State high court refuses to force ranked-choice voting

Petition to get system operational for 2018 municipal election fails

Advocates of ranked-choice voting who want the city of Santa Fe to use such a system for the 2018 municipal election were rebuffed again Thursday, this time by the New Mexico Supreme Court.

An emergency petition asking the state’s high court to compel the City Council and mayor to implement the system, sometimes called “instant runoff,” was denied by a unanimous threejustice panel without explanation.

The court’s action could mark the end of last-ditch efforts by residents who have been pushing for the city to launch the voter-approved election format March 6, 2018, when Santa Feans will cast ballots for a new mayor and fill four City Council seats. Supporters of the election system have argued that usable software will be available for city voting machines by then, and that under a city charter amendment approved by voters nearly a decade ago, the city must use it.

The City Attorney’s Office, in a written response filed with the state Supreme Court last week, disputed the petitioners’ claims about the system’s readiness. It said the ranked-choice software provider has missed key deadlines and has not yet met conditions in the charter language that would ensure a functioning system.

One aspect of that assurance would be certification of the software by the New Mexico Secretary of State’s Office, which is scheduled to take place next week.

Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, in an affidavit filed with the ranked-choice advocates’ Supreme Court petition, said she believes certification of the software by Sept. 30 “allows plenty of time to have the software and machines tested by the

municipal clerk in preparation for” the city election.

City Attorney Kelley Brennan and Assistant City Attorney Zach Shandler, in their response, wrote that the city’s 2018 election cycle already has begun and that candidates have been operating for weeks and even months under the expectations of existing rules. They singled out Councilor Ron Trujillo, who formally announced his candidacy for mayor in March, as an example.

“As always, our focus is on administering another successful election process this March, and we look forward to implementing ranked-choice voting following this cycle,” City Clerk Yolanda Vigil said in a statement Thursday after the Supreme Court order was issued.

The City Council voted twice this year to hold off on ranked-choice voting until after the 2018 municipal elections, arguing there was too much uncertainty about the software and how the ranked-ballot system would operate to move forward.

Vigil told councilors at their second discussion on the matter that she believed she would need six months to a year to sufficiently educate voters on the ranked-choice system. Toulouse Oliver, in her affidavit, said she believed an education campaign could be done between the end of September and the March election.

But a majority of city councilors said they didn’t want to chance having a botched election.

“There’s too many unknowns,” Councilor Mike Harris said at the time, “and there’s too much at stake.”

Councilor Joseph Maestas, on the other hand, was among the minority. “I think there’s issues with the timeline,” Maestas said in late July. “I understand that. But I think they can be overcome.”

Maestas is now one of three city councilors, alongside Trujillo and Councilor Peter Ives, to enter a wide-open race to succeed Gonzales as mayor. More candidates for what will be a higher-paid mayor’s position could yet step forward.

Under the system Maestas wanted to implement in March, voters would rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate received more than 50 percent of the vote, the lowest-scoring candidate would be eliminated from the contest and their votes would be distributed to voters’ secondchoice candidates. The totals would be counted again until one candidate is elected with a majority of votes.

At least some mathematicians say the ranked-choice system would not necessarily ensure a candidate wins a majority of votes. Some voters might vote for only one candidate, and therefore would have no votes to redistribute to a second choice.

The high court’s ruling means Santa Fe’s first full-time mayor will be elected in March based on a plurality system. This same system was in place in 2014, when Gonzales won a three-way race with 43 percent of the vote.

Advocates of the ranked-choice system say a race without an incumbent or with many candidates is perfectly suited to ranked choice.

“We’re likely to get candidates elected with 30 percent of the vote, or less, which is not acceptable,” said Maria Perez, director of FairVote New Mexico and one of the petitioners.

Perez said she was disappointed by the court’s decision but that she did not consider ranked choice in Santa Fe in 2018 to be “a closed door.”

“We are exploring all legal options,” she said, “but we haven’t decided what the next move is going to be.”

Teresa Leger, counsel for the petitioners, said they were considering whether to file a case in District Court.

Given more candidates in city races, “voters’ prescient decision to elect their officials with majority support is needed now more than ever,” Leger wrote in an email.

A ranked-choice election system was approved by voters in 2008 as an amendment to the city charter, which stipulated that the format must be implemented in either the 2010 municipal election or as soon thereafter as the equipment and software “for tabulation of votes and the ability to correct incorrectly marked, in-person ballots” was available at a reasonable price.

Contact Tripp Stelnicki at 505-428-7626 or tstelnicki@sfnewmexican.com.