Ranked Choice Voting allows voters to rank candidates on the ballot according to their preference - 1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, etc. Voters cast their vote for their favorite candidate knowing that if he or she doesn't gather enough votes to win, their vote will count toward their second choice. In a single-winner election, votes cast for the least popular candidate are not "wasted", but rather redistributed to more popular candidates, based on the voters' second choices, until one candidate wins with a majority of votes.
About Ranked Choice Voting handout (pdf)
Ranked Choice Voting:
Ranked Choice Voting is the familiar runoff process done in a single election. Under the system, all ballots are tallied according to first-place choices. In a single-winner election, if one candidate wins a majority (50% + 1) among all first-place votes, that candidate is the winner.
If not, the candidate with the fewest first-place votes is eliminated and the ballots for this candidate are redistributed among the remaining candidates according to the second choices on those ballots. The process continues until one candidate has picked up a majority of votes.
Ranked Choice Voting works equally well when there are multiple seats to fill. The threshold for winning is adjusted depending on the number of seats to fill and a similar process of eliminating and electing candidates and redistributing votes occurs until all the seats are filled.
Complete the ballot by ranking candidates in order of preference.

Example, Office of Mayor or City Council District
Determine the threshold needed to win.

In a single-seat election, the threshold to win is 50% + 1 vote:

The first choice votes are sorted and counted. If the votes for any candidate equal or exceed the threshold, that candidate is the winner.
If no candidate receives the required number of votes to win, the candidates with the fewest votes are eliminated in a series of rounds.
The votes of the eliminated candidates are reallocated to the remaining candidates in accordance with the second and third choices marked on those ballots by the voters.
The rounds continue until one candidate has more than half of the votes or, when only two candidates remain, has more votes than the other candidate.
The threshold needed to win is 5,001 votes (10,000/2 + 1 vote)
| Round 1 | The first choice votes are counted. No candidate has received a majority of the votes cast |
| Round 2 | Because no candidate reached the threshold, the candidate with the fewest votes – Candidate E – is eliminated and the votes cast for this candidate are reallocated to the voters’ second choice candidates.
The votes for Candidate E are redistributed and go to Candidate A and B in accordance with the voters’ second choices. No candidate has a majority of the votes. |
| Round 3 | Candidate D now has the fewest votes and so is eliminated. Candidate D’s ballots are redistributed, but 200 of the ballots did not have a next choice marked on the ballot and are set aside as ‘exhausted’. The other 1,200 votes get redistributed to the continuing candidates in accordance with the voters’ next preferences.
Candidate A now has a majority of the votes and so is the winner. |
Example, two seats for Board of Estimate & Taxation and three seats for Park Board at large
Determine the threshold needed to win.

In a two-seat election, the threshold to win is 33% + 1:

Multiple seat counts are a little different but still quite easy.
The first choice votes are sorted and counted. Any candidate whose vote equals or exceeds the threshold is elected.
If any candidate has more votes than the threshold, that ‘surplus' above the threshold is transferred, unless the surplus is too small to affect the elimination of the bottom candidate.
All the ballots are transferred to remaining candidates in accordance with the second choices on the elected candidate's ballots. The surplus votes are transferred in proportion to the number of ballots each remaining candidates receives.
If after the surpluses have been transferred some seats remain to be filled, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and that candidate's votes are transferred in accordance with the next preference marked on those ballots.
The transfers of votes continue, round by round, until all seats are filled.
Examples of multi-seat elections are the Minneapolis Board of Estimate (2 seats) and Taxation and Park Board (3 seats).
The threshold needed to win is 3334 votes (10,000/3 + 1 vote)
| Round 1 | The first choice votes are counted. Candidate A has reached the threshold and so is declared the first winner. There is still one more seat to be filled. |
| Round 2 | Candidate A has more votes than the threshold – a surplus of 666 votes. The ballots that have Candidate A as their first choice are redistributed to the second choice candidate on each of those ballots. All 4,000 ballots are transferred, but at a fraction of a vote (666/4000 or .1665) so that only the 666 surplus votes are transferred in total.
Candidate C is the second choice on 3,000 of the 4,000 ballots and so 499.5 votes are transferred to Candidate C. Candidate D is the second choice on 1,000 of the 4,000 ballots and so 166.5 votes are transferred to Candidate D. |
| Round 3 | No other candidate has yet reached the threshold and so another round of transfers occurs. Candidate D is the candidate with the fewest votes and is eliminated.
The votes for Candidate D are redistributed to the two remaining candidates based on the next preferences indicated on the voters’ ballots – 116.5 go to Candidate B and 950 to Candidate C. A total of 100 voters did not mark a next preference and those ballots are ‘exhausted’. Candidate C has reached the threshold and is declared the second winner. |
Ranked Choice is a tested and accepted voting method now used in several jurisdictions across the United States - San Francisco (CA), Burlington (VT), Takoma Park (MD), Hendersonville (NC), Cambridge (MA), Pierce County (WA), Aspen (CO) and Minneapolis (MN) - and is pending implementation in more than a dozen other cities.
Strong voter education has resulted in high approval ratings in all of these jurisdictions and successful ballot measure campaigns are adding to the number of jurisdictions using Ranked Choice Voting every year.
Ranked Choice Voting is also used in democracies such as Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland and London.
It is also used in hundreds of colleges and by several organizations, including the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for the Best Picture award.
See full list of places and organizations using RCV across the country.
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions About Ranked Choice Voting
In state partisan elections, there is no requirement in Minnesota that candidates secure a majority of votes. The candidate with the most votes wins. This is not a problem when only two candidates compete on the ballot, but as the 2008 elections and a decade of gubernatorial contests have demonstrated, our "plurality-takes-all" voting system is no longer reliably producing majority winners in many elections.
In municipal nonpartisan elections, in which the top two vote-getters in the primary advance to the general election, RCV combines the primary and general elections into a single election. In state partisan legislative and statewide elections, in which primaries determine a single candidate from each party who will appear on the general election ballot, RCV can be used in the primary to elect a majority winner from party to advance to the general election. RCV can then be used in the general election when there are three or more candidates on the ballot to elect a majority winner without the additional cost and hassle of a second 'runoff' election.
Third, by replacing two-round elections with one instant runoff election, voters are offered more choice on the ballot and the ultimate decision will be made with the greatest level of citizen participation. This makes elections more competitive and meaningful.
Minnesota’s “plurality-take-all” elections are a holdover from an era in which there were usually only two parties on the ballot; they’re out of step with Minnesota’s growing political diversity.
Plurality winners are, unfortunately, becoming commonplace. Our last governor elected by a majority was Arne Carlson in 1994; now our legislative and federal races are trending this way too, with nearly 20 races decided by a plurality since 2002.
Ranked Choice Voting (a.k.a. Instant Runoff Voting) gives voters more choice while eliminating the problems of “spoiler” candidates and “wasted” votes. The current system forces voters to choose between voting for their preferred candidate (and risk helping elect the candidate they like the least) or for their second choice to avoid “wasting” their vote.
Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) provides a clear incentive for candidates to campaign positively and on ideas and positions that matter to voters. The current system rewards attack campaigning. Candidates can win votes by driving up opponents’ negatives, persuading voters to vote against the opponent instead of for the candidate. A candidate behaves differently knowing that being someone’s second choice is a tangible benefit.
In local races, primaries have become expensive no-show elections in which qualified candidates get weeded out by just a small number of voters before the November election.
RCV provides our electoral process with a badly needed upgrade. It’s like a traditional runoff, but faster, simpler, and cheaper.
Under RCV, voters choose the candidate they prefer – as they would on a traditional ballot – but also additional choices if they wish. If a candidate receives a majority of first choices, that candidate wins. If not, the least popular candidate is eliminated and his or her ballots are divided among the remaining candidates based on voters’ second choices. If there's still no majority winner, the process repeats until one candidate gains a majority of support. Or, in the case of multi-winner elections, until all seats are filled.
In local nonpartisan elections, RCV combines the primary and general election, saving money and maximizing voter participation. In state partisan elections, RCV can be used in the primary to ensure winning candidates are supported by a majority of party voters, as well as in the general election to accomplish majority outcomes without a separate, costly, low-turnout runoff election.
Under RCV, the outcome more accurately reflects the will of the voters, and officeholders serve knowing they were elected with majority support. In multi-winner elections, RCV allows more voters to be represented by someone they voted for.
RCV gives greater opportunity to candidates of color and a greater voice to communities of color.
RCV, a consensus-building process, could help moderate the polarization that dominates our political dialogue and decision-making.
RCV works. It is a proven and successful system used in numerous U.S. cities and in democracies around the world, including Ireland, Northern Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Scotland and London. It had a successful rollout last year in Minneapolis and is on track for implementation in St. Paul.
RCV is also used by more than a hundred colleges and organizations across the country, including by the Academy of Motion Pictures to elect Best Picture, by the Olympics to decide host cities and by the American Political Science Association to elect their president.
While we continue to demonstrate that RCV works well at the local level, it’s time to take this idea to the state level for consideration and work to ensure that the next generation of voting equipment is equipped to conduct RCV elections. RCV equipment will provide instantaneous results just as current machines do now and give voters the ability to rank their full preferences.