during the meeting. Join us for the Charter Review Commission meeting at the time and location specified on this agenda to make your comments. Each person will be allotted three (3) minutes to address the Commission. • Submit an eComment. Visit www.chulavistaca.gov/boardmeetings, locate this meeting, and click the comment bubble icon. Click on the item you wish to comment on, then click "Leave Comment." • Mail or email comments. Submit comments via email to CRC@chulavistaca.gov or by mail to Charter Review Commission, 276 Fourth Ave, Chula Vista, CA 91910. • The commenting period will close three (3) hours before the meeting. All comments will be made available to the Commission and the public. Accessibility: Individuals with disabilities are invited to request modifications or accommodations in order to access and/or participate in a Charter Review Commission meeting by contacting the Charter Review Commission Staff at CRC@chulavistaca.gov (California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired by dialing 711) at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting. Pages 1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL Commissioners Buddingh, Disharoon, Glanz, Hopida, Inzunza, Lopez. 3.PRESENTATIONS 3.1 Presentation by Deputy City Manager Courtney Chase: Keeping Chula Vista Safe, Clean and Well-Maintained, A Status Update on Measure P 4 Recommended Action: Hear presentation. 4.CONSENT CALENDAR The Item(s) listed in this section of the agenda will be considered individually by the Commission and are expected to elicit discussion and deliberation. If you wish to comment on one of these items, you may do so at www.chulavistaca.gov/boardmeetings. 4.1 Approval of February 28, 2024 Special Meeting Minutes 29 Recommended Action: Review minutes and consider for approval. 5.ACTION ITEMS 5.1 Report and Discussion on April 23, 2024 Presentation to City Council Regarding Potential Charter Amendment Allowing Suspension of a City Councilmember 31 Chair Jan Budding's report back to the Commission on his April 23, 2024 presentation to City Council regrading the potential charter amendment allowing suspension of a City Councilmember with pending felony charges. Recommended Action: Commission hear the report and discuss the issue. 5.2 Discussion Regarding City Council's Creation of a Charter Review Subcommittee Recommended Action: Commission discuss the issue. 5.3 Discussion and Possible Action Regarding a Potential Amendment to Chula Vista Charter Section 503 (C) to Make the City Attorney an Appointed Position 33 Discuss possible amendment to Charter section 503 (C) to change the Chula Vista City Attorney from an elected to an appointed position. City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Page 2 of 38 Recommended Action: Commission discuss the issue and take action as appropriate. 5.4 Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Potential Amendment of Charter Section 303 (C) to Extend the Timeline to Fill a Councilmember Vacancy By Appointment 36 Discuss possible amendment to Charter section 303(C) to extend the time period to fill a Councilmember vacancy by appointment, and take action as appropriate. Recommended Action: Commission discuss the issue and take action as appropriate. OTHER BUSINESS 6.STAFF COMMENTS 7.CHAIR'S COMMENTS 8.COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS 9.ADJOURNMENT to the regular meeting on August 14, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. Materials provided to the Charter Review Commission relating to any open- session item on this agenda are available for public review by contacting the City Attorney's Office at CRC@chulavistaca.gov. City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Page 3 of 38 Keeping Chula Vista Safe, Clean and Well -Maintained A Status Update on Measure P Presented by: Courtney Chase, Deputy City Manager Page 4 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Background on Measure P ½ Cent Sales Tax on Retail Sales Voter Approved on November 8, 2016 Collection Began April 1, 2017 10-Year Period, Set to Expire in 2027 Instituted the Citizens’ Oversight Committee Established the Infrastructure, Facilities and Equipment Expenditure Plan which established the most critical priority items for funding Key Highlights Page 5 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Evaluation of City Infrastructure Page 6 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Background on Measure P Approved Expenditure Plan Priorities Pave, maintain and repair residential streets and fix potholes Upgrade or replace aging police, fire and 911 emergency response facilities, vehicles and equipment Replace storm drains to prevent sinkholes Upgrade irrigation systems to conserve water and save energy Make essential repairs to older libraries, senior center and recreation centers Improve our Traffic Signal Systems Page 7 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda 42%City Infrastructure Projects Replacement of the City network & upgrades to telecommunications has allowed for Smart City functionality which reduces traffic congestion and associated carbon emissions, enhances energy savings in City buildings, provides advanced citizen engagement through the capabilities of virtual City Hall, and enables enhanced security at City parks and other locations. City Network Upgrade Over 300 residential street segments were in failing condition and required major rehabilitation and repairs at costs significantly more than typical preventative maintenance. Measure P funding allowed for major asphalt replacement and rehabilitation on these streets placing them into a sustainable cycle of preventative maintenance for years to come. Residential Street Rehab & Repair Measure P has funded a multitude of much- needed upgrades and repairs at Chula Vista's largest park, covering nearly 60 acres, including reconstruction of the basketball courts, bleachers, picnic benches, and drinking fountains; expansion of ADA access; and new restroom facilities. Rohr Park Renovation Page 8 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda 42%City Infrastructure Projects Measure P funding has allowed for the rehabilitation of more than 160 Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP) locations including storm drain repairs of over 19,000 linear feet outside the right of way. Drainage Funding from Measure P has been utilized to repair over 7,640 damaged sidewalk locations exhibiting moderate -to- small heave displacements including the replacement of 130 sidewalk panels throughout the city. Sidewalks Measure P funding has allowed for traffic signal modifications and upgrades to 11 existing signalized intersections. These upgrades improve visibility, provide for protected left turn movements, and replaced failing and outdated traffic signals at various locations citywide. Traffic Signals Page 9 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Public Safety Projects $30 million in Measure P funding has facilitated major rehabilitation of Fire Stations throughout the City-Including the design and construction of new Fire Stations 3 and 5 and reconstruction of Fire Station 1, improving emergency services and response times in the community. Fire Facilities and Equipment Funding from Measure P has secured a new $1.4 million PremierOne Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) System, a critical component of the 911 emergency service framework, ensuring that the system remains stable and reliable with expanded technological capabilities directly impacting response times and officer safety. Police Dispatch Center 37% Page 10 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Public Facility Renovations The Loma Verde Community Center underwent a $22.5 million renovation and has a new multi-purpose gymnasium, dance rooms, crafts room, fitness room, game room, restrooms, two new pools and splash pad, shower/changing rooms, and classrooms. Loma Verde Community Center The Chula Vista Civic Center Library opened its doors in 1976, and thanks to Measure P, the City has been able to address significant infrastructure repairs including replacing the roof, restroom renovations for ADA access, and electrical/HVAC upgrades. All with