Amherst (Massachusetts) in 2018 adopted a new town charter that includes a switch to the use of STV for town elections. The switch has not yet been made but the desire is there. Amherst is also unusual in that it still uses townhall meetings where issues are hashed out publicly and openly. Although the recent adoption of a new town council charter signals lessening of this aspect of town politics and governance. The town also uses mixture of district town councillors and at-large councillors. Unlike the district seats, the at-large councillors allow representation to a voting block group thinly-spread across the town - if the voting system used is fair.
In the 2021 election it appears the system - Block Voting - is not great, but the way slates and voters behaved was very civilized and the council elected is diverse, by party, gender etc..
Amherst's town council consists of ten district councilors and three councilors-at-large. Two district councillors are elected from each of five districts in Amherst. so the town already uses multi-member districts, a prerequisite for STV. The three councilors-at-large are elected by the whole town. Each councilor serves a two year term, except for the first council where each member will serve a three year term Amherst has a long history, one with a Canada connection, although an unsavoury one. Amherst became a township in 1759. Township here means "a unit of local government, generally a civil division of a county." According to the Wikipedia article on Amherst When Amherst incorporated, the colonial governor assigned the town the name "Amherst" after Jeffery Amherst, 1st Baron Amherst. Many a colonial governor at the time. Several towns in the northeast corner of <north America bear his name. Amherst was Commander-in-Chief of the forces of North America during the French and Indian War who, according to popular legend, singlehandedly won Canada for the British and banished France from North America. Popular belief has it that he supported the U.S. side in the Revolutionary War and resigned his commission rather than fight for the British. Baron Amherst actually remained in the service of the Crown during the war—albeit in Great Britain rather than North America—where he organized the island's defence against the proposed Franco-Spanish Armada of 1779. Nonetheless, his previous service in the French and Indian War meant he remained popular in New England. Amherst is infamous for recommending, in a letter to a subordinate, the use of smallpox-covered blankets in warfare against Natives along with any "other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race".[9] For this reason, there have been occasional ad hoc movements to rename the town.[10] Suggested new names for the town have included "Emily", after famous poet Emily Dickinson. whose house still stands on a prominent Amherst street. ==================================================================== The Wikipedia article "ranked choice voting in the United States" says this: Amherst, Massachusetts adopted RCV in 2018 as part of a new town charter. The details of implementation were delegated to a Ranked Choice Voting Commission, with expected first use in November 2021 for the town council, school committee, and library trustees. All of these races will be in multi-member districts, varying from two to six members...." So the November 2021 election, which happened this last week, was to be run by STV.
But it did not work out that way. The Commission was organized as per a clause in the town's Home Rule charter of 2018. But the Commission asked for and was granted extension in late 2020 to postpone the switch to STV. Here is what happened according to the town's website. "Section 10.10 of the Amherst Home Rule Charter adopted on March 27, 2018 requires the Town Council to create a Ranked-Choice Voting Commission. In accordance with the Town Charter, the purpose of the Ranked-Choice Voting Commission is to propose: “… a measure to adopt and implement ranked-choice voting in Amherst.” “A voting method shall be considered ranked-choice voting if the voter ranks candidates in order of preference and a voter’s lower ranked choice does not impact the likelihood of a higher ranked choice being selected.”
The commission met, investigated and ruled in favour of change to RCV (STV), endorsing the use of Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method for transfers of votes [an unduly complicated method to my way of thinking but to each his own], and gave clear instruction in how to set up the computer program to count and transfer the votes. But the Commission found that the town needs state approval to use RCV -- and that is where the process stopped.
Commission report (Dec. 1, 2020) https://www.amherstma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/53914/RCVC_Report_2020-12-01 Concluding remarks of the Commission's report specify that "The most pressing action needed is to get a special act passed by the state legislature" so apparently the town itself cannot bring in ranked votes without this change and that is holding up the process.
But the commission concluded that the taking of that step and other steps as outlined "we believe will lead to a successful implementation of RCV in Amherst" -- apparently some time in the future. Here is some information on the 2021 elections as actually conducted without STV. 2021 election Nov. 2, 2021 Two slates
In thrifty New England style, they apparently did not engage in campaigning if it was seen to be wasted. One or the other slate only ran one candidate where the other group had the upper hand. and voters often cast just one vote, it seems, instead of the two or three allowed.
Amherst Forward ran just one candidate in District 3.
The Progressive Coalition of Amherst ran just one in District 4.
The Progressive Coalition of Amherst was lucky to win three of the four seats in those two districts.
Amherst Forward won one seat in those two districts. It also won six uncontested seats and two in the at-large election.
(I wonder if the PCA activists are kicking themselves for not contesting more seats - they won four of the seven seats they contested and let AF win six without opposition.
In District 4, Lopes was elected but had no running mate. Each of her supporters had two votes and probably would have voted for a second PCA candidate as well if there had been another in the running.
