HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 06/21/2022 - ITEMS RELATING TO A CITY-INITIATED CHARTER AMENDME (3) Agenda Item 20
Item # 20 Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 21, 2022
City Council
STAFF
Anissa Hollingshead, City Clerk
Rita Knoll, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Carrie Daggett, City Attorney
SUBJECT
Items Relating to a City-Initiated Charter Amendment Relating to the Conduct of City Elections to Use a
Ranked Voting Method.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Amendments were made to Section 7. Certification of election results – paragraph (a) of the Ordinance.
A. Possible Public Hearing and Motion(s) Regarding Protest(s) of Ballot Language.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 080, 2022, Submitting to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City of Fort
Collins a Proposed Amendment to the City Charter Concerning the Use of a Ranked Voting Method to Elect
Future Mayors and Councilmembers of the City of Fort Collins.
The purpose of this item is to submit a City-initiated Charter Amendment to the registered electors of the City at
the November 8, 2022 special election. This Charter amendment proposes to amend various provisions of the
Charter to require the use of a ranked voting method beginning in 2025.
Any protest of the proposed ballot language must be received no later than Tuesday, June 21, 2022, at noon.
Protest(s) shall be heard, considered, and resolved by the Council prior to adoption of the related Ordinance. If
protests are received, copies will be included in Council's "Read Before the Meeting" packet.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
If Council desires to present voters with the determination of whether to shift to using ranked-choice voting to
elect future Mayors and Councilmembers, staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
At the March 22, 2022 Work Session, Council discussed two potential Charter Amendments relating to the
conduct of municipal elections. These Charter Amendments have also been considered by the Council’s Election
Code Committee (ECC) at meetings in 2021 and 2022, and that committee has recommended bringing both
amendments forward to the full Council for consideration.
The first proposed amendment makes changes to the City Charter necessary to allow for the use of ranked-
choice voting in elections for City Councilmembers and Mayor. If adopted, this Ordinance will submit this
amendment to voters at the November 8, 2022 Special Election.
There are multiple sections of the Charter which would require changes as part of this amendment in order to
implement RCV, including:
Agenda Item 20
Item # 20 Page 2
Amending Article VIII. Elections
• In Section 1, Adding potential applicability of coordinated municipal elections.
• In Section 7:
o Shifting the requirement to certify the election from by the 10th day after the election to a date to be
specified by ordinance.
o Adding provisions relating to how the highest number of votes for a particular office is determined
relevant to the use of a ranked voting method.
o Establishing the use of ranked voting methods for municipal elections beginning in 2025.
Amending Article IX. Recall
• Adding a reference to ranked voting requirements to recall provisions.
CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS
The financial impacts of adopting this ordinance include the cost of co nducting a coordinated special election
with Larimer County on the question. Special elections are not budgeted and typically are paid for with prior
year reserves.
If this measure is ultimately approved by the voters, there would be additional costs in a dministering elections.
The amount of these costs is difficult to predict and would differ depending upon whether the election was
conducted by the City Clerk’s Office or as a coordinated election with Larimer County.
In a City-run municipal election, most election expenses would remain relatively stable with the addition of
RCV. The handful of expenses most likely to see impacts include:
• Vote Tabulation Equipment – The City does not own its own tabulation equipment. It is also not
constrained to using its existing vendor and can explore other options that may offer some cost efficiencies
or additional opportunities for partnership. At this stage, quotes have been obtained from the current
vendor being used for adding RCV capabilities. The estimate provide d includes overall cost increases from
recent years regardless of whether RCV is used. The specific module for RCV would add $35,000 to rental
costs in each election.
• Staffing Costs – Implementing RCV will likely mean increased staffing costs primarily fo r temporary staff
including election judges. Estimating the level of increase is speculative without a more complete picture of
the circumstances of implementation, including available internal resources to support efforts. It is
reasonable to assume at least some impact in this category. Utilizing equipment capable of fully tabulating
RCV ballots would decrease the level of potential increase, but not eliminate it entirely.
• Voter Education – In every election, the City engages in a level of voter outreach and education. This is
an area for potential growth regardless of voting methodology to better address the goals of Council
around supporting voter participation. In recent election years, approximately $10,000 per municipal
election has been invested in this realm. Specific to RCV, the need for more comprehensive voter
education does exist and would rightly call for an increased investment to help voters become familiar with
what to expect when casting their ballots. Done by the City and with a longer ter m ramp up to
implementation over more than the course of a year, this expense could be managed well to maximize the
use of any funds allocated for this purpose.
With the timing of implementation under consideration for 2025, it is likely possible to offset some of these
additional costs at least in part through the development of partnerships with neutral civic -oriented entities
including the pursuit of grant funds. Adequate time would be available to explore these options to minimize the
additional costs if elections continue to be administered by the City.
In a coordinated election, Larimer County has indicated all costs directly associated with RCV will be passed
on to only those jurisdictions utilizing RCV on a ballot. At this point, there are no other jurisdictions in Larimer
County indicating an interest in implementing RCV, so all RCV-related costs would be passed on to Fort
Agenda Item 20
Item # 20 Page 3
Collins. This would be in addition to the share of all expenses that would be allocated to the City as occurs in
any coordinated election. The cost sharing provisions are set by the County with a basis in state statute and
apply to all jurisdictions participating in coordinated elections. The arrangement incentivizes the entity
conducting the election – in this case the county – to ensure all necessary resources are dedicated to elections
to ensure a successful event without the ability of coordinating jurisdictions to be part of those decisions, or
aware of what the costs will be until the election event is underway. RCV-specific costs are most likely to
include:
• Equipment Firmware and Licensing for the RCV Module – Costs for this are being negotiated by the
Secretary of State on behalf of counties across the state with the vendor. Costs may be tiered by
population and are not likely to be known until sometime in 2023.
• Voter Education – The state statute permitting the use of RCV in coordinated municipal elections requires
an agreement between a municipality and the coordinating county specifically including a voter education
plan and coordinating its execution and costs.
• Staffing Costs – It is likely the County will increase staffing levels to administer an election event with
RCV to ensure it has adequate capacity to ensure successful administration of new processes.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Targeted outreach was not conducted for this proposed Charter amendment. However, meetings of the
Elections Code Committee where this amendment was discussed were open to the public, and several
members of the community regularly attended and provided input. In addition, the Council discussed this
proposed amendment at its March 22 Work Session.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Where RCV is Used (PDF)
2. Election Code Committee Minutes, September 2021 (PDF)
3. Election Code Committee Minutes, February 2022 (PDF)
4. Election Code Committee Minutes, March 7, 2022 (PDF)
5. Election Code Committee Minutes, May 9, 2022 (PDF)
6. Election Code Committee Minutes, May 31, 2022 (draft) (PDF)
7. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
City Clerk
300 LaPorte Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6515
970.221-6295 - fax
fcgov.com/cityclerk
elections@fcgov.com
MEMORANDUM
Attached is a report prepared by the Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center in June of 2020
reflecting the use of ranked-choice voting (RCV) in elections across the U.S. as well as
internationally.