the focus of increasing access to services and materials for the public. Civic Center Library 21% Page 11 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Community Facilities Page 12 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Parks, Fields & Courts Page 13 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Energy & Water Page 14 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Public Safety Page 15 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Storm Drains Page 16 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Streets Page 17 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Sidewalks Page 18 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Measure P Financials 22% Current Expenditure Allocation 37%42% City Infrastructure Projects Public Safety Public Facility Renovations $165.5M 10Y Expected (2016) $244.8M 10Y Projected Actual v. Projected Revenues Sales Tax Revenues were originally estimated to generate $16 million per year Updated 2023 revenue estimates are projected to generate >$25 million per year The Infrastructure, Facilities and Equipment Plan includes long -term financing of approximately $70.8 million from the issuance of bonds via Resolution 2017-089 on June 6, 2017, in order to expedite the most critically needed repairs or replacements of citywide infrastructure. City has paid down the bond debt principal by 49% ($34.7 million) as of FY22-23 Page 19 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Measure P Citizens’ Oversight Committee Meeting:4th Thursday Quarterly (Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct) The committee is comprised of nine members consisting of five At-Large members, with at least one from each Council district, and four Designated members selected from candidates brought forward by select nominating authorities. The main function of the Measure P Citizens’ Oversight Committee (COC) is to review and report on City compliance with the provisions of Measure P, particularly with respect to the City’s accounting and expenditure of Measure P revenues. David Garcias (Term Exp. 2025) Chair: Page 20 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Measure P Citizens’ Oversight Committee Meeting:4th Thursday Quarterly (Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct) The main function of the Measure P Citizens’ Oversight Committee (COC) is to review and report on City compliance with the provisions of Measure P, particularly with respect to the City’s accounting and expenditure of Measure P revenues. Specific duties include: Review and comment on each year’s Finance Department Report, Measure P Spending Plan, and Auditor Report. Prepare an annual report regarding the Finance Department Report for presentation to the City Council at a Public Meeting Work with City staff to identify and apply ‘best practices’ for tracking and reporting on Measure P revenues and expenditures relative to other City revenue and expenditures. Role & Function The committee is comprised of nine members appointed to four-year terms, consisting of five At-Large members, with at least one from each Council district, and four Designated members selected from candidates nominated by the following Nominating Authorities: Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment San Diego & Imperial Counties Labor Union San Diego Taxpayers Association Parks and Recreation Commission Sustainability Commission David Garcias (Term Exp. 2025) Chair: About Page 21 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Maintaining Local Funding without Raising Taxes Funding is set to expire, unless voters choose to renew it. To continue upgrading and maintain streets, underground storm drains and other local infrastructure the City is considering a November 2024 ballot measure to renew this source of funding for an additional 10 years at the current rate, without raising taxes. Page 22 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Continued Funding Could be Used To: Fix potholes and pave and maintain local streets Clean up trash and litter along streets sidewalks and in other public areas Keep existing parks and recreations facilities safe, clean, and well-maintained Repair infrastructure including sidewalks, curbs and storm drains Make improvements to roads and intersections to better manage traffic congestion on City streets Repair or replace aging underground stormwater pipes that are at risk of collapse and creating sinkholes Address homeless encampments and increase cleanup efforts Page 23 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Fiscal Accountability and Local Control Required public disclosure of all spending Essential purchases such as groceries, prescription medicine, diapers, and feminine hygiene products would continue to be exempt from sales tax All funds must stay local in Chula Vista and no funds can be taken away by the State Renewal of local funding at current rates, with no increase to local sales tax Any local funding measure would include fiscal accountability requirements, including: Page 24 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Ballot Measure Planning Voter Survey Election Timing Tax Rate Political Landscape Non-Advocacy Communication Existing comms Informational mailers / digital ads Internal and external audiences Seek feedback Refine proposal Community readiness? Ballot Resolution/ Ordinance 75 words Projects & Programs Ballot Argument & Signers Official Vote (>88 days before Election) Volunteer leaders Fundraising Website/Social Endorsements Grassroots Lawn Signs Mailers Digital Ads Get Out the Vote © 2023 We are Here Nov 2024 election: Council Action Summer 2024 Page 25 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda "By successfully leveraging and investing our Measure P revenue to fund our priority infrastructure needs, the City has delivered on their promise to maintain a stronger, safer Chula Vista and improving the quality of life for our residents and visitors. " -DAVID GARCIAS CHAIR, MEASURE P CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Page 26 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Delivering on the Promise... Page 27 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda QUESTIONS Page 28 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda 1 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION Meeting Minutes February 28, 2024, 6:00 p.m. City Hall, Bldg. #A, Executive Conference Room #103 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista Present: Commissioners Disharoon, Hopida, Lopez and Chair Buddingh Absent: Commissioners Glanz and Inzunza Also Present: Assistant City Attorney McClurg and Secretary Cornejo _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Charter Review Commission of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:09 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Secretary Cornejo called the roll. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR 3.1 Approval of February 14, 2024 Meeting Minutes Moved by Commissioner Hopida Seconded by Commissioner Disharoon Minutes approved. Result:Carried Page 29 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda 2 4. ACTION ITEMS 4.1 Continued Discussion and Action Regarding Potential Charter Amendment Allowing Suspension of a Councilmember Under Certain Circumstances Commissioners discussed potential Charter amendments to present. Moved by Commissioner Disharoon Seconded by Commissioner Hopida There was consensus for Chair Buddingh and Vice Chair Lopez to present the potential charter amendment to the Mayor and City Council for feedback at a Council meeting. Result:Carried OTHER BUSINESS 5. STAFF COMMENTS 6. CHAIR'S COMMENTS Chair Buddingh requested staff to agendize two items for our next meeting: 1. Discuss a charter amendment that would change the elected City Attorney position to an appointed one. 2. Discuss an increase from 45 to 60 days for Section 303 (filling a Councilmember vacancy by appointment) in the Charter. 7. COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS Commissioner Disharoon proposed we consider starting dialog regarding an amendment to the Charter that will assist our law enforcement, City Manager, and all City staff in dealing with homelessness issues. 