Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Irvine council directs staff to place ranked‑choice voting ordinance on November ballot after mixed public comment
Summary
Following more than an hour of public testimony for and against ranked‑choice voting (RCV), the council voted to direct staff to prepare a ballot package for a voter‑enacted ordinance on Nov. 3, 2026. Staff and outside groups warned of cost and technical uncertainties; the motion passed 5–2.
Irvine — After extensive public comment and technical questions about implementation, the City Council voted to direct staff to prepare a ballot package so voters can decide whether to adopt ranked‑choice voting (RCV) for Irvine municipal elections this November.
Public testimony split sharply. Supporters — including youth organizers, local RCV advocates and the finance commission chair — argued RCV increases majority support, encourages positive campaigning and can be less costly than a two‑round system because it eliminates separate runoffs. "Place it on the ballot and let Irvine voters decide," Finance Commission chair Don Geller told the council. Opponents cautioned that RCV is more complicated for some voters and raised cost and timing concerns.
Technical concerns and costs: Staff reported county election compatibility and certification issues remain unresolved and that the Orange County Registrar of Voters could not provide a firm cost estimate because the county has not previously run RCV ballots. The staff report included independent cost scenarios from the Cal RCV Institute ranging from a modest first‑year implementation cost to a higher estimate; staff warned that a one‑time implementation cost would be borne by the city if Irvine were the only jurisdiction in the county to switch ballots.
Council action: Councilmember Tresita moved, and colleagues seconded, a direction to the city attorney and city clerk to prepare the ordinance language as a voter‑enacted ordinance and assemble required resolutions and impartial analysis for placement on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot. Council adopted the direction 5–2; Councilmember Carroll and Vice Mayor Mai voted no.
Why it matters: The council chose the voter‑approval route rather than adopting RCV unilaterally; that path requires the city to finalize language and ballot materials quickly to meet county timelines. Staff said practical deadlines make the July council meetings the latest opportunity to meet the November cycle.
Next steps: City attorney will draft a voter‑enacted ordinance and the ballot materials and return to council at the next available meeting. The county registrar will be engaged to determine final ballot formatting, certification steps, and any implementation costs that would apply if other jurisdictions do not adopt the same voting method.