Of note, in the list of jurisdictions that previously used RC, Burlington, Vermont is listed.
Burlington first implemented RCV in 2005 and repealed it in 2010 following a scandal occurring
with a mayor who had been elected using RCV without majority support in the first round of
voting. Subsequent to the production of this report by the Ranked Choice Voting Resource
Center, Burlington has reinstated the use of RCV, beginning this year.
ATTACHMENT 1
Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center www.rcvresources.org Last Updated June 2020 Ranked choice voting (RCV) is a proven voting method that has been used for major elections in the U.S. and other countries for over a century. Multi-winner RCV was invented in the 1850s, as a proportional representation system to be used in multi-winner elections. In the 1870s, it was adapted to the single-winner form. It is sometimes referred to as “instant runoff voting," “preferential voting,” "proportional representation," "single transferable vote" and a number of other names. CURRENT USE IN U.S. ELECTIONS City, State Year Adopted Election Contest Multi- and/or Single-Winner RCV Resource Folder Basalt, Colorado Passed 2002 (first use 2020) Mayor Single-Winner Basalt Resources Benton County, Oregon Passed 2016, Use Beginning 2020 Countywide Elections Single-Winner Benton County Resources Berkeley, California 2004 (first use 2010) Mayor, City Council, and City Auditor Single-Winner Berkeley & Alameda County Resources Cambridge, Massachusetts 1940 (first use 1941) City Council and School Board Multi-Winner Cambridge Resources Eastpointe, Michigan 2019 City Council Multi-Winner Las Cruces, New Mexico 2018 (first use 2019) City Elections Single-Winner Maine Passed 2016 (first use 2018) U.S. House and Senate Primary and General Elections, Statewide and State Assembly Primaries Single-Winner Maine Resources Minneapolis, Minnesota 2006 (first use 2009) Mayor, City Council, Park Board, and Tax Board Single- and Multi-Winner Minneapolis Resources
2 Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center www.rcvresources.org Last Updated June 2020 CURRENT USE IN U.S. ELECTIONS City, State Year Adopted Election Contest Multi- and/or Single-Winner RCV Resource Folder Oakland, California 2006 (first use 2010) Mayor, City Council, City Attorney, City Auditor, and School Director Single-Winner Oakland & Alameda County Resources Payson, Utah 2018 (first use 2019) City Elections Single-Winner and Sequential IRV Portland, Maine 2010 (first use 2011) Mayor Single-Winner Portland Resources San Francisco, California 2002 (first use 2004) Mayor, City Attorney, Board of Supervisors, Sheriff, District Attorney, Treasurer, Assessor-Recorder, and Public Defender Single-Winner San Francisco Resources San Leandro, California 2000 (first use 2010) Mayor, City Council Single-Winner San Leandro & Alameda County Resources Santa Fe, New Mexico Passed 2008 (first use 2018) Mayor, City Council, and Municipal Judge Single-Winner Santa Fe Resources St. Louis Park, Minnesota 2018 (first use 2019) Mayor and City Council Single-Winner St. Paul, Minnesota 2009 (first use 2011) Mayor and City Council Single-Winner St. Paul Resources
3 Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center www.rcvresources.org Last Updated June 2020 CURRENT USE IN U.S. ELECTIONS City, State Year Adopted Election Contest Multi- and/or Single-Winner RCV Resource Folder Takoma Park, Maryland 2006 (first use 2007) Mayor and City Council Single-Winner Takoma Park Resources Telluride, Colorado 2008 Mayor Single-Winner Telluride Resources Vineyard, Utah 2018 (first use 2019) City Elections Single-Winner and Sequential IRV CURRENT USE IN U.S. DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES State Year Adopted Election Contest Notes Resource Folder Alaska 2019 (first use 2020) Democratic presidential delegates All voters Hawaii 2019 (first use 2020) Democratic presidential delegates All voters Kansas 2019 (first use 2020) Democratic presidential delegates All voters Nevada 2019 (first use 2020) Democratic presidential delegates To be used only for early voting; people who cannot attend caucus in person Wyoming 2019 (first use 2020) Democratic presidential delegates All voters
4 Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center www.rcvresources.org Last Updated June 2020 STATES WITH LOCAL OPTION LAWS State Year Adopted Election Contest Multi- and/or Single-Winner RCV Resource Folder Colorado 2018 (first use 2019) Mayor, City Council Single-Winner and Multi-Winner New Mexico 2018 (first use 2019) City Elections Single-Winner Utah 2018 (first use 2019) City Elections Single-Winner and Sequential IRV Virginia 2020 City or County Elections Single-Winner or Multi-Winner MILITARY AND OVERSEAS VOTING (UOCAVA) State Year Adopted Election Contest Notes Resource Folder Arkansas 2005 Federal Runoffs; Local Runoffs Adopted via Statute UOCAVA Resources Alabama 2013 All Federal Runoffs Adopted by Court Order UOCAVA Resources Louisiana Early 1990s State and Federal General Election Runoffs Also includes out of state military voters living in United States UOCAVA Resources Mississippi Mid 2000s Federal Runoffs Adopted to deter Department of Justice Suit UOCAVA Resources South Carolina 2006 State and Federal Runoffs UOCAVA Resources Springfield, Illinois 2007 Local, State, Federal Runoffs First used in 2011 UOCAVA Resources
5 Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center www.rcvresources.org Last Updated June 2020 FUTURE USE IN U.S. ELECTIONS City, State Year Adopted/Anticipated Election Contest Notes Resource Folder Amherst, Massachusetts Passed 2018, Use Beginning 2021 Town Council Single-Winner Carbondale, Colorado Passed 2002, Not Yet Necessary in a Race Mayor Single-Winner Davis, California Advisory Vote 2006, No RCV Law Yet in Place City Council Single-Winner Easthampton, Massachusetts Passed 2019, Use Beginning 2021 City Elections Single-Winner Ferndale, Michigan Passed 2004, Pending Implementation Mayor, City Council Single-Winner New York City, New York 2019, Use Beginning 2021 City Primaries and Special Elections Single-Winner Memphis, Tennessee Passed 2008, Pending Implementation City Elections Single-Winner Memphis Resources Santa Clara County, California Advisory Vote 1998, No RCV Law Yet in Place Board of Supervisors Single- and Multi-Winner Sarasota, Florida Passed 2007, Pending Implementation City Commission Single-Winner Sarasota Resources Vancouver, Washington Advisory Vote 1999, No RCV Law Yet in Place City Elections Single-Winner
6 Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center www.rcvresources.org Last Updated June 2020 PAST USE IN U.S. ELECTIONS City, State Year Adopted/Repealed Election Contest Notes Resource Folder Ann Arbor, Michigan Adopted 1974, Repealed 1976 Mayor Single-Winner Aspen, Colorado Adopted 2007, Repealed 2010 Mayor; Two City Council Seats Single-Winner Burlington, Vermont Adopted 2005, Repealed 2010 Mayor Single-Winner Burlington Resources Cary, North Carolina Pilot Program in 2007, 2009, Pilot sunset in 2011 City Elections Single-Winner Cary Resources Hendersonville, North Carolina Pilot Program in 2007, 2009, 2011, Pilot sunset in 2011 City Elections Single-Winner Hendersonville Resources North Carolina Used in 2010, Repealed as part of election code overhaul in 2013 Judicial Vacancy Elections (County- and State-Wide) Single-Winner North Carolina Resources Pierce County, Washington Adopted 2006; Replaced with Top Two in 2009 County Offices Single-Winner