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:42 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Doris Cornejo, Secretary _________________________ Doris Cornejo, Secretary Page 30 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Page 31 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda 2 This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.  M m m   Page 32 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Sec. 503. City Attorney: Election, Powers and Duties. (A) Designation as Officer; Election. The City Attorney shall be an Officer of the City and the department head of the City Attorney’s Office. The City Attorney shall be elected to said position by the voters of the City as set forth in Charter Section 503(C). Except as otherwise provided by this Charter, it is the intent of the voters that the City Attorney shall be sufficiently independent of the City Council and other City officials to advise the City while also acting in the best interests of the public. (B) Powers and Duties. The City Attorney shall: (1) represent and advise the City Council and all City Officers in all matters of law pertaining to their offices and advise all boards, commissions, and other agencies of the City on legal matters referred to the City Attorney, and render written legal opinions when the same are requested in writing by the City Council or the City Manager, the City Clerk, or any board or commission of the City with decision making authority; (2) represent, defend, and appear for the City, and any City Officer or employee, or former City Officer or employee as may be required by law or in accordance with City policy in any or all legal actions and proceedings in which the City or any such Officer or employee in or by reasons of the City Attorney’s official capacity, is concerned or is a named party; (3) attend and advise at all regular and special meetings of the City Council; (4) oversee the preparation of all contracts made by and all bonds given to the City, and approve the form of same in writing; (5) oversee the preparation of any and all proposed ordinances or resolutions for the City, and approve the form of same in writing; (6) prosecute, in the City Attorney’s professional discretion, all offenses against the ordinances of the City and such offenses against the laws of the State as may be authorized or required by law; the City Attorney shall also have concurrent jurisdiction with the District Attorney of the County of San Diego to prosecute persons charged with or guilty of the violation of the State laws occurring within the City limits of the City of Chula Vista for offenses constituting criminal misdemeanors or infractions; (7) exercise discretion as to when to commence or maintain legal proceedings whenever a civil cause of action exists in favor of the City, and when the basis for such action is within the knowledge of the City Attorney, subject to the approval or ratification by the City Council; (8) consistent with all applicable ethical rules and guidance, commence or maintain legal proceedings as directed by the City Council; and (9) surrender to the City Attorney’s successor all books, papers, files and documents pertaining to the City’s legal affairs. Art. V Officers and Employees | Charter of the City of Chula Vista Page 1 of 3 Latest amendments were approved by the electorate on November 8, 2022. Page 33 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda In order to assist with such responsibilities, the City Attorney may appoint Assistant or Deputy City Attorneys, who shall be in the Unclassified Service, and other employees, subject to City Council approval as to number of positions and funding therefor. The City Attorney may also employ special legal counsel and appraisers, engineers or other technical and expert services necessary for the handling of any pending or proposed litigation, proceeding or other legal matter as the City Attorney deems necessary or appropriate, to assist with performance of the above-described duties, subject to available funds and the City’s procurement policies. Upon the City Attorney’s recommendation and the approval of the Council, when the City Attorney has a conflict of interest in litigation involving another Officer or employee of the City acting in their official capacity, such other Officer or employee may be authorized to retain special legal counsel at City expense. Nothing in Charter Section 503 shall be construed to prevent the City Attorney from giving confidential advice to the City when otherwise allowed by law. (C) Election; Compensation. The City Attorney shall be nominated and elected in the same manner and at the same election as the Mayor, except as otherwise provided in this Charter Section 503. The annual salary of the elected City Attorney shall be equivalent to the salary of a Judge of the Superior Court of the State. The City Attorney shall also receive reimbursement for budgeted travel and other expenses when on official duty out of the City consistent with City policies. The City Council may also provide, by resolution, for the payment of an allowance of a sum certain per month, as reimbursement for additional demands and expenses made upon and incurred by the City Attorney. In addition, the City Attorney shall be entitled to such benefits as are granted to other department heads of the City, as established by the City Council. (D) Residency Requirements. To be eligible to seek election to the office of City Attorney, a person must be a Resident and registered voter of the City at the time they are issued their nomination papers for such office. To be eligible to hold the office of City Attorney, a person must be a Resident and registered voter of the City and maintain such status throughout their term. (E) Qualifications Requirements. The City Attorney shall be licensed to practice law in all courts of the State, and be so licensed for at least ten years preceding their assumption of office following election under this Charter. (F) Term of Office. The City Attorney shall be elected to a term of four years, which term shall commence upon the taking of the oath of office and shall continue until a qualified successor takes the oath of office, or until the City Attorney vacates the seat, whichever occurs first. The oath of the office shall be administered at, or immediately prior to, the first City Council meeting held following the Friday after which the official election results are certified. The City Attorney shall be subject to the same limits on terms of service as are applicable to the Mayor and the City Council under Charter Section 300(D). (G) Vacancy, Filling of. Upon a declaration of vacancy in the Office of the City Attorney, the Office of the City Attorney shall be filled by appointment by the majority vote of the City Council; provided, that if the Council shall fail to fill a vacancy by appointment within sixty days after such office becomes vacant, or if the unexpired term of the City Attorney shall exceed twenty-four months at the time of the appointment, the City Council shall cause a special election to be held to fill such vacancy, as provided in Charter Section 303(C)(2). An appointee or the person elected to the Office of City Attorney for the balance of an unexpired term shall hold office until the next regularly scheduled election for the Office of the City Attorney. Art. V Officers and Employees | Charter of the City of Chula Vista Page 2 of 3 Latest amendments were approved by the electorate on November 8, 2022. Page 34 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Latest amendments were approved by the electorate on November 8, 2022. Recommended by Charter Committee 1949. Approved by a special election, November 8, 1949, with a vote of 2068 YES to 1101 NO, presented to the House by Assemblyman Ralph R. Cloyed and to the Senate by Senator Fred H. Kraft. Ratified by the Legislature of the State of California on December 15, 1949. City Website: www.chulavistaca.gov Hosted by Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company. (H) Vacancy, What Constitutes. The Office of City Attorney shall be declared vacant by the Council under any of the circumstances described in Charter