Wide testimony for and against bill to set statewide standards for ranked‑choice voting

House Bill 1448 would clarify state law to allow and govern the local use of ranked‑choice voting (RCV) in county, city, town, school district, fire district and port district elections. The bill removes a statutory mismatch that limits RCV’s use in general elections by changing the requirement that nonpartisan primaries must winnow candidates to two and replacing it with a top‑five process for jurisdictions that adopt ranking.

Connor Schiff, counsel to the committee, opened the staff briefing by explaining the statute changes and technical ballot rules the bill proposes. He said the bill would require ballots to permit voters to rank at least five candidates and would establish ballot‑counting rules that preserve portions of existing state law while allowing jurisdictions to implement ranked ballots for single‑winner and multi‑winner contests.

Representative Gregerson, the sponsor, framed the bill as an optional framework for local jurisdictions: “It doesn't mean they have to. There's nothing in this bill that is a mandate.” He said the measure is intended to provide local governments clear standards and a work group to help the Secretary of State adopt rules, voter‑education materials and ballot‑design guidance.

Supporters told the committee standardized guidance would reduce uncertainty and help jurisdictions learn from other states’ experience. Shannon Grimes of the Sightline Institute said the bill “clarifies state laws so that local jurisdictions know what pathways they have for adopting ranked choice voting. And it starts the process for setting standards to ensure that all places have access to best practices around ballot design and voter education.” Chris Hughes of the Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center testified implementation resources and focused guidance can reduce burdens on local election officials and suggested the bill would let the state pull together best practices.

Proponents from community and voting‑rights organizations — including representatives of the Washington Voting Justice Coalition, Fix Democracy First and other local groups — emphasized RCV can be a remedy under the Washington Voting Rights Act and argued statewide guidance would reduce ad‑hoc local experimentation. Eric Gonzales Alfaro of Washington for Equitable Representation said the bill would “establish the highest standards when it comes to new election methods” and urged support.

The Secretary of State's office, represented by Brian Hatfield speaking for Secretary Steve Hobbs and Stuart Holmes, director of elections, opposed the bill in its current form. Brian Hatfield warned of “additional expense, the logistical problems, and the confusion” from moving to an algorithmic counting method and said early evidence from other jurisdictions shows differential ballot‑completion rates in lower‑income and minority neighborhoods. Stuart Holmes raised auditing concerns, noting that ranked‑choice tabulation and multi‑round recounts complicate pre‑ and post‑election audits and that publication of cast‑vote records, which many jurisdictions release to allow auditing, raises voter‑privacy considerations under current Washington exemptions.

Several witnesses who work with voters with disabilities and the Arc of King County urged including people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in implementation planning. Esther Warwick of the Arc of King County said, “People with intellectual and developmental disabilities can understand many things and that includes ranked choice voting,” and asked to be part of the work group and outreach planning.

Testimony included examples from jurisdictions that have implemented RCV and empirical references to rollout challenges. Supporters and opponents cited different interpretations of recent local experiences (e.g., Portland and New York City rollouts) and urged caution or state guidance accordingly. No formal committee vote occurred during the hearing; the committee concluded public testimony after a lengthy panel of witnesses and moved on to other bills on the agenda.