7 Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center www.rcvresources.org Last Updated June 2020 RANKED CHOICE VOTING IN OTHER COUNTRIES Country Year Adopted Election Contest Notes Resource Folder Australia 1918; 1948 Senate, House of Representatives, State Assembly Elections Single-Winner for House; Multi-Winner for Senate; Both Used at State Level International Resources Fiji 1999 Parliament Single-Winner. Used in 1999, 2001, and 2006. Now using a closed party list form of proportional representation. Research paper on RCV in Fiji Malta 1921 Parliament; Local Government; EU Parliament Multi-Winner New Zealand 1992 Local Health Boards; Some Local Councils Multi-Winner Northern Ireland 1921 (Parliament of Northern Ireland); 1973 (local elections); 1979 (EU parliament) Local Elections; National Assembly; EU Parliament Multi-Winner International Resources Papua New Guinea 2007 Parliament Single-Winner Republic of Ireland 1921 Parliament; President; Local Elections; EU Parliament Single- (President) and Multi-Winner (all other elections) Scotland 2007 Local Council Elections Multi-Winner International Resources United Kingdom Various All Directly Elected Mayoral Elections Modified Single-Winner International Resources
City of Fort Collins Page 1
September 20, 2021
ELECTION CODE COMMITTEE MEETING
12:00 PM
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Arndt, Canonico, Ohlson
STAFF PRESENT: Carrie Daggett, Tammi Pusheck, Rita Knoll
CITIZENS PRESENT: None
1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2.PUBLIC COMMENT
Robbie Moreland commented on two outstanding election complaints and suggested an independent
election oversight committee should be formed. She suggested 18 months is a sufficient amount of
time to implement ranked choice voting for the April 2023 election if it is app roved at the November of
2022 election.
Jody Deschanes supported Ms. Moreland’s comments and addressed inaccurate comments about
ranked choice voting.
3.CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 27, 2021 COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
Vice Chair Arndt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Ohlson to approve the August 27, 2021
meeting minutes. The motion was adopted unanimously.
4.DISCUSSION ITEMS
a.Campaign Finance Provisions
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll asked about the scope of the review of campaign finance provisions
and whether it is separate or in conjunction with considering reverting to the state law.
Vice Chair Arndt asked about the main differences between the Colorado Fair Campaign Practices
Act and the City Code. Knoll replied they were almost identical when Fort Collins wrote its Code
with the exception of not addressing state candidates. She stated local provisions were written so
they could all be contained in one document.
Vice Chair Arndt stated candidates need more clear guidance on PACs as one example.
City Attorney Daggett noted there are state, but not local, guidelines for independent expenditure
committees.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he would like to keep big money out of City elections, and if that is
not possible, there should be as much disclosure as possible regarding who is contributing.
b.Redistricting
Chair Canonico noted redistricting must be complete by October 6, 2022 for the April 2023 election.
Interim City Clerk Pusheck noted this process has already begun and funds have been budgeted
for a consultant.
Councilmember Ohlson asked about the role of the consultant stating he does not recall a
consultant being used for redistricting in the past. He stated the earlier in the process the
redistricting can occur, the better, as candidates are contemplating running for office earlier.
Vice Chair Arndt concurred an earlier date for having district boundaries set would be beneficial.
ATTACHMENT 2
City of Fort Collins Page 2
City Attorney Daggett stated this is the first time a consultant has been used as the last redistricting
process took much longer than anticipated. She stated the consultant’s role will be to help prepare
and present options for the best way to determine the cadence for redistricting.
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll stated the consultant will be familiar with many different models used
in the country.
Vice Chair Arndt asked who sets precinct boundaries. Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll replied the
County sets those boundaries and the Code requires City precincts to match County precinct
boundaries in order to obtain accurate voter data.
Councilmember Ohlson commented on ensuring an incumbent is not redistricted out if his or her
own seat.
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll stated it may be difficult to have redistricting occur much earlier if
census data is used. She also noted there will be a public outreach component to the consultant’s
work.
Vice Chair Arndt asked about the City’s residency requirements for candidates. Chief Deputy City
Clerk Knoll replied candidates must have been a registered voter for one year and live in the district
at the point of taking office.
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll noted the consultant is to assist with different methodologies;
however, if there is no desire to change that, a consultant may not be needed.
City Attorney Daggett clarified a candidate must be residing w ithin the district at the time of
nomination, not the time of election.
Vice Chair Arndt noted state and federal congressional maps are based on population and that
seems to be the metric that makes the most sense.
Chair Canonico asked about the projected cost of the consultant. Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll
replied it was between $80,000 and $90,000. She stated staff can put together options based on
population and the consultant may not be necessary if the methodology is not changing.
Councilmember Ohlson questioned the need for the consultant, particularly at that cost.
City Attorney Daggett noted the scope of work for a consultant has yet to be written. She stated the
redistricting triggers per the Code will be outlined and may need to be adju sted.
c. November Elections
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll discussed time constraints and the timeline around moving elections
to November. She noted there are currently no municipal elections in Larimer County in even
years. She noted the topic is slated for a more detailed discussion at the next meeting.
Councilmember Ohlson stated there is no reason to change to a coordinated election in odd years
and expressed support for coordinated even year elections beginning in 2024.
Chair Canonico asked if there would be anything that would prevent the extension of Council terms
should an April 2023 election not occur. City Attorney Daggett replied that would need to be a topic
of discussion for the Committee. She stated having the April 2023 election to fill terms could be a
possibility and stated the various aspects of the timing could be built into the ballot issue approving
any change to a coordinated election.
Vice Chair Arndt and Councilmember Ohlson commented on the benefits of having more voters per
election which may result from changing to coordinated elections.
City of Fort Collins Page 3
d. Ranked Choice Voting
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll stated the earliest ballot on which this item could appear would be
November 2022 and the earliest it could be implemented, should voters also approve a switch to
November elections, would be November of 2023. She noted the use of ranked choice voting could
only occur if the County uses a system certified by the Secretary of State for use in a ranked choice
voting election. She noted the November 2022 election would not be certified until about three
months after preparations for the April 2023 election would occur.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he would need to see some proof that implementation could not
occur by the April 2023 election and stated the consultant funding could be used to hire additional
staff if necessary.
