Although some members expressed concerns, the City Council overwhelmingly voted in favor of moving along a proposed ordinance that would change the way Minneapolis residents vote in city elections.

The proposed ordinance, which would eliminate primary elections and make Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) the city’s voting method, will now go to the Charter Commission for approval. If approved there, it will go on the ballot this November and voters would have the chance to decide how they want to vote.

“I actually think this is a courageous move for the City Council and shows we are willing to take risks to improve our government,” said Councilmember Cam Gordon (2nd Ward) during the May 26 City Council meeting where the ordinance was approved. “We know that democracy is important in our government and in our world, but I think too often we don’t think about ways to improve it.”

The Council’s vote was a boost for those working on an effort called the Better Ballot Campaign, which has been pushing hard to get a question on the ballot this fall asking voters if they want future city elections to include instant runoff voting.

With instant runoff voting, voters rank candidates in order of preference rather than choosing one. When all the ballots are collected, first choices are counted. If no candidate receives a majority, the candidate who received the fewest votes is defeated. Those ballots are then recounted and the candidate listed as the second choice receives those votes. The process is repeated until a candidate receives a majority of votes. Switching to instant runoff voting would eliminate primary elections.

Mayor R.T. Rybak said he was a very tentative convert to the idea of IRV because he worried it would confuse voters and the execution wouldn’t work as smoothly as the idea. But he said he now supports IRV and told councilmembers that whether they agree or disagree, all they are doing is putting a question on the ballot and letting voters decide.

“There are some very informed people on both sides of this issue, and it will be a very rich discussion,” Rybak said. “If nothing else, it will create a discussion about voting, and there’s nothing we need more.”

Councilmember Paul Ostrow (1st Ward) said the Council’s action in moving the ordinance forward showed leadership. Now it will be critical to educate voters about IRV in the coming months, he said.

“I have struggled with this issue, because changing our voting system is a major step,” Ostrow said. “But I am a convert in this issue, because ultimately our current election system is broken.”

But Councilmember Sandy Colvin Roy (12th Ward) expressed concern that voters would be confused and said the education campaign for IRV is going to have to be more complex than anything that will fit into a 60-second television commercial. She also said the costs of implementing IRV is a concern, as is the legality of the system. Colvin Roy pointed out that the city went ahead with its “Stop on Red” program — which captured images of motorists running through traffic lights — when it was unsure of its legality and now is dealing with an “expensive cleanup” as the case winds its way through the court system. She also said the campaign for IRV will take time away from other issues.

“We’ll probably spend a lot of time working on this rather that getting more Democrats into the state Legislature,” Colvin Roy said.

Council President Barb Johnson, the lone vote against the proposed ordinance, said she wants to know what the cost of IRV will be and whether it’s legal before she supports it.

“I don’t think we have the answer to either of these, which is why I won’t be supporting it,” Johnson said.