House concurs on municipal ranked‑choice pilot that lets cities contract outside their county

Representative Stankwist moved to concur with Senate amendments to third substitute House Bill 75, which the sponsor described as a compromise to allow cities that want to participate in a municipal ranked‑choice voting pilot to contract with a county other than the one in which the city is located. "This is a compromise that existed in 2019," the sponsor said, adding the change "does not force a clerk to do something that they do not want to do."

Floor debate included questions about whether cities would realistically contract with other counties, whether software and programming would support ranked‑choice counts, and whether this change removes the sunset on contracting. The sponsor answered that many counties use compatible ES&S/Dominion systems and that some cities have already contracted across county lines. He said the amendment removes the sunset on the contracting option while the pilot itself has a separate sunset (noted as 2026).

Representative Bennion relayed specific practical concerns from a county clerk: in prior ranked‑choice mail elections contested ballots required manual adjudication at a higher rate (about a 10% increase), and longer ballots for mail ballots raise printing costs (noted in floor remarks as roughly an additional $200,000 per extra page in large elections). The sponsor said statute already allows clerks to pass on actual costs to municipalities and that the pilot will generate experience and data.

The House voted to concur with the Senate amendments and then took a final passage vote: third substitute House Bill 75 passed the House with 62 yes votes and 12 no votes and will be returned to the Senate for signature.