Section 303(A)(1)-(10) with respect to City Councilmembers and the Mayor. Additionally, the Office of City Attorney shall be declared vacant by the Council when the person elected or appointed thereto either (1) is absent continuously from the State for a period of more than thirty days without permission from the Council, or (2) is no longer licensed as an attorney in the State. Art. V Officers and Employees | Charter of the City of Chula Vista Page 3 of 3 Latest amendments were approved by the electorate on November 8, 2022. Page 35 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Sec. 303. Vacancies. (A) When a Vacancy Occurs. A City Councilmember or Mayor shall be deemed to have vacated their office on the date such office holder: (1) is absent from four consecutively scheduled and held regular meetings of the City Council without permission or excuse approved by the City Council; (2) is convicted of a felony or a crime involving moral turpitude; (3) resigns from office; (4) is sworn in to another office or position requiring the surrender of the City office; (5) is removed from office by judicial procedure or other state law proceeding; (6) forfeits the office under any provisions of this Charter; (7) no longer meets the qualifications necessary to hold the position; (8) is judicially-determined to be an incompetent; (9) is permanently so disabled as to be unable to perform the duties of the position. A finding of disability shall require the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the members of the Council after considering competent medical evidence bearing on the physical or mental capability of the officer; or (10) dies. The City Council shall declare by resolution the existence of any vacancy as soon as practicable. (B) Anticipated Vacancies with Intervening Consolidated Elections; Duration of Elected Replacer’s Term. If (1) a vacancy is expected to occur in an office of any member of the City Council or Mayor because of the election of the current office holder to another office requiring the surrender of the City office seat, and (2) if, between the time the expectation of vacancy occurs (by final election results for the other election contest having been announced) and the time the actual vacancy is expected to occur, any other federal, State or local (non-City) election involving all the electors of the City is scheduled to be held at such a time that permits a special election to be called and consolidated with such other federal, State or local election, then (a) the City Council shall declare an anticipated vacancy and call and request consolidation of such special election with such other election or elections, and (b) the vacancy so expected to be created shall be filled by such special election. A person elected in such special election to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the term of the office and until a successor qualifies. (C) Filling Vacancies: Appointments and Special Elections. Except under the circumstances provided in Charter Section 303(B), the City Council shall fill such vacancy by election or appointment as set forth herein. Art. III Mayor and City Council | Charter of the City of Chula Vista Page 1 of 3 Latest amendments were approved by the electorate on November 8, 2022. Page 36 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda (1) One Year or Less Remaining in Term. If a vacancy is declared by the Council with respect to an elected office with one year or less remaining in the term of such office from the date of such declaration, the Council shall use their good faith, best efforts to fill that vacancy by Council appointment by no later than forty-five days after the date of such declaration. In the event Council shall make such an appointment, the appointed office holder shall be entitled to hold such office until a qualified successor is subsequently sworn in at the expiration of the term. If the Council is unable to make an appointment during the prescribed forty-five day time period, the Council’s power to appoint to fill the vacancy shall terminate and the seat shall remain vacant for the remainder of the term. (2) Twenty-Five Months or More Remaining in Term. If a vacancy declared by the Council occurs with twenty- five months or more remaining in the term from the date of said declaration, the Council shall call a special election to be held on the next established election date, as specified in the Charter Section 901 and the Elections Code, or within 120 days from the declaration of vacancy, whichever is practical, unless there is a federal, State, or local election scheduled to be held within 180 days of the declaration of the vacancy. If there is a federal, State, or local election scheduled to be held within 180 days of the declaration of the vacancy, the Council may consolidate the special election with that election, as provided by the Elections Code. (a) Special Election. In the special election, the voters in the district for which a vacancy shall be filled shall be entitled to vote for one candidate from the district. If a candidate receives the majority of the votes cast in that candidate’s district, that candidate shall be deemed and declared by the Council to be elected to the vacant office. Ties among candidates shall be resolved in the manner provided in Charter Section 901(B). (b) Special Run-Off Election. If no candidate receives a majority of votes cast in the special election, to fill a vacancy, a special run-off election shall be held in the district in which the vacancy exists, on the next established election date, as specified in Charter Section 901 and the Elections Code, or within 120 days following the certification of the special election results, whichever is practical, unless there is a federal, State, or local election scheduled to be held within 180 days following the certification of the special election results, at which time the Council may consolidate the special run-off election with that election, as provided by the Elections Code. The two candidates receiving the highest number of votes cast for the vacant seat in the first special election shall be the only candidates for the vacant Council seat and the name of only those two candidates shall be printed on the ballot for that seat. If a special run-off election is required under this Charter Section 303, a write-in candidate may participate in such election only if the candidate qualified as a write-in candidate for the election initially held pursuant to Charter Section 902(A). (c) A vacancy in the office of Mayor shall be filled in the same manner as provided in Charter Section 303(C)(2)(a), and (b) except that the voters of the City at-large shall be entitled to vote. (3) More than One Year But Less Than Twenty-Five Months Remaining in Term. If a vacancy is declared by the Council with more than one year but less than twenty-five months remaining in the term from the date of declaration, the Council may either appoint a person to fill the vacant seat on the City Council, pursuant to Art. III Mayor and City Council | Charter of the City of Chula Vista Page 2 of 3 Latest amendments were approved by the electorate on November 8, 2022. Page 37 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda Latest amendments were approved by the electorate on November 8, 2022. Recommended by Charter Committee 1949. Approved by a special election, November 8, 1949, with a vote of 2068 YES to 1101 NO, presented to the House by Assemblyman Ralph R. Cloyed and to the Senate by Senator Fred H. Kraft. Ratified by the Legislature of the State of California on December 15, 1949. City Website: www.chulavistaca.gov Hosted by Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company. Charter Section 303(C)(1), or call a special election to fill the vacancy, pursuant to Charter Section 303(C)(2). The Council shall determine, by majority vote within fourteen days of the declaration of vacancy, whether to fill the vacancy by appointment or by special election. If the Council determines to fill the vacancy by appointment and is unable to make an appointment within forty-five days of the Council declaring a vacancy, the Council’s power to appoint is terminated and the Council shall call a special election pursuant to Charter Section 303(C)(2). (4) Exception When Appointment Would Result in Majority of Appointed Councilmembers. Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary in Charter Section 303(C), if an appointment would result in a majority of the members serving on the City Council being appointed, the Council shall not fill the vacancy by appointment; rather: (a) where the vacancy is for a remaining term of one year or less, the office shall remain vacant; and (b) where the vacancy is for a remaining term of more than one year but less than twenty-five months, the Council shall call a special election to fill the office in accordance with Charter Section 303(C)(2). (5) Future Election of Appointee to Elected Office. Any person who is appointed by the Council to fill the office of Councilmember or Mayor as provided in Charter Section 303(C), may not seek nomination and election to said offices of Councilmember or Mayor until a period of one year from the termination of the appointed term has elapsed. Said appointee shall be eligible to seek nomination and election for two full terms thereafter. (6) Mail Ballot Only Option in Case of Special Election. If a vacancy in the office of an Elected Official is to be filled utilizing a special election that is not consolidated with a scheduled federal, State or local polling place election, the City Council may authorize such election to be conducted wholly by mail ballot. Art. III Mayor and City Council | Charter of the City of Chula Vista Page 3 of 3 Latest amendments were approved by the electorate on November 8, 2022. Page 38 of 38 City of Chula Vista Charter Review Commission May 22, 2024 Agenda 1 Doris Cornejo From:Kerry Bigelow Sent:Wednesday, May 22, 2024 1:33 PM To: Cc:Doris Cornejo Subject:Fw: RCV Material Attachments:favicon.ico Hello, Delia. We’re unable to open the attached file. It looks like it might just be an icon image. Can you please resend it in another format or let us know if it’s not necessary to distribute? Thank you, Kerry Kerry Bigelow, MMC | City Clerk | City of Chula Vista, Office of the City Clerk 276 Fourth Avenue | Chula Vista, CA | 91910 | (619) 407-3590 | kbigelow@chulavistaca.gov Email correspondence with the City of Chula Vista, including attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act and, therefore, may be publicly disclosed unless otherwise exempt. From: Delia Dominguez Cervantes Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 12:10 PM To: Kerry Bigelow <KBigelow@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: RCV Material WARNING - This email originated from outside the City of Chula Vista. Do not click any links and do not open attachments unless you can confirm the sender. PLEASE REPORT SUSPICIOUS EMAILS BY USING THE PHISH ALERT REPORT BUTTON or to reportphishing@chulavistaca.gov Good Afternoon Commissioners, Please read the attached. This material will not see the light of day unless you inform. In the end the community deserves the right to vetting their candidates and know that their vote is going directly to the candidate and not being manipulated at different rounds. Some political candidates want this because they ‘save money and time’ for themselves and the local governments (ROV). But the right to vote is for the people, for the community to select their representative. The election is for the people not the politicians. htps://alaskapolicyforum.org/2022/10/the-undue-voter-burden-of-rcv/ ALASKA POLICY FORUM OUR VISION IS AN ALASKA THAT CONTINUOUSLY GROWS PROSPERITY BY MAXIMIZING INDIVIDUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND FREEDOM • 2022 • OCTOBER • THE UNDUE VOTER BURDEN OF RCV The Undue Voter Burden of RCV Published on October 18, 2022 by Quinn Townsend By Quinn Townsend and Sarah Montalbano The ideal election ballot makes choices clear and preferences easy to express. In Alaska, unfortunately, the state’s new ranked-choice voting (RCV) system can be a complicated disincentive. The work required to be an informed voter and rank all candidates on the ballot requires more time, interest, and information than many voters have to spare. Confronting voters with a multitude of candidates can dissuade them from voting in certain races or, in some cases, from voting at all. Alaska’s RCV ballot instructs voters to rank up to four candidates per office, with an optional write-in for each. Voters must have an informed opinion about every candidate — and every candidate’s policy positions — to rank them responsibly. In a traditional election, voters’ necessary research is typically limited to the two candidates for each state or national office who have a chance of winning. That totals 10 or 12 candidates, depending on which offices are on the ballot. With RCV, Alaskans now must conduct research to rank up to four candidates for each open seat. In 2022, most Alaskans are voting for five offices in the general election: governor and lieutenant governor, state representative, state senator, U.S. representative, and U.S. senator. Depending how many candidates are running for each seat in a district, some voters will need to research and form opinions about 20 to 24 different candidates in order to decide their preferences between them. The number of candidates is only the start of the complexity. There are 24 ways to rank four candidates in a single race, not including permutations that leave spaces blank. Voters don’t merely have to research candidates they might like or decide between frontrunners; they must research all of them to determine preferences and put them in rank order relative to each other. And that’s not considering ballot questions and judicial retention questions on the flip side of the ballot. Prior to RCV’s adoption, the 2018 ballot only tasked voters to research up to 10 candidates for four races in the general election, not including judges: governor and lieutenant governor, state representative, state senator, and U.S. representative. Not all these offices are on every ballot due to term lengths, and the Libertarian Party and a petition nominee increased the number of choices in the governor/lieutenant governor race, so in any given general election, voters would have to be familiar with fewer than 10 candidates. Even so, being an informed voter in a traditional election is a tall order for Alaskans who are busy living their lives without worrying about politics. In 2018, the most recent general election that did not include a U.S. presidential race, only 54.6% of eligible voters in Alaska cast ballots. In the long run, RCV may depress turnout by discouraging voters who don’t feel knowledgeable enough to make informed decisions about every candidate in every race. For most, politics competes with work and parenting, caring for sick or aged family members, and managing personal struggles. As Alaska Policy Forum has noted before, research has found that RCV is likely to decrease voter turnout, particularly among minority groups and those whose first language is not English. RCV also increases the gap between likely voters and the rest of the population, discouraging more-casual voters. The informational tools available to voters illustrate the complexities. The candidate statements available on the Division of Elections website provide their official statement and websites. These statements are simply what each candidate wants voters to know — not necessarily the information that voters want to know. They might be sufficient to find the candidate who would best represent a voter, but not to rank them by shades of difference. Other entities, such as newspapers and nonprofits, provide guides to compare candidates across a variety of questions. However, voters must then do the work to uncover the biases of those organizations. The more numerous and subtle the decision, the more voters must go right to the source and track the actions of every candidate — all 20 or more of them. Being an informed voter is difficult enough when the system narrows the choice down to two or a few options. RCV requires voters to develop extensive knowledge about 20+ candidates at a time. While advocates argue that they are willing to take on the costs of ranking