Like change? If you are a city of Vancouver resident and registered voter, you can usher some in or say no way.

The 1999 Charter Review Committee was successful in getting three proposed charter amendments on the Nov. 2 ballot for voters to ponder.

* Amendment 1 asks whether the city charter should be revised to authorize, but not require, the city council to use instant runoff voting to elect its officers. If the council wanted to exercise the option, it would have to approve the method 30 days prior to a candidate filing date.

Vancouver would be the first city in the nation to use the voting method, but that shouldn't scare us away. The method does work in other countries and can work here.

In most elections, the candidate with the most votes wins. But when there are three or more candidates, a person can end up winning even though he or she received less than the majority of voter support. The result? A majority of unhappy voters who felt their participation in the election meant nothing -- or worse yet, that their vote helped elect the candidate they least liked. The result of that? Possible voter apathy in future contests.

Instant runoff voting ensures the election of a candidate preferred by most voters. When filling out the ballot, voters rank candidates in the order that they like them: Instead of picking just one candidate, people can choose their favorite candidate and go on to pick out their second and third favorites and so on. If no candidate receives a majority of first rankings, the person with the fewest number of first-place votes is dumped from the list and his or her votes are applied to the voters' second picks. This process continues until one candidate has a clear majority.

Instant runoff is a choice-increasing method. Not only do voters more often elect a candidate who wasn't at the bottom of their list, but the method avoids the need for a primary contest. This means voters get a longer period to get to know candidates and their ideas. How many times has an incumbent won because voters never heard the ideas of challengers? How many times has name recognition taken over a race and eliminated a no-name but impressive visionary?

So what's the downside? The city would have to purchase thousands of dollars of equipment that can tally the out-of-the-norm ballots. Clark County Auditor Greg Kimsey estimates it would take $30,000 to $50,000. But in the long run, the city would most likely save money because of the elimination of primary races.

While passing the amendment allows the city council to consider using the election method, it does not require the city to adopt instant runoff voting or spend even one dollar. A cost analysis would certainly be a top consideration for implementing the system. The amendment deserves a solid "yes."

-- Elizabeth Hovde, for the Vancouver Columbian editorial board