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll noted candidate guidelines include elec tion information and there
would be differences based on which type of election is run, including different certification dates
and potentially different vendors.
Committee members and staff discussed certification dates and swearing in dates. City Att orney
Daggett noted a specific swearing in date could be set, but it would need to be far enough out to
allow for recounts.
Chair Arndt opposed the last timeline for swearing in and the immediately following retreat to
determine Council priorities.
Councilmember Ohlson stated the Committee needs to know what resources are needed in order
to implement ranked choice voting for the April 2023 election, if approved in November of 2022.
e. Public Financing of Elections
Interim City Clerk Pusheck stated interns are working on collecting data from peer cities and will be
returning with information during the first quarter of 2022.
f. Election Oversight Board
Interim City Clerk Pusheck stated interns are working on collecting data from peer cities and will be
returning with information during the first quarter of 2022.
g. Partisan/Non-partisan Elections
City Attorney Daggett asked if the Committee views this as an immediate issue or more of a long -
term topic.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he has preferred non-partisan elections; however, he believes those
have not occurred in practice in years, therefore, he would rather see partisan elections. He
suggested the topic could still be placed on the same ballot with other questions.
City Attorney Daggett noted the main change with a partisan election involves the establishment of
political parties to determine who candidates on the ballot would be.
Chair Canonico supported prioritizing ranked choice voting and November elections over changing
to partisan elections. Councilmember Ohlson agreed with prioritizing those; however, he suggested
they could potentially all move forward simultaneously.
City Attorney Daggett requested a prioritization of the seven items.
Councilmember Ohlson noted redistricting has to be done. Vice Chair Arndt stated she would like
to have that done by April.
Councilmember Ohlson suggested the next priority should be campaign financing improvements,
followed by November elections and ranked choice voting.
City Attorney Daggett noted the budgeting process will be starting again in March and April and
having some direction on public election financing could be beneficial at that time.
City of Fort Collins Page 4
Councilmember Ohlson suggested public financing and the election oversight committee would be
the next priorities.
5. OTHER BUSINESS
6. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 1:26 PM.
City of Fort Collins Page 1
February 28, 2022
ELECTION CODE COMMITTEE MEETING
12:00 PM
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Arndt, Canonico, Ohlson
STAFF PRESENT: Kyle Stannert, Rita Knoll, Ryan Malarky, Tammi Pusheck, Carrie Daggett, Anissa
Hollingshead
CITIZENS PRESENT: Joe Rowan, Robbie Moreland, Jody DesChenes, Steve Lucas
1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2.ROLL CALL
3.PUBLIC COMMENT
Joe Rowan suggested items being discussed for ballot consideration should be brought forward by
citizens, not Council. He also stated there needs to be more robust conversation about the implications
and costs of making various changes to the election process.
Robbie Moreland stated she is looking forward to the discussion on ranked choice voting and she
presented postcards from residents in support of the placement of the topic on the November ballot.
She commented on the difference between the City and state regarding disclosure requirements for
contributions collected by independent expenditure groups.
Jody DesChenes expressed support for the placement of ranked choice voting on the November ballot.
She stated ranked choice voting is not more difficult nor more expensive than a regular election.
Steve Lucas, Citizens for a Sustainable Economy, commented on myths regarding successes of ranked
choice voting. He cited various election situations and stated ranked choice voting disenfranchises
voters. He also stated moving elections to November will increase election costs. He commented on
the number of towns that have repealed ranked choice voting.
4.PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP
Mayor Arndt stated the costs associated with ranked choice voting should be researched and she
concurred the disclosure requirements for independent expenditure committees should be changed.
Councilmember Ohlson concurred. Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll noted that would require a Code
change.
Chair Canonico requested additional information on communities that have repealed ranked choice
voting. Councilmember Ohlson concurred that would be valuable information to have for the upcoming
work session.
5.CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 10, 2022 COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to adopt and approve the meeting
minutes of January 10, 2022. The motion was adopted unanimously.
6.REDISTRICTING UPDATE
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll stated the County’s redistricting data has recently been received and GIS
is now moving forward with the City’s efforts. She stated the plan is for an April or May presentation of
the information.
ATTACHMENT 3
City of Fort Collins Page 2
7. ELECTION TIMING AND ADMINISTRATIVE OPTIONS DISCUSSION
City Clerk Hollingshead stated staff would like to walk through potential alternatives for a work session
discussion. She discussed pros and cons of election timing in terms of maintaining April elections or
moving to November elections of either odd or even years.
Councilmember Ohlson commented on the direction being provided to staff to be prepared for an April
2023 election.
Chair Canonico asked when the state will be requiring counties to be prepared to handle ranked choice
voting. City Clerk Hollingshead replied it is a soft requirement for November of 2023.
Members discussed the various effects of changing from April to November elections , particularly on
Council terms.
City Attorney Daggett noted any changes to Council terms that would result from a sw itch to November
elections would also need to be part of the voter approval, but would not necessarily need to be written
into the Charter.
Mayor Arndt asked if there are other municipalities that conduct local elections in November of odd
years. City Clerk Hollingshead replied there are many, including Loveland and Greeley.
City Clerk Hollingshead presented information regarding the effects of April versus November elections
on ranked choice voting in terms of responsibilities. She also discussed what items would be included
on the ballots for April versus November elections and listed advantages and disadvantages of having
elections remain in April versus switching to November.
Members also discussed the effects of the timing of taking office for April versus November elections.
City Attorney Daggett noted the timeframe between the election and swearing in has increased due to
Charter changes that allow for more time for receiving overseas ballots and conducting recounts if
needed.
City Clerk Hollingshead discussed a meeting with County Clerk Myers regarding what the City could
anticipate in working with the County in coordinated elections. She discussed the cost allocation f or
coordinated elections and noted all ranked choice voting costs of those elections would be passed on to
the City.
City Clerk Hollingshead outlined the various deadlines that would change with a shift to November
elections. She also discussed public outreach and voter education regarding ranked choice voting.
She showed examples of ballots that include ranked choice voting and ballots for even versus odd
years.
City Attorney Daggett noted the County will be following state standards when conducting elections.
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll noted ranked choice voting is only an option for municipal candidates, not
school board.
Councilmember Ohlson noted changes, even if met with resistance initially, are always doable.
Mayor Arndt asked City Clerk Hollingshead if more candidates ran for office when ranked choice voting
was implemented. City Clerk Hollingshead replied in the affirmative.
Malarkey suggested an additional ECC meeting may need to be scheduled prior to th e March 21st
meeting in advance of the March 22nd work session. Members concurred and determined the
remaining items on this agenda will be discussed at that additional meeting.
City of Fort Collins Page 3
8. SCOPE OF WORK DISCUSSION ON POTENTIAL BALLOT QUESTIONS AND DIRECTION FOR
STAFF
9. CAMPAIGN FINANCE COMPARISON TO STATE LAW
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll stated, in most cases, the City Code is somewhat stricter and more
transparent than the state law, and the only major difference is related to the independent expe nditure
committees’ contribution reporting.