responsibly and insist others should be, as well, many voters do not have the time, interest, or information to tackle this mind-boggling task of prioritization. Increasing the difficulty of being an informed voter is a recipe for reducing voter turnout and electing unrepresentative candidates who don’t reflect the will of the people. Blog, Front Page Slider, Other Issueselections, Ranked-Choice Voting, RCV Watch How Ranked-Choice Voting Complicates Elections And Disenfranchises Voters BY: SHAWN FLEETWOOD MARCH 06, 2024 Ranked-choice voting (RCV) leads to voter disenfranchisement and chaotic elections, a newly released video shows. Under RCV, voters rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of first-choice votes in the first round of voting, the last-place finisher is eliminated, and his votes are reallocated to the voter’s second-choice candidate. This process continues until one candidate receives a majority of votes. Published by the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), the two-minute-long explainer video showcases how the use of RCV in elections leads to confused voters and discarded ballots. It highlights the issue of “ballot exhaustion,” a term used to describe what happens when voters select only one candidate on their ballot and then have their ballots tossed because their first choice didn’t win a majority in the first round. A study published by FGA last year discovered thousands of “exhausted” ballots that were discarded in states and localities that have employed RCV in recent elections. In Alaska’s 2022 special congressional election, for example, more than 11,000 of the almost 15,000 “exhausted” ballots were thrown out because those electors “voted for only one Republican candidate and no one else.” Meanwhile, more than 8,000 ballots were deemed “exhausted” and effectively thrown out in a 2018 Maine congressional race, according to FGA. “The result is that a much smaller, manufactured pool of voters ultimately decides the election to the exclusion of thousands of other voters,” the video narrator said. The video also documents how the use of RCV often results in electoral victories for Democrats. In 2022, Democrat Mary Peltola won Alaska’s at-large congressional seat even though “nearly 60 percent of voters [cast] their ballots for a Republican.” RCV also played a major role in helping Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski win reelection during the 2022 midterms. Efforts are currently underway in the state to have a measure repealing RCV appear on Alaska’s 2024 general election ballot. A similar scenario played out in the aforementioned 2018 Maine congressional race, in which then-incumbent GOP Rep. Bruce Poliquin lost to Democrat Jared Golden despite Poliquin winning the most votes in the first round of voting. “Ultimately, ranked-choice voting undermines voters’ confidence in the integrity and accuracy of elections,” FGA Marketing Director Victoria Eardley told The Federalist. “Trust is something that is very hard to gain and very easy to lose, and the track record of ranked-choice voting shows it’s the fastest way to erode trust.” RCV proponents use misleading talking points about vague ideals of “fairness” to distract from the system’s negative effects on voter confidence and the efficiency of elections. A polling memo previously obtained by The Federalist revealed that RCV supporters are searching for ways to deceive voters into adopting the system, by analyzing what pro-RCV talking points work best in convincing voters to get on board. Democracy Found, an RCV advocacy group, applied these tactics in an attempt to mislead voters and Wisconsin legislators about how a top-five ranked-choice voting system would work ahead of a state Senate Committee hearing on a pro-RCV bill in December. https://thefederalist.com/2024/03/06/watch-how-ranked-choice-voting-complicates-elections- and-disenfranchises-voters/ Ranked-Choice Voting Advocates Are Forced To Lie About ‘Fairness’ To Get Voters On Board BY: SHAWN FLEETWOOD NOVEMBER 20, 2023 A memo obtained by The Federalist shows how ranked-choice voting proponents aim to deceive voters into adopting the system for U.S. elections. States and localities are finding out in real-time how terrible ranked-choice voting (RCV) is for their respective elections. From Alaska to Virginia, the leftist-backed election system gaining traction throughout the country is leading to undesirable election outcomes and confusion among voters. Under RCV, often dubbed “rigged-choice voting” by its critics, voters rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of first-choice votes in the first round of voting, the last-place finisher is eliminated, and his votes are reallocated to the voter’s second-choice candidate. Despite the many failures associated with its use, RCV proponents are searching for ways to deceive voters into adopting the system for their local and state elections across the nation. A polling memo obtained by The Federalist shows exactly how they intend to do it. Produced by HighGround Inc., a public affairs consulting group, the document analyzes what pro-RCV talking points work best in convincing voters to get on board with the controversial system. Conducted among 500 likely 2024 Arizona voters, the survey found that misleading arguments centered around “the idea of fairness” appear to resonate with the electorate. Among these are claims that RCV shifts power to voters, ensures “all candidates and voters [are] equal,” and empowers independents (the largest voting bloc in Arizona). In its memo, HighGround noted how emphasizing “fairness” when pitching RCV to voters is effective because it’s a “universal virtue and value which no one can successfully argue with.” It’s these types of arguments, the group claimed, that can be effective in convincing Arizonans to vote down a 2024 constitutional amendment proposal that would reportedly bar the use of RCV in the Grand Canyon State. In addition to analyzing talking points hyping RCV, HighGround also surveyed arguments opposing the system to help ranked-choice proponents outmaneuver election integrity activists’ warning of RCV’s failures. While the poll’s findings indicate claims that RCV is “absolute chaos” and a “dangerous idea” don’t resonate with likely Arizona voters, arguments that the system would bring California-style primaries to the state appear to work best in generating opposition to RCV. While speaking with The Federalist, an election integrity expert highlighted how the memo confirms what RCV critics have accurately assessed: The system’s proponents have to “dance around” what it actually does to the elections process and obfuscate the reality that RCV implements a jungle primary-like model in order to get voters’ support. Another elections specialist separately told The Federalist that the memo shows how RCV proponents have an “uphill battle” ahead of them, and to sell the system to voters they must “mislead” the electorate about its true nature. Internal RCV Polling by The Federalist RCV’s Dark History Contrary to proponents’ grossly misleading talking points, governments using RCV for their respective elections have produced anything but “fair” outcomes for voters. During Maine’s 2018 elections, for example, then-incumbent GOP Rep. Bruce Poliquin lost to Democrat Jared Golden despite Poliquin winning the most votes in the first round of voting. That outcome was due to the state’s ranked-choice voting system. Meanwhile, Alaska has also had its fair share of undesirable election outcomes since adopting the practice in 2020. During the state’s 2022 special election for its at-large congressional district, ranked-choice voting propelled Democrat Mary Peltola to victory even though “nearly 60 percent of voters [cast] their ballots for a Republican.” RCV also played a major rolein helping Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski fend off a challenge from conservative challenger Kelly Tshibaka during the November 2022 midterms. [RELATED: Ranked-Choice Voting Is The Monster Under The Bed Of American Elections] Various U.S. municipalities that have adopted RCV have also experienced confusing and even inaccurate election outcomes. In an Oakland school board