By John H. Gilbert, Sharon Everett
Published July 2nd 2008
Much misinformation has been written about that pilot. It is true that at this time there is no certified software for Wake County's optical scan equipment to count an IRV ballot. We knew that when we endorsed the pilot program knowing the IRV ballots from Cary would have to be hand-counted.
From the time results are available on election night until the board again meets to certify the results of the election, those results are unofficial. It is the responsibility of the elections board director and staff to administratively audit and reconcile the unofficial results prior to the board's certifying the results of an election. This audit and reconciliation is not a nonpublicized meeting; it is an administrative responsibility of staff. Any person wishing to observe this process would be allowed to do so. It begins the day after an election. This was done for the IRV in Cary just as it was done in all 100 counties after the second primary June 24.
Wake County has not compiled the entire cost of the second primary, but it is estimated to be approximately $300,000. That would amount to approximately $45 per vote. Compare that to the savings in the pilot IRV election. An informational brochure explaining the IRV process was mailed to all Town of Cary voters for an approximate cost of $9,000. The cost of sorting and hand-counting the IRV ballots was $552. A runoff election for the District B contest would have cost the Town of Cary approximately $24,000.
North Carolina set a record in May for the percentage of voters participating in the primary. About 38 percent of the voters went to the polls in May and marked their choices. Compare that with the 1.8 percent who voted in the second primary. Isn't it better to have a nominee selected with 38 percent of the electorate voting vs. 1.8 percent of the electorate voting? This can be accomplished with IRV.
John H. Gilbert, Chair
Sharon Everett, Secretary Wake County Board of Elections
Raleigh
(The length limit was waived to permit a fuller response to the article. The letter also was signed by the other member of the board, Thomas W. Steed, Jr.
Election Day '09 was a roller-coaster for election reformers. Instant runoff voting had a great night in Minnesota, where St. Paul voters chose to implement IRV for its city elections, and Minneapolis voters used IRV for the first time—with local media touting it as a big success. As the Star-Tribune noted in endorsing IRV for St. Paul, Tuesday’s elections give the Twin Cities a chance to show the whole state of Minnesota the benefits of adopting IRV. There were disappointments in Lowell and Pierce County too, but high-profile multi-candidate races in New Jersey and New York keep policymakers focused on ways to reform elections; the Baltimore Sun and Miami Herald were among many newspapers publishing commentary from FairVote board member and former presidential candidate John Anderson on how IRV can mitigate the problems of plurality elections.