10. PROPOSED TIMELINE
11. FUTURE ELECTION CODE COMMITTEE DATES WITH SCHEDULING CONFLICTS
12. OTHER BUSINESS
13. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 1:33 PM
City of Fort Collins Page 1
March 7, 2022
ELECTION CODE COMMITTEE MEETING
12:00 PM
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Arndt, Canonico, Ohlson
STAFF PRESENT: Rita Knoll, Ryan Malarky, Tammi Pusheck, Carrie Daggett, Anissa Hollingshead
CITIZENS PRESENT: Robbie Moreland, Jan Kok, Eric Fried, Kathleen Schmidt, Sonya Ketting, Nick
Armstrong, Michelle Haefele
1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2.ROLL CALL
3.PUBLIC COMMENT
Robbie Moreland encouraged the Committee to refer ranked choice voting to the ballot.
Jan Kok supported replacing the current plurality voting system with an improved system, approval
voting. He discussed the system which involves utilizing the current type of ballot while allowing voters
to vote for as many candidates as they would like. He stated Fargo, North Dakota and Saint Louis,
Missouri have adopted the system.
Eric Fried supported ranked choice voting and opposed plurality voting. He noted Maine, Alaska, and
New York City use ranked choice voting.
Kathleen Schmidt discussed the disadvantages of plurality voting and the advantages of ranked choice
voting.
Sonya Ketting expressed support for ranked choice voting.
Nick Armstrong expressed support for ranked choice voting.
Michelle Haefele expressed support for ranked choice voting.
4.PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP
Mayor Arndt thanked Mr. Fried for discussing a new voting system.
Members thanked the speakers.
5.ELECTION TIMING AND ADMINISTRATIVE OPTIONS DISCUSSION
Mayor Arndt commented on the possibility of prioritizing changes, such as referring ranked choice
voting to the ballot first then considering changing elections to November.
Chair Canonico noted considering changing the election to November was a priori ty for the Committee;
however, ranked choice voting was not.
Councilmember Ohlson stated his first priority is campaign finance reform and he believes all changes
could be made at the same time. He stated he could support odd year November elections over even
year. He also stated if ranked choice voting is approved by voters in November, it would not
necessarily need to be implemented in an April 2023 election. He expressed personal support for
ranked choice voting and supported placing both items on the November ballot.
Mayor Arndt stated her first preference is also to put both items on the November ballot.
Members discussed wording for dealing with the possibility that ranked choice voting passes and
moving to November elections does not.
ATTACHMENT 4
City of Fort Collins Page 2
Chair Canonico asked when counties will be required to be prepared to hold ranked choice elections.
City Clerk Hollingshead replied the Secretary of State is recommending counties be prepared by
November of 2023; however, there is some discretionary language involved.
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll noted the issue is whether Larimer County will have the equipment that is
ultimately certified by the Secretary of State. If it does not have that equipment, it is not required to
replace equipment per the legislation related to ranked choice voting.
Chair Canonico asked if the City could be ready to do a ranked choice election in April of 2023 should
the ballot initiative to move the elections to November fail. City Clerk Hollingshead replied the most
challenging aspect would be dealing with contingencies through election day.
City Attorney Daggett stated there would still be an option to h ave a local April 2023 election even if
voters approve the change to November elections. Mayor Arndt stated that would be difficult for the
electorate.
City Attorney Daggett noted the work session agenda materials will go to print prior to the next
Committee meeting. Members discussed the topics to be included in the work session materials.
Councilmember Ohlson commented on his desire for all donors to any type of committee to be made
public. Members discussed concerns with donors being required to provide addresses which become
public information.
City Attorney Daggett discussed independent expenditures and requirements for small scale issue
committees, which are consistent with state law. She suggested changing the requirements for small
scale issue committees to be such that they would automatically switch to a full committee with regular
reporting requirements after reaching a certain threshold for independent expenditures.
Councilmember Ohlson stated he wants to see as much transparency and disclosure as possible.
City Attorney Daggett noted anyone who is receiving contributions for a political activity must register as
a committee. Any type of existing group, such as the Sierra Club for example, that happens to be
spending money in a City election is currently not required to disclose where the money came from ;
therefore, addressing independent expenditures is likely the best way to ens ure additional transparency
in those types of situations.
6. PROPOSED TIMELINE
City Clerk Hollingshead noted the next Committee meeting will be the day prior to the work session and
stated future meetings will focus more on campaign finance as well as redistricting.
Councilmember Ohlson asked about the scale of change in the Counc il districts that will result from the
redistricting. Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll suggested an entire reconfiguration of the districts could be
a possibility. She asked members to discuss whether that would be acceptable, or whether they would
prefer to keep the current district layout with additional balance. She noted the districts need to be as
balanced as possible population-wise, among other requirements in the Charter.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 1:18 PM
City of Fort Collins Page 1
May 9, 2022
ELECTION CODE COMMITTEE MEETING
12:00 PM
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Canonico, Ohlson, Francis
STAFF PRESENT: Marcus Bodig, Rita Knoll, Ryan Malarky, Tammi Pusheck, Carrie Daggett, Anissa
Hollingshead, Kelly DiMartino
CITIZENS PRESENT: Martha Coleman, Sarah Tar, William Russell, Nick Armstrong, Marge Norskog,
Robbie Moreland
1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
Martha Coleman discussed using Census data throughout her career as a geographer, including to
assist with state redistricting. She presented a map option for City redistricting that would keep the
current districts similarly shaped with the fewest boundary changes possible and a maximum deviation
of 8.4%, which is within the 10% threshold. Additionally, she stated the map keeps Councilmembers
within their districts, does not create unnecessary changes, and primarily maintains County precincts.
Sarah Tar expressed support for referring ranked choice voting to the ballot and commented on the
success of the public outreach campaign related to the topic.
William Russell expressed support for keeping the City’s district boundaries as close to the current
boundaries as possible.
Nick Armstrong expressed support for option two presented by staff for redistricting. He also
commented on needed infrastructure in the northeast part of town and expressed support for ranked
choice voting.
Marge Norskog commented on the proposed redistricting options expressing concern about possibly
dividing her neighborhood which has four distinct boundaries and should be represented by one
Councilmember.
Robbie Moreland expressed support for the draft ranked choice voting ballot language as well as for the
campaign finance Code changes. She thanked the Committee for its work on the issues.
4.PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP
City Attorney Daggett noted there are different redistricting, or reapportionment, processes at the state
level and at other levels; the City’s process is driven mainly by the Charter with some constitutional
principles that have been applied. She noted the standard that is most critical for this process is what is
laid out in the Charter and requires six contiguous, reasonably compact districts, each of which shall
consist of contiguous, undivided general election precincts, and, to the extent reasonably possible, an
equal number of inhabitants. She noted it will therefore be important to ensure contiguity and
compactness when considering redistricting in the city.
