ST. MARYS’ PLURALITY DILEMMA

By R. A. Pearson

On March 8, 2010, the St. Marys City Council faced an overflow crowd at City Hall to attend a 1:00 p.m. meeting concerned with changing the local election methods from winning by a plurality (the most votes) to winning by a majority (one over half). Two weeks before this meeting the St. Marys City Council, some of whom can be a little condescending at times, had questioned exactly how much interest residents had about changing the election method when only 21 people attended a public hearing to discuss the issue. The interest seemed to shock the movers and shakers of the City as former political leaders, press and bloggers, and enough lawyers to double the bar membership of a small Banana Republic, crowded into the room and packed the hall outside the room while speakers barraged them with opinions.

One of the first to address the City Council was Adam Jacobson, chairman of the Camden County Republican Party, one of the primary movers in the attempt to change the election process. When he asked the crowd if they support changing from plurality to majority elections, perhaps 85 to 90% of the people in the room stood up. Jacobson continued by saying, “There’s absolutely no reason this can't be put on the ballot for a referendum in November. It should be a no-brainer.” He also encouraged simple wording on the ballot.

Barbara Ryan told council members, “Every decision made in this room is determined by a majority vote except the process of putting you there. Why wouldn’t the election of our city leadership be determined by the same method?”

St. Marys changed to plurality elections in 1996. Since then only two candidates have won by a majority vote and they were in two candidate races. Most races have had at least three candidates and the winner received less than 50 % of the votes, a plurality (the most) not a majority (one over half).
Councilman Sidney Howell is the only member of the current City Council elected by a majority vote.

Former county commissioner Artie Jones Jr. said runoff elections are costly (an objection to runoffs expressed throughout the discussion) and expressed concerns about a suggestion to create single member districts and drop at-large voting for council seats. Jones indicated St Marys was about 20% African-American and 5% Hispanic and advised, “Why don't we wait until the census results to determine where residents live?” The question of moving voting in St. Marys to district instead of the current post voting was announced by Mayor Bill Deloughy as a topic for the referendum and discussion during his opening statements.

Alex Kearns took the room by storm when she proposed a type of voting which allowed the voter to list their preferences for candidates in numerical order at the time of the original election thus bypassing the need for a runoff election even in a multi-candidate race. This type of election is called an Instant Runoff Voting (IRV). The basic idea is the voters rank candidates in order of choice: 1, 2, 3 and so on. It takes a majority to win. If anyone receives a majority of the first choice votes, that candidate is elected. If not, the last place candidate is defeated, just as in a runoff election, and all ballots are counted again, but this time each ballot cast for the defeated candidate counts for the next choice candidate listed on the ballot. The process of eliminating the last place candidate and recounting the ballots continues until one candidate receives a majority of the vote. With modern voting equipment, all of the counting and recounting takes place rapidly and automatically.

Kearns pointed out IRV encourages positive, issue-oriented campaigning, it eliminates the “spoiler” dynamic in elections, and it eliminates expensive, two-round runoff elections. She also indicated IRV has been used in the United States in various jurisdictions since 1912. Its popularity has increased more recently since 2002.. The crowd seemed to feel the IRV election process had merit and should be looked at for future elections in St. Marys.

After Kearns electrified the room, Charlie Smith, a St. Marys lawyer and former state representative, lowered the temperature a bit by indicating the council members needed to contact the U.S. Department of Justice before putting a referendum question on the ballot to make sure the city can hold majority elections. Smith believed the Justice Department would find problems in the plan to go from plurality to majority voting without some safeguards for minorities in the area.
However, Jim Stein, another lawyer and member of the Republican Party, said he had already checked with federal authorities and was told the city can change to majority elections if voters approve a referendum.

After the public had commented on the issue at hand, various members of the council lamented they had not been elected to their seats with a majority vote. Attendees at the meeting were relieved when the meeting adjourned before the council could adorn sackcloth and ashes to emphasize the point. While council members agreed voters should decide the issue, Mayor Bill Deloughy said the challenge is to draft a referendum question everyone could agree on.

The dilemma is there is no simple resolution to the problem. Almost everyone agrees on the concept of majority winners in municipal elections; however, the costs of runoff elections plus the poor turn out of voters in these elections seems hardly worth the cost of the runoff elections. Here is where the IRV style of election looks very appealing. In a day when electronic voting machines can be used to hold an election to allow voters to vote on which of 144,000 angels is dancing the best Tango on the head of a pin, this editor believes IRV elections can be used in St. Marys to eliminate runoff elections.

There is also a need to address the district versus the post form of election process. The concept of a representative being elected from and representing citizens of a specific district is as old as the English style of democracy brought to this country by the settlers of Jamestown and the Massachusetts Bay Colony. It became a fixture of the U.S. Constitution in the form of the House of Representatives and is a feature of the state government as both houses of the Georgia General Assembly are apportioned by population. Mr. Jones is right here; we will need the census to do this correctly.

The final item of concern on the issue was the date for the municipal elections. As Councilwoman Deborah Hase said, the referendum and voters should consider changing the years elections are held to coincide with county, state, and federal elections as a way to save money. This is a great idea. It would improve voter turn out and increase participation in city political awareness. For those who believe voters can not follow a national or state and then the local campaign, and the various issues at the same time, that is like saying a redneck can’t watch a fishin’ show on TV and chew tobacco at the same time. Of course they can.

In conclusion, the concept of the majority versus the plurality election may have a few hurdles to cross, including Justice Department scrutiny; however, it seems to be gaining support in St. Marys and may be on a ballot in a future election. Certainly the IRV promises to hold down the costs and inconvenience of runoff elections. St. Marys needs to move toward districts where a councilperson is elected solely from and represents that district, a time honored American tradition. Finally, municipal elections need to be moved to coincide with state or national elections to improve voter turn out and interest in city politics.

Editor’s note: The city of Woodbine, Georgia, has also initiated a ballot initiative to move from plurality to majority voting. An election will be held in the “Crawfish City” in the future on this issue.