race, for instance, “election officials announced — two months after the fact — that they got the count wrong,” resulting in the “rightful winner … suing for his seat.” Meanwhile, a Utah town that used an RCV pilot program for its 2021 municipal elections experienced high rates of ballots being discarded or spoiled. After using the system for a June 20 primary election, officials in Arlington, Virginia, opted not to use the practice for its Nov. 7 elections, “pointing to confusion about the process” among voters and “concerns about whether outreach efforts were translating to diverse support for the new system.” But these examples highlighting the chaos associated with ranked-choice voting haven’t stopped its advocates from deceptively pushing voters throughout the country from adopting the system for their respective local elections. During this month’s off-year elections, residents in three Michigan cities voted to adopt RCV for their local elections should state lawmakers pass legislation allowing for the system’s use. Minnetonka, Minnesota, voters similarly voted to keep RCV for its municipal contests after first adopting the practice in 2020. It’s worth mentioning that both Michigan and Minnesota Democrats have introduced bills in recent state legislative sessions that sought to authorize RCV’s use for various elections. Coming off their 2023 successes, RCV advocates are seeking to further expand the system’s use in other states and localities. In Nevada, RCV proponents successfully got a pro-RCV constitutional amendment placed on the state’s 2022 ballot and managed to convince enough voters to pass it. If approved by a majority of voters again during the 2024 elections, Nevada will adopt a top-five RCV system, in which voters rank their top five preferred candidates in federal and state primary and general elections. The amendment would not allow RCV’s use for presidential elections, however. While RCV supporters didn’t collect enough signatures to get a similar initiative on Missouri’s 2022 ballot, they’re actively seeking to do so for the state’s 2024 elections. Other states being targeted by RCV advocates include Arizona, Wisconsin, Idaho, and Oregon. htps://thefederalist.com/2023/11/20/ranked-choice-vo�ng-advocates-are-forced -to-lie-about-fairness-to-get- voters-on-board/ Louisiana Republicans Pass Bill Ensuring Ranked-Choice Voting Can’t Disenfranchise Voters BY: SHAWN FLEETWOOD MARCH 20, 2024 The Republican-controlled Louisiana Senate advanced legislation on Wednesday prohibiting the use of ranked-choice voting in elections. SB 101 stipulates that a “ranked-choice voting or instant runoff voting method … shall not be used in determining the election or nomination of any candidate to any local, state, or federal elective office in this state.” The measure would, however, allow the system to be used “for absentee voting by military and overseas voters pursuant to the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.” SB 101 passed the Senate in a 29-9 vote, with two Democrats joining 27 Republicans in voting “yea.” All “nay” votes came from Democrats, while Republican Sen. Michael Fesi was absent. The House will soon consider the measure. Under RCV, voters rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of first-choice votes in the first round of voting, the last-place finisher is eliminated, and his votes are reallocated to the voter’s second-choice candidate. This process continues until one candidate receives a majority of votes. When pressed by Democrat Sen. Edward Price on the need to prohibit RCV, given that no Louisiana locality currently uses it, bill sponsor and GOP Sen. Blake Miguez noted the importance of preventing the chaotic system from being implemented in the future and disenfranchising Pelican State voters. “We are trying to ensure that ranked-choice voting doesn’t become a reality here in Louisiana,” Miguez said. “America is about … one person, one vote, and to have these complex tabulated ballots is un-American, and I think both sides of the aisle understand this. And that’s why we don’t want it here in Louisiana.” Miguez is a member of the Louisiana Freedom Caucusand sponsored the recently enacted constitutional amendment banning “Zuckbucks.” As alluded to by Miguez, various U.S. municipalities that have adopted RCV have experienced confusing and even inaccurate election outcomes. In an Oakland school board race, for instance, “election officials announced — two months after the fact — that they got the count wrong,” resulting in the “rightful winner … suing for his seat.” Meanwhile, a Utah town that used an RCV pilot program for its 2021 municipal elections experienced high rates of ballots being discarded or spoiled. A study published by the Foundation for Government Accountability last year found that RCV ballots are often discarded due to “ballot exhaustion,” a term used to describe when voters select only one candidate on their ballot, and those ballots are tossed because their first choice didn’t win a majority in the first round. In Alaska’s 2022 special congressional election, for example, more than 11,000 “exhausted” ballots were thrown out because those electors “voted for only one Republican candidate and no one else.” RCV has also produced election results that contradict voters’ desires. Some of these examples include the aforementioned special congressional election in Alaskaand a 2018 Maine congressional contest. The Democrat candidates won both races despite Republican candidates receiving more votes in the first round of voting. While Maine and Alaska are currently the only states that use the system for statewide races, electors in Nevada and Oregon will vote on pro-RCV ballot measures during their respective elections this November. States prohiting the use of RCV for elections include Florida, Idaho, Tennessee, Montana, and South Dakota. Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood • BLAKE MIGUEZ • ELECTIONS • LOUISIANA • LOUISIANA REPUBLICANS • RANKED-CHOICE VOTING • RCV • RIGGED-CHOICE VOTING • STATE LEGISLATURES • VOTER DISENFRANCHISEMENT • VOTING htps://thefederalist.com/2024/03/20/louisiana-republicans-pass-bill-ensuring-ranked -choice-vo�ng-cant- disenfranchise-voters/ Ranked-Choice Voting Is The Monster Under The Bed Of American Elections BY: SHAWN FLEETWOOD OCTOBER 31, 2023 Ranked-choice voting ‘is a scheme of the Left to disenfranchise voters and elect more Democrats,’ a new report found. Democrats are using ranked-choice voting (RCV) to benefit their party and disenfranchise voters in elections across the country, a new report provided to The Federalist found. Published by the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), the new analysis unearths how Democrats use the complexities associated with RCV to diminish confidence in elections among U.S. voters. Under RCV, often dubbed “rigged-choice voting” by its critics, voters rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives more than 50 percent of first-choice votes in the first round of voting, the last-place finisher is eliminated, and his votes are reallocated to the voter’s second-choice candidate. This process continues until one candidate receives a majority of votes. While both major political parties have a history of promoting RCV, it’s primarily Democrats who are pushing states and localities to adopt the practice for future elections. As noted by FGA, of the 74 pro-RCV bills introduced in state legislatures this past year, 57 “had only Democrat sponsors.” Meanwhile, “just eight percent of the total bills received bipartisan support,” with Republicans introducing 16 of the 17 bills opposing ranked- choice voting. “Both the number of bills supportive and opposed to ranked-choice voting saw a large uptick in 2023,” the report reads. “Part of the reason for this increase is legislators have seen the system allow less popular Democrats beat more popular Republicans in federal races in both Maine and Alaska.” While RCV proponents often claim the system “guarantees that elected officials receive majority support from the electorate,” election outcomes in Alaska and Maine — both of which have adopted RCV — show the exact opposite is true. In Alaska, Democrat Mary Peltola won