Chair Canonico asked if there is anything problematic with Ms. Coleman’s suggested option. City
Attorney Daggett replied it should be considered whether the contiguity and compactness are
compromised and whether the 8.4% deviation is acceptable when other options have a much smaller
level of deviation. Chair Canonico clarified the staff option two has a 9% deviation and option one has
5.19%.
ATTACHMENT 5
City of Fort Collins Page 2
Councilmember Ohlson stated Ms. Coleman’s option three seems to be a better option as it is not as
dramatic a shift from the historic precedent. He commented on the fact that some of the districts will
naturally be more compact than others.
Mayor Pro Tem Francis expressed concern about the dramatic changes contemplated in the two staff-
proposed options. She encouraged additional analysis by staff of the option presented by Ms.
Coleman. Marcus Bodig, GIS Manager, replied staff has already determined the option to be viable
and accurate.
Chair Canonico concurred the two staff-proposed options were concerning in the changes they
proposed and stated option three achieves the requirements of the Charter.
City Attorney Daggett suggested staff and the Committee may want to take a bit more time to examine
the third option. She also suggested moving the next Committee meeting up to allow for one more prior
to the June 21st Council meeting, the agenda for which includes this item and other election-related
items.
5. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 18, 2022 COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
Councilmember Ohlson made a motion, seconded by Chair Canonico, to approve the minutes of the
April 18, 2022 Committee meeting. The motion was adopted unanimously.
6. PRESENTATION OF REDISTRICTING OPTIONS AND POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION
(**Secretary’s Note: This topic was discussed as part of Public Comment and Follow-up.)
7. REVIEW OF POTENTIAL BALLOT QUESTIONS
City Clerk Hollingshead presented proposed ballot question language and potential Charter language
changes.
Councilmember Ohlson supported the language provided for both the ranked choice voting and
November elections ballot questions.
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll asked if there is a preference for the order of the questions on the ballot,
which is how they should be presented in the agenda materials for the full Council.
City Attorney Daggett noted the language was developed to ensure the passage of either or both items
would not create issues.
Mr. Armstrong suggested the City create some type of educational video or FAQ page describing the
difference between the current election system and the election system that would exist with ranked
choice voting and November elections.
8. REVIEW OF POTENTIAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE CODE AMENDMENTS
City Attorney Daggett noted the yellow highlighted items represent substantive changes from the
previous discussion and she outlined those changes. Members and staff discussed mailing list
purchasing and in-kind donations of services provided versus volunteering. Mr. Armstrong suggested
individuals who are asked to do something they otherwise do professionally should be required to
report the service as an in-kind donation.
Councilmember Ohlson expressed support for a $75 limit for an in-kind donation.
Mayor Pro Tem Francis noted not everyone has the ability to contribute $75 but can contribute skills or
time, and limiting that value to $75 could have unintended consequences for candidates who may not
have a network of individuals who can donate cash.
City of Fort Collins Page 3
City Attorney Daggett stated staff could return with language options and stated there may be some
value in distinguishing between contributions of work from more formal, organized providers and from a
person who may have certain skills in an area.
Members agreed to further discuss the in-kind donation topic.
City Attorney Daggett outlined additional potential campaign finance code amendments including
reporting threshold changes and language relating to political committees. Chair Canonico commented
specifically on billboard costs and some candidates reporting those as $75 in-kind donations.
Mr. Armstrong commented on campaigns relying on vendors to detail costs rather than putting the onus
on candidates to determine the value of certain in-kind contributions. Chair Canonico stated there
should be some responsibility on the part of the candidate to look into what other candidates were
charged for the same item.
Councilmember Ohlson commented on his desire to ensure transparency in in-kind contributions.
City Attorney Daggett stated there may be a way to guide candidates to carefully examine in-kind
contributions that are likely to be worth more than $75.
City Attorney Daggett outlined possible changes to election infractions and the use of committee funds
to pay penalties. Members agreed to further discuss certain issues.
Staff committed to working to find an earlier date for the next meeting.
9. PROPOSED TIMELINE
No discussion.
10. OTHER BUSINESS
None.
11. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 1:36 PM
MINUTES APPROVED AT THE MAY 31, 2022 ELECTION CODE COMMITTEE MEETING
May 31, 2022
ELECTION CODE COMMITTEE MEETING
10:00 AM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Canonico, Arndt, Ohlson
OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Gutowsky, Francis, Peel
STAFF PRESENT: Marcus Bodig, Rita Knoll, Ryan Malarky, Tammi Pusheck, Carrie Daggett, Anissa
Hollingshead
1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2.ROLL CALL
3.PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
4.PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP
None.
5.CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MAY 9, 2022 COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
Councilmember Canonico made a motion, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to approve the May 9, 2022
meeting minutes. The motion was adopted unanimously.
(**Secretary’s Note: Councilmember Ohlson arrived at this point in the meeting.)
6.PRESENTATION OF REDISTRICTING OPTIONS AND POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION
City Clerk Hollingshead outlined the history of the four options for redistricting and stated, based on the
previous meeting’s discussion, staff has presented what was then option three developed by a resident,
and a new option four which makes a slight change to option three. She stated there have been some
recent issues with population counts due to the County’s precincts not adhering to census block groups.
Marcus Bodig, GIS, further detailed the population count issue. Mayor Arndt asked how big of an issue
has been created. Bodig replied there are 10 to 20 instances of block groups being cut out of perhaps
500 or so.
Councilmember Ohlson asked why the City and County Clerk’s Offices do not coordinate on these
issues. City Clerk Hollingshead replied the two redistricting processes are independent as the County
must ensure it is adhering to state statute. It does not take into account the City’s process with
redistricting or elections in general as the County is governed by the Uniform Election Code and the
City is governed by the Municipal Election Code.
Councilmember Ohlson asked about the practical impact of the population count issues on the
redistricting options. City Attorney Daggett replied work has yet to be completed; however, staff is
attempting to focus in on the lines between the districts to determine where the precinct lines cut across
census blocks and look at what can be done to try to approximate.
Councilmember Ohlson asked if staff is requesting additional time rather than a formal
recommendation. City Attorney Daggett replied in the affirmative and stated staff has yet to determine
whether there will need to be changes, but would like to do those additional checks.
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll noted options three and four have been renumbered to one and two and
reiterated the only difference between the two is a slight change to one precinct. City Attorney Daggett
ATTACHMENT 6
City of Fort Collins Page 2
discussed the population of that precinct, 362. Bodig noted it does not take much of a population
change to affect the deviation.
Councilmember Gutowsky asked about the main reasons the original options one and two were not
deemed acceptable. Chair Canonico replied the resident’s proposed option three provided the greatest
continuity with the current districts and met all the necessary criteria. It was noted the ultimate decision
will be up to the full Council.
Councilmember Gutowsky stated she would like the original options one and two to still be considered
and noted a large piece of Old Town that was once in her district is now gone with the resident’s
proposed map.
Councilmember Peel also stated she would like all of the options to remain for consideration.
