Should the City of Minneapolis adopt Single Transferable Vote, sometimes known as Ranked Choice Voting or Instant Runoff Voting, as the method for electing the Mayor, City Council, and members of the Park and Recreation Board, Library Board, and Board of Estimate and Taxation without a separate primary election and with ballot format and rules for counting votes adopted by ordinance?

Here's how mayoral and council elections work in Minneapolis today: Two nonpartisan elections, in which voters choose only one candidate for each seat. The primary election narrows the number of candidates to two for each office. The top vote-getter in the general election wins the seat.

Here's how mayoral and council elections would change under instant-runoff voting: One nonpartisan election, in which voters rank the choices for each office. If no candidate captures more than 50 percent of the first-place votes, the candidate with the least number of first-place votes is eliminated from the count. Those ballots are recounted, with their next choices added to the totals until a single candidate gets more than 50 percent of the vote.

What elections would change to the new system if the instant-runoff voting ballot measure is approved? Minneapolis mayor, City Council, Library Board, Park and Recreation Board and Board of Estimate and Taxation.

Why proponents say instant-runoff voting would be superior: It would save money and time for voters by eliminating the primary, typically a low-turnout election. Voters could choose the candidate they really want, even if they don't think that candidate would win, because they would still have a voice in the election through their second-choice vote. It would reduce negative campaigning because candidates would realize a vote against their opponent doesn't necessarily result in a vote for them.

Why opponents say instant-runoff voting would be a mistake: The primary election gives dedicated voters an incentive to get involved, and provides more of an incentive for candidates to tell voters about themselves. Instant-runoff voting could put a crowd of candidates on the ballot that could confuse voters and swing the election to a candidate with little qualification other than a good get-out-the-vote effort.