Title: An act relating to the process for election to local nonpartisan offices.

Sponsors: By House Committee on Local Government (originally sponsored by Representatives Moeller, Jarrett, Lovick, Fromhold, Veloria, Kessler, Pettigrew, Miloscia, McDermott, Dunshee, Upthegrove, DeBolt, Wallace, Wood, Sullivan, Schual-Berke, Kagi and Nixon).

Brief Summary of Substitute Bill

• Creates a five-year pilot project conducted by the Secretary of State to study the use of instant runoff voting (IRV) as a local option for nonpartisan offices in charter cities.

• Requires a city charter amendment authorizing the use of IRV prior to adoption of the method by the legislative body of a city.

• Includes amendatory provisions related to the IRV pilot project.

Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 9 members: Representatives Romero, Chair; Upthegrove, Vice Chair; Schindler, Ranking Minority Member; Jarrett, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Berkey, Clibborn, Ericksen, Mielke and Moeller.

‟Instant runoff voting” is an election method requiring candidates to receive a majority, rather than a plurality, of the votes cast in a particular race. While requirements vary under IRV, voters may select more than one candidate for a single race and rank candidates in a preferential order. A candidate receiving a majority of ‟first choice” votes is elected. If no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast in the race after the first counting stage, the ‟second choice” votes indicated on the ballots cast for the candidate receiving the fewest votes become additional votes for the candidates indicated in those ballot choices. This process generally continues until a candidate receives a majority of the votes cast for the position or until all but one candidate has been eliminated.

Present statute provides that city and town primary elections are nonpartisan and are held when more than two candidates file for the same position. Generally, if a primary was held for a nonpartisan office, the general election ballot must contain the names of the two candidates receiving the highest vote totals, listed in that order. A candidate must receive at least 1 percent of the votes cast for the office being sought in the primary in order to advance to the general election ballot. If no primary was held, the order of the candidate names for the general election ballot is determined by a lot drawing by the county filing officer. The candidate receiving the highest vote total in the general election is elected to the office.

The Secretary of State is required to select at least one city and county auditor to participate in a pilot project studying the use of IRV as a local option for nonpartisan offices in charter cities. The pilot project must begin by August 1, 2003, and conclude no later than June 30, 2008.

• certify all election equipment and related processes before the conduct of an IRV election; and

Following a charter amendment authorizing a city to adopt IRV, and selection by the Secretary of State to participate in the pilot project, the legislative body of a charter city may adopt IRV as the method for electing candidates for all nonpartisan city offices.

If the county auditor notifies the city that existing county election equipment is insufficient for the conduct of an IRV election, the city and county must reach an agreement for the purchase of any new equipment required for the election.

To the extent that they are not inconsistent with the provisions authorizing the IRV pilot project, the laws governing the conduct of elections apply to the IRV pilot project. Primary elections may not be held for nonpartisan city offices selected to participate in the pilot project, and IRV elections may only be held on the dates specified in law for general elections. Cities participating in the pilot project and conducting an IRV election must certify the IRV results on or before the 30th day after the election.

The pilot project authorized by the bill and amendatory provisions to existing law expire on June 30, 2008.

Effective Date: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For: Instant runoff voting (IRV) is used throughout the world, but Washington law prohibits adoption of the method. This bill provides an IRV option to first class cities, encourages clean political campaigns, and will decrease election costs. A citizen initiative in Vancouver has demonstrated support for IRV. Voting is ‟ground zero” for civil rights and this bill would be an effective tool for reinvigorating the voting process. This bill is needed, as fundamental reforms are necessary to support and strengthen democracy.

(In support with concerns) A policy discussion about how officials are elected would be an appropriate first step, as this bill represents a fundamental shift in elections law. Elections officials are presently implementing the federal ‟Help America Vote” Act; implementing IRV at this time could be problematic. IRV requires all ballots to be ‟in hand” prior to beginning the counting process. County auditors will have to pay for new equipment, and the bill does not provide auditors with a sufficient voice in the process. None of the current voting systems in Washington can support IRV elections. Federal approval of a voting system requires six to 12 months. Officials conducting IRV elections would have to run two separate elections. Support exists for a pilot project to study the issue.

Testified: (In support) Representative Moeller, prime sponsor; Mark Brown, City of Vancouver; Cherie Davidson, League of Women Voters; David Elliot, Office of the Secretary of State; Zena Hartung, Thurston County Democrats; Brent White, Coalition for Instant Runoff Voting; Kris Novoselic; and Jim Dees, Green Party.

(In support with concerns) Kim Wyman, Thurston County Auditor and Washington Association of County Auditors; and Bob Terwilliger, Snohomish County Auditor.