Mayor Arndt suggested going back to the original options one through four to eliminate confusion.
7. REVIEW OF POTENTIAL CHARTER AMENDMENT BALLOT QUESTIONS
City Attorney Daggett outlined the changes made since the last discussion of this item and asked if the
Committee wants to make a formal recommendation. Members discussed the ballot question
language.
Mayor Arndt asked the City Clerk her opinion on whether the election becomes coordinated and if
ranked choice voting passes. City Clerk Hollingshead replied Fort Collins seems to place a great deal
of value on flexibility and autonomy and holding municipal elections would allow for more autonomy,
such as paying for postage on return ballots. She stated there are areas for making a meaningful
impact on voter turnout that might accomplish some of the goals that are being sought from switching to
November coordinated elections. She commented on ways to increase voter turnout.
Members discussed the impact of holding municipal elections in November, but not having them be
coordinated with the county. Councilmember Ohlson stated he does not like the idea of voters
receiving two ballots in November at this time.
Members concurred they would support the amended charter ballot language related to November
coordinated elections and ranked choice voting.
8. REVIEW OF POTENTIAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE CODE AMENDMENTS
City Attorney Daggett commented on the updates that have been made based on the discussion at the
last Committee meeting. She requested input from members regarding mailing lists and how they are
treated in terms of contributions. Councilmember Ohlson stated he does not believe purchased mailing
lists should be able to be given to other candidates; however, the sharing of personally developed
mailing lists is not a concern. Other members agreed and requested staff prepare some language
related to the topic.
Members discussed contributions in kind and how contributions of services such as web design should
be addressed. Councilmember Ohlson expressed concern about the number of hours certain
professionals could contribute to a campaign that would greatly exceed $75.
City Attorney Daggett stated staff would work on additional language to address the provision of
services. She discussed the changes made to language regarding not allowing committee funds to be
used to pay penalties.
Councilmember Ohlson commented on the effectiveness of this committee but stated he did not want
all of the work done to not mean anything. He stated he believes there should be consequences for
non-compliance and stated he would support penalties not being allowed to be paid from committee
funds.
City of Fort Collins Page 3
City Attorney Daggett noted there is an escalation factor for fines, and multiple offenses eventually
result in a criminal offense. If someone is convicted, they are disqualified from serving. She stated the
list of offenses and associated penalties was placed in the Code in 2020 because the Committee at that
time wanted to create a predictable process. She noted this Committee could recommend changes to
the dollar amounts associated with the violations and noted there are still some items that are criminal
offenses.
Councilmember Ohlson opposed a minor fine penalty for blatant violations. Chair Canonico stated she
would like there to be room for errors to be made without it being a fatal flaw for candidates. City
Attorney Daggett noted the process that was put in place in 2020 calls for the Clerk to provide notice of
a complaint and for the candidate to have 7 days to correct. If corrected, the issue is resolved.
Additionally, she stated there is a provision that makes criminal knowingly violating the disclosure and
filing report with intent to fraudulently misrepresent campaign contributions or expenditures on a
disclosure report. Members requested staff prepare language regarding the topic.
Chair Canonico asked about penalties at the state level. Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll replied the state
has a daily penalty and there are municipalities with daily penalties; however, those are difficult to
enforce.
Councilmember Ohlson commented on the biggest violation he sees being related to monies not being
reported within the first three days of having committed the funds at the end of campaigns. He
requested staff work on language to tighten the issue of committing funds versus spending funds.
Other members agreed.
Members commented on campaign finance reports not being cumulative for total amounts raised and
total amounts spent. City Attorney Daggett noted staffing resources have made review of each
campaign finance report difficult and have led to public review being the primary source of complaints.
9. REVIEW OF TIMELINE FOR PRIORITIES
Chief Deputy City Clerk Knoll stated the redistricting ordinance will hopefully by heard by the full
Council at the two July meetings after an additional Committee meeting.
10. OTHER BUSINESS
11. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 11:50 AM
Considering Ranked Choice
Vo ting
Recommendations from the Election Code Committee relating to potential
ballot questions under consideration by the City Council
Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance and Ballot Language 06/21/2022
ATTACHMENT 7
2Ballot Language
CITY-INITIATED
PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT NO. ___
(Ranked Voting)
Shall Article VIII of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins, regarding the conduct of City elections, be amended
to:
·require that for all regular city elections after January 1, 2025, the offices of Mayor and of each District
Councilmember shall be elected using a “ranked voting method,” pursuant to the applicable Colorado statutes or,
for City-conducted elections, procedures and deadlines adopted by the City Council by ordinance;
·clarify the applicable law for coordinated elections; and
·make minor conforming edits; and
shall Article IX of the Charter, regarding recall, be amended to incorporate the ranked voting method set out in
Article VIII?
Ye s/For
No/Against
3How Municipal Elections are Governed in Colorado
Municipal Election Code (CRS Title 31)
•Applies to statutory municipalities –can choose by adopting an ordinance or resolution to
follow Uniform Election Code and conduct coordinated regular elections
•Applies to Charter municipalities conducting their own municipal elections unless supplanted
by municipal code or charter
Uniform Election Code (CRS Title 1)
•Applies to coordinated elections conducted by a county or counties, which can include
municipal contests
Fort Collins Home Rule Charter and City Code
•Article VIII prescribes the timing and conduct of municipal elections –shifting to November
coordinated elections requires voter approval to change
•Additional election administration provisions are found in Chapter 7 of the Fort Collins Code of
Ordinances –this supersedes the Municipal Election Code now in Fort Collins
Primary Drivers to Consider 4
•Vo ter participation
•Maximizing voter
turnout and
participation in
municipal races
•Costs
•Responsible and
effective use of
funding
•Professional administration
/ effective governance
•Confidence in results and
integrity of process
•Strong ability to be
responsive to voter needs
•Ability to fulfill election
responsibilities that cannot
be coordinated
Ranked Choice Voting
•Method of voting that
allows ranking 3 or more
candidates in order of
preference
•Provides ability for voters
to potentially select from
more candidates and
express preferences in a
single election event
5
RCV Factors to Consider 6
•Will voters have options to be
notified of ballot errors?
Requires in person voting
options using equipment.
•Paid postage for ballots (in
any election) –not possible
in coordinated elections.
•Vo ting locations and timing
available for in person voters.
•Determining voter intent
in different scenarios
involving over votes or
under votes.
•Batch elimination of non-
viable candidates.
•Ballot layout –number of
rankings, order of
contests, instructions, etc.
•Use of equipment for
tabulation.
•Manual tabulation
alternatives.
•Recount scope and cost if
required.
Vo ting Options Rules and Procedures Ta bulation and Certification
Costs
Administering RCV in April elections
•Equipment cost increases likely –can be negotiated
and potential options with partnerships & grants
•Possibly higher temporary staffing costs to support
RCV in any election
•Vo ter outreach and education costs
Coordinated elections
•Cost sharing formula means costs not determined until
all participating jurisdictions sign IGAs & certify ballots
•All RCV costs will be passed on to City –equipment,
software licensing, additional ballot length, staff
processing time, other implementation expenses
7
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA
8Voter outreach and education campaigns
For Questions or Comments, Please Contact:
THANK YOU!