Amherst Forward endorsed 11 (including Walker). 3 in at-large contest,
nine of them were elected (including Walker) Progressive Coalition of Amherst endorsed 6 (including Walker); four were elected (including Walker) Also at least one Independent ran. Due to large number of acclamations, contests were only held in District 3 and 4 and for the at-large seats. In each contest, multiple seats filled. two in each district and three for the at-large election. in two of the three contests, mixed crops were elected - both Amherst Forward and Progressive Coalition of Amherst. In District 4 this was due to the most popular slate, the PCA, not running a full slate.
In the at-large contest, the mixed representation likely was produced by both Amherst Forward and the Progressive Coalition claiming Walker. Or so it appears. His vote total is larger than any other candidate, which leads one to think he got votes from both people who cast their other vote(s) for candidates of the PCA and also from people who cast their other vote(s) for candidates of the Amherst Forward group.
Amherst Forward ran two other candidates as well, as did the Progressive Coalition.
If Walker is supported by Amherst Forward, that group did in fact take all the seats. That is often the case in Block Voting - the largest group - whether a majority or not - takes all the seats, leaving none to other groups.
Or did a fair number of voters (perhaps Progressive voters) cast just one vote to select Walker, and not cast their other two? We can't know.
This is the kind of uncertainty that Block Voting allows. Better a voting system where each voter casts just one vote. Then you can know where you are and how many people actually support a slate.
The results District 1 no contest Cathy Shoen (AF) (re-elected by acclamation) Michele Miller (AF) (by acclamation) District 2 no contest Deangelis (AF) and Griesemer (AF) (both re-elected by acclamation) District 3 (Block Voting election) Jennifer Taub (PCA) (238 votes); Dorothy Pam (PCA) (227 votes) both elected (Ryan (AF) (incumbent) (190 votes) not elected) District 4 (Block Voting election) Anika Lopes (PCA) (568 votes and Pamela Rooney (who declined endorsement by PCA to run as an independent) (454 votes) both elected (Ross (AF) (incumbent) (451 votes) not elected) District 5 no contest Bahl-Milne (AF) (re-elected by acclamation); Ana Gauthier (AF) (by acclamation) At-large (3) (Block Voting election) Steinberg (AF), Mandi Jo Hanneke (AF) re-elected, Ellisha Walker (PCA) In District 3 and District 4 it looks like only three candidates competed. At-large Three to be elected. Six candidates Each voter casts three votes
3 PCA candidates 2 AF candidates (not including Walker) 1 Independent
Walker 3,164 votes (PCA) (also endorsed by Amherst Forward but Walker rejected the endorsement)
Hanneke (AF) (incumbent) 2,661
Steinberg (AF) (incumbent) 2,617
Viraphanh Douangmany-Cage (PCA) 1,701 votes
Vincent O’Connor (PCA) 1,087 votes
Robert Greeney (Ind) 1,030 votes
all others (write-in candidates) 27
total 12,260
blank 2599
total possible votes: about 14850 (thus about 5000 voters voted in this election)
=========================================
An article in town newspaper describes the election as a success, which I see as somewhat of a miracle due to the multiple vote method that was used.
"Amherst’s next Town Council, when sworn in next January, will be more racially diverse, will have more women serving on it and will have six new members..."
(from
When voters can cast multiple votes, usually the largest single party, whether majority or less than half the voters, can take all the seats, leaving none to other groups. It appears though that in the election contests this time, the "parties" did not run full slates and two of the election contests in Amherst's 2021 election produced mixed representation, party slate wise.
Perhaps the large number of blanks (votes not cast) accounts for that. Perhaps voters to a degree treated the election contest as single voting in a multi-seat district. Very fair of them.
Coverage of the election from the Progressive Coalition perspective is at:
https://www.amherstindy.org/2021/11/03/progressive-coalition-of-amherst-celebrates-increased-diversity-of-incoming-town-council-school-committee/
================================================
2018 election
three at-large seats were open
each voter could cast three votes
District seats
two open seats for councillors in each of the 10 precincts
each voter could cast two votes, either for the listed candidates or can write-in a name
Small number of voters involved.
for town councillors, town was divided into 5 districts and 10 precincts.
each district elects two, each district has two precincts.
Votes from two precincts were lumped together to elect a district's two reps.
district 1 (Precinct 1 and 3) Schwartz 726; Schoen 682; Usher 324 Povenelli 317
district 2 (Precinct 2 and 6) two leaders: Griesemer 1400 1100
district 3 (Precinct 4 and 10) two leaders: Ryan 400 Pam 500
district 4 (Precinct 5 and 9) two leaders: Ross 900 Schreiber 800
district 5 (Precinct 7 and 8) two leaders: Dumont 1500 Bahl-Milne 1500
I am not sure how the precincts are organized into districts, perhaps it is some randomized procedure to prevent gerrymandering.
At-large (the district covers the whole town)
each voter cast up to 3 votes
total possible votes 28,497
7098 blank, about 20,000 votes were cast by the 9499 voters
Hanneke 4883 (elected)
Brewer 4293 (elected)
Steinberg 4220 (elected)
Pisrang 3717
Kusner 2114
Greeney 1992
all others 180.
No candidate had support of more than half the voters.
Obviously a fairer system is needed to ensure that votes cast are used to elect someone.
===================================
Kommentare