the state’s at-large congressional seat last year even though “nearly 60 percent of voters [cast] their ballots for a Republican.” As noted by FGA, this race also saw nearly 15,000 votes discarded due to so-called “ballot exhaustion.” The term “ballot exhaustion” is used to describe when voters select only one candidate on their ballot, and those ballots are tossed because their first choice didn’t win a majority in the first round. Of the nearly 15,000 “exhausted” ballots thrown out in Alaska’s special congressional election, more than 11,000 were from voters who “voted for only one Republican candidate and no one else,” according to the report. RCV also played a major role in helping Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski win reelection during the 2022 midterms, which reportedly saw the “lowest voter turnout percentage on record.” Election outcomes contradicting the desires of voters were also documented in a 2018 Maine congressional race. In that election, then-incumbent GOP Rep. Bruce Poliquin lost to Democrat Jared Golden despite Poliquin winning the most votes in the first round of voting. According to FGA, more than 8,000 ballots were deemed “exhausted” and effectively thrown out. “These ballots are not just pieces of paper, each is connected to a voter and his or her preference,” the report reads. “By throwing away these ballots, ranked- choice voting is erasing their opinion and leaving their voice unheard in the democratic system.” But discarded ballots are just one of the many problems associated with RCV. In jurisdictions that employ RCV, delayed election results and errors have become the norm. During New York City’s 2021 Democrat mayoral primary, for example, it took “a week of counting and 11 rounds of tabulations” before city officials determined that “135,000 test ballots had been counted by mistake.” It took nearly a month and eight rounds of counting before a winner was ultimately declared. Voter confusion about how RCV works has also presented its challenges. After using the system for a June 20 primary election, officials in Arlington, Virginia, opted not to use the practice for its upcoming fall elections, “pointing to confusion about the process” among voters and “concerns about whether outreach efforts were translating to diverse support for the new system.” FGA concluded its report by calling on lawmakers to follow the lead of states such as Florida and Tennessee by banning the use of RCV in future elections. “This complicated and confusing form of counting votes is not a non-partisan solution to give voters greater voice,” the report reads. “It is a scheme of the Left to disenfranchise voters and elect more Democrats.” Other states that have banned RCV in recent years include South Dakota, Idaho, and Montana. htps://thefederalist.com/2023/10/31/ranked-choice-vo�ng-is-the-monster-under-the-bed-of- american-elec�ons/ The Truth About Ranked-Choice Voting TheFGA.org | @TheFGA With RCV, every vote does not count. One of the greatest problems with RCV is “ballot exhaustion”—when a ballot is cast but does not count toward the end election result. This occurs when a voter overvotes, undervotes, or only ranks candidates that are no longer in contention on their ballot. Ballot exhaustion leaves voters and voices uncounted—ballots are literally thrown in the trash because the RCV voting process renders their votes meaningless. RCV diminishes voter confidence. RCV is overly complicated and confusing. Additionally, it requires voters to make decisions about all the candidates on the ballot, forcing them to cast their vote for candidates that they disapprove of or lack sufficient information about. RCV threatens fast and accurate ballot counting. With multiple runoffs and choice rankings, the RCV process leads to slower election results and increased irregularities. What’s wrong with Ranked-Choice Voting? Ranked-choice voting undermines voter confidence and leads to slower election results and increased irregularities. What is Ranked-Choice Voting? American elections are traditionally and almost universally run using the “one-person, one-vote” system. When voters cast their ballots, they pick a single candidate in each race, and the candidate with the highest number of votes wins. Under Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV), voters are forced to rank the candidates. If no candidate wins a majority, the race goes into multiple rounds of what is referred to as “instant run-off voting” until one candidate receives more than 50 percent of the remaining votes. It is anything but “instant” though—it is a complex process that has taken days or weeks in some cases. Using RCV, candidates who lost in the first round can win the election after multiple rounds of tabulation. The Left has successfully pushed RCV in Maine and Alaska through ballot initiatives and implemented RCV in cities across the country, including New York, San Francisco, and Cambridge, Massachusetts. The RCV movement is gaining momentum and without an explicit ban, every state is vulnerable. In 2022, Florida and Tennessee lawmakers enacted bills that banned ranked-choice voting for all elections. The RCV Track Record Alameda County California’s 2022 Local Elections Nearly two months after November’s election, Alameda County announced that it systematically counted the ballots wrong due to a ranked-choice programming error. The third-place finisher had actually won the Oakland school board election. The Board of Supervisors has directed a recount for all local races that used ranked-choice voting, including Mayor of Oakland. Portland, Maine’s 2021 Charter Commission Election In a 10-person race for four open seats on the Portland Charter Commission, one of the eventual winners had a mere four percent of the vote after the first round of tabulation. Two of the top four initial vote-getters ultimately lost. A group backed by Democratic Socialists of America supported the winners and their success was largely due to ranked-choice voting being used in the election. New York City’s 2021 Democratic Mayoral Primary Ranked-Choice Voting mandates the central counting of votes and involves a complicated counting process. The 2021 Democratic mayoral primary took 15 days to announce a winner. The New York City Board of Elections accidentally included 135,000 “test ballots” in its publicly posted tally before fixing the error. Overall, almost 15 percent of the ballots were thrown in the trash and didn’t count toward the final result. Maine’s 2022 Second Congressional District Election It took more than eight days to decide the official winner in this 2022 congressional race. A “technical snafu” led to two memory sticks, which had recorded more than 16,000 ballots, being corrupt. Maine’s 2018 Second Congressional District Election In this state race, 8,253 ballots were thrown in the trash, which was almost five percent of the total ballots cast. Bruce Poliquin (R) received 46.33 percent of the vote ahead of Jared Golden’s (D) 45.58 percent. But since Poliquin didn’t receive 50 percent, there was a second round of tabulation. The secretary of state threw out the 8,253 “exhausted ballots”—this was not a mistake; this is how ranked-choice voting is designed to work. Golden was declared the winner with 50.62 percent of the remaining ballots but only 49.2 percent of the total ballots cast. Alaska’s 2022 At-Large Congressional Special and General Elections In the special election, nearly 15,000 Alaskan votes were tossed out before the Mary Peltola (D) was declared the winner. In fact, 60 percent of voters voted Republican in the first round, but by the last tally, Peltola came out ahead by just 5,129 votes. Conveniently for the Democrats, more than 11,000 ballots were tossed by the second round simply because they only voted for the other Republican candidate instead of ranking all of the candidates. In November’s midterm elections, Mary Peltola won reelection after three rounds of tabulation and, once again, after nearly 15,000 ballots were exhausted. Wi t h R C V , e v e r y v o t e do e s no t c o u n t . RC V d i m i n i s h e s vo t e r c o n f i d e n c e . RC V t h r e a t e n s f a s t a n d ac c u r a t e b a l l o t c o u n t i n g .