Anissa Hollingshead, City Clerk
ahollingshead@fcgov.com 970-416-2995
-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 080, 2022
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
SUBMITTING TO A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CHARTER CONCERNING THE
USE OF A RANKED VOTING METHOD TO ELECT FUTURE MAYORS AND
COUNCILMEMBERS OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
WHEREAS, Article IV, Section 8 of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins (the
“Charter”) provides that the Charter may be amended as provided by the laws of the State of
Colorado; and
WHEREAS, Section 31-2-210, Colorado Revised Statutes, provides that Charter
amendments may be initiated by the adoption of an ordinance by the City Council submitting a
proposed amendment to a vote of the registered electors of the City of Fort Collins; and
WHEREAS, on May 17, 2022, the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance
No. 056, 2022, calling a special municipal election (“November Election”) to be held in
conjunction with the November 8, 2022, Larimer County General Election; and
WHEREAS, Article VIII of the Charter concerns the conduct of elections in the City of
Fort Collins, including Article VIII, Section 7, regarding the Certification of Election Results;
and
WHEREAS, Section 31-10-617, Colorado Revised Statutes, provides authority to
municipalities to choose to use a ranked voting method to elect the mayor or members of the
governing body of the municipality; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is of the opinion that a ranked voting method could offer
more expressive voting for Fort Collins electors, encourage participation in the electoral process,
and result in municipal representation that is better representative of the preferences of Fort
Collins electors; and
WHEREAS, the Council’s intent in adopting this Ordinance is to present to the City’s
electorate at the November Election, through the ballot title set in Section 3 of this Ordinance, a
proposed amendments to Article VIII and Article IX of the City Charter that would, if adopted,
provide that Fort Collins electors shall elect the City mayor and council members through a
ranked voting method, beginning with the regular City election in 2025, and for all elections
moving forward; and
WHEREAS, accordingly, the City Council desires to submit to the Fort Collins electors
the Charter amendment below.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
-2-
Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and
findings contained in the recitals set forth above.
Section 2. That the following proposed changes to Article VIII and Article IX of the
City Charter, requiring the use of a ranked voting method for all elections after January 1, 2025,
shall be submitted to the registered electors of the City as “Proposed Charter Amendment ___” at
the November Election:
ARTICLE VIII. ELECTIONS
Section 1. Applicability of state constitution.
The Council shall provide by ordinance for the manner of holding city elections. All ordinances
regarding elections shall be consistent with the provisions of this Charter and the state
Constitution. Any matter regarding elections not covered by the state Constitution, this Charter
or ordinance of the Council shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado relating to
municipal elections, or coordinated municipal elections, as applicable.
. . .
Section 7. Certification of election results.
(a) No later than the date specified by Council by ordinance tenth day after every city election
and, after verifying the total number of legal votes cast for each candidate and measure voted
upon, the Board of Elections shall complete a certificate declaring the results of the election. The
candidate receiving the highest number of votes for a particular office, as determined pursuant to
this Section 7, shall be declared elected to that office. In event of a tie, the selection shall be
made by the Board of Elections by lot after notice to the candidates affected. In case the
candidate elected fails to qualify within sixty (60) days after the date of issuance of the certificate
of election, tabulation of results in that contest shall be rerun with the disqualified candidate
being eliminated prior to any tabulation and the candidate with the nextresulting highest vote
shall be elected, and the candidate failing to qualify shall forfeit his or her office whether or not
such candidate has taken the oath of office. If there is no other elected successor who qualifies,
the office shall be deemed vacant, and shall be filled by appointment by the remaining members
of the council, as provided in Article II, Section 18. In the event of a mandatory recount or
recount by request, the Board of Elections shall complete an amended certificate declaring the
results of the election no later than the fifth day after the completion of the recount.
(b) For coordinated city elections (which are not administered by the City), the election shall be
determined and certified and any tie vote or recount shall be administered, as provided in the
applicable state law. The candidate receiving the highest number of votes for a particular office,
as determined pursuant to Section 7(c), shall be declared elected to that office.
(c) Ranked voting methods. Beginning in 2025, the candidate receiving the highest number of
votes for a particular office will be determined using a ranked voting method.
(1) For a City-administered election, the ranked voting method will be in accordance with
specifications adopted by the City Council by ordinance.
-3-
(2) For a coordinated election, the ranked voting method will be in accordance with, and
as provided by, applicable state law.
ARTICLE IX. RECALL
Section 3. Elections.
. . .
(d) Election results. If a majority of those voting on the question of the recall of any incumbent
from office votes "No," the incumbent continues in office. If a majority votes "Yes" for the
incumbent's removal, the incumbent shall thereupon be deemed removed from his or her
office upon the taking of the oath of office by his or her successor. If the officer is recalled,
the candidate for succession receiving the highest number of votes at the election
determined in accordance with Article VIII, Section 7, shall be declared elected for the
remainder of the incumbent's term. The candidate elected shall take office upon taking the
oath of office, which shall occur as the first order of business at the next regular or special
Council meeting. In case the candidate elected fails to qualify within sixty (60) days after
the issuance of a certificate of election, the candidate with the next highest vote shall be
elected, and if there is no other elected successor who qualifies, the office shall be deemed
vacant, and shall be filled by appointment by the remaining members of the Council, as
provided in Article II, Section 18.
Section 3. That the following ballot title, with its title and submission clause, is
hereby adopted for submitting Proposed Charter Amendment No. to the voters at the
November Election:
CITY-INITIATED
PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT NO. ___
(Ranked Voting)
Shall Article VIII of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins, regarding the conduct of City
elections, be amended to:
• require that for all regular city elections after January 1, 2025, the offices of
Mayor and of each District Councilmember shall be elected using a “ranked
voting method,” pursuant to the applicable Colorado statutes or, for City-
conducted elections, procedures and deadlines adopted by the City Council by
ordinance;
• clarify the applicable law for coordinated elections; and
• make minor conforming edits; and
shall Article IX of the Charter, regarding recall, be amended to incorporate the ranked
voting method set out in Article VIII?
-4-
Yes/For
No/Against
Section 4. That pursuant to Section 31-2-210(4) of the Colorado Revised Statutes,
the City Clerk is directed to publish in the Coloradoan a notice of the City’s November 8, 2022,
special election coordinated with Larimer County and to include in that notice the full text of the
proposed amendments to City Charter Article VIII and Article IX as st ated in this Ordinance.
Such notice is to be published within thirty (30) days of the adoption of this Ordinance and not
less than sixty (60) days nor more than one hundred twenty (120) days before said election.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 21st day of
June, A.D. 2022, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of July, A.D. 2022.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 5th day of July, A.D. 2022.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk