This month’s election marked the second time Heber City voters have used the ranked-choice method in selecting the candidates they want for open positions. Though the city’s website lists several potential benefits that come through the still uncommon methodology, voters hold mixed feelings.
Heber City Recorder Trina Cooke said those opposed to the process are often don’t fully understand it or its benefits.
According to a document released by the Utah Ranked Choice Voting organization, the option first became available to municipalities in 2018 after state legislators passed HB 35 and Gov. Gary Herbert signed it into law.
Cooke said the method saves cities money, as there is not a primary election and allows people to support their favorite candidate with less worry that a split vote might land someone they find disfavorable in office.
When participating in a ranked-choice voting election, voters can order all of the candidates running for a position from their top choice to their bottom.
Then, when votes are considered, they are done so in rounds to determine who the overall preferred candidate is.
“In each round of ranked choice voting, the candidate with the lowest number of votes is eliminated,” Utah Ranked Choice Voting’s webpage states. “When a voter’s number one choice is eliminated, their second choice is included in the count for the second round. This process continues until the final round.”
Visualizations of the Heber City Council seat selections on the city’s website shows the process of elimination used to first select Mike Johnston, then Aaron Cheatwood and finally Sid Ostergaard.
The Park Record used popular local Facebook pages “Ask (Heber, UT)” and “Wasatch County Politics” to ask community members what they think about ranked choice voting.
Over 30 individuals weighed in on the conversation. Some simply commented “traditional,” some shared stronger opinions, and Steve Black opined “the Californians love this non democratic way.”
“The ranked voting process is ridiculous,” wrote Terri Bronson. “What was the purpose of this idiotic idea? Traditional is the best.”
Rick Sharp stated his frustration that voters couldn’t just vote for three separate candidates for the three positions. Rather, they were instructed to rank each of the 11 candidates.
Wasatch County Councilor Kendall Crittenden threw in his two cents as well. He said he would have liked the primary election that would have come as a part of traditional voting, as it would have brought 11 candidates down to six.
“Vote by mail and election day in person voting works, but let’s get rid of rank choice voting,” he said.
The only commenter who remained slightly open to the idea of ranked choice voting was Kent Gratteau.
“I’m hoping that the ranked choice process will prove to work well. With eleven candidates it was a bit challenging,” he wrote. “I think it will be much easier when there are far fewer candidates and fewer openings.”
Daniel Mahoney put a voice to the general consensus of the process.
“It has the right name,” he punned. “RANK voting!”
While Cooke wasn’t sure if Heber City has conducted any surveys to gauge public perception of ranked choice voting, she did believe those who support it are typically less vocal than those who don’t.
“The people who express dissatisfaction with it, … they don’t recognize the benefits of it fully,” she said. “I’m always happy to talk to people who want me to explain it to them so they can better understand it.”
She said she’d rather have people come to her for information than social media.