An electoral reform opportunity rejected by the outgoing council will affect the outcome of next month’s city elections. The decision not to adopt ranked balloting was one of several democracy issues that divided councillors this term including re-drawing of ward boundaries so all votes should have the same weight.
Two years ago the Kathleen Wynne government offered municipalities the option of modifying the first-past-the-post election system and allowing voters to rank their choice of candidates. If no one initially obtained a majority, then second choices of the bottom-ranking candidate would be re-allocated until someone’s total exceeded fifty percent.
Such a system could have made a difference in at least five instances in the 2014 election as well as in the single by-election in 2016 when Donna Skelly got less than a fifth of the ballots cast and her closest rival came in less than one percent behind her. In another very close race, Doug Conley squeaked into the ward nine seat backed by just over a quarter of voters and his two closest rivals were each less than 6 percent behind.
The common feature of all these races was no incumbent, and consequently a very large number of candidates. Incumbents were easily re-elected in all their wards in 2014, most winning over 70 percent of the ballots cast.
This year there are also four wards without incumbents (1, 3, 7, and 8) and a fifth one (Dundas – ward 13) that has significantly altered boundaries where seven candidates are running. Fifty individuals – well over half of all the candidates running for council position – are competing in these five wards. In contrast, there are only 39 in the ten wards that have incumbents.
In 2014 a ranked ballot process could have selected a different mayor too. Eisenberger won with just 40 percent of the vote but his two strongest opponents together scored 47 percent with the remaining ballots spread among several candidates. There are 15 mayoralty candidates this time.
In the wards races, Aidan Johnson was selected with just over a third of voters, while his closest rival was about eight percentage points behind, certainly within striking distance if ballots had been ranked. Matthew Green got support from four out of ten ward three voters, but none of his rivals won even half that amount.
The majority of city councillors opposed a November 2016 proposal to ask staff to determine the costs of implementing ranked balloting in Hamilton. Mayor Eisenberger along with councillors Green, Farr, Merulla and Skelly wanted to consider the change but were out-voted by Collins, Conley, Ferguson, Jackson, Brenda Johnson, Partridge, Pearson, Vanderbeek, and Whitehead. Aidan Johnson and Robert Pasuta were absent for the decision.
The initial staff report prepared by Elections Manager Tony Fallis was not enthusiastic about the potential change. It warned of higher costs, “more spoiled ballots” and the need for additional staff time, as well as noted the requirement that the city “hold at least one open house for the purpose of giving the public an opportunity to ask questions.”
A major change also not welcomed by most councillors but in place for the October 22 elections nevertheless is a re-drawing of ward boundaries to make them approximately equal in population. That was imposed by the Ontario Municipal Board after only Eisenberger, Farr, Green, and Merulla supported a re-alignment. Earlier in the extended debate, there were two attempts to block any change at all.
In the first instance, councillors Conley, Ferguson, Partridge, Pasuta, Pearson, and Vanderbeek unsuccessfully sought to discontinue the ward boundary review at a general issues committee meeting. At the subsequent council meeting they were joined by Brenda Johnson and Terry Whitehead but an 8-8 tie meant another defeat. That was followed by a Whitehead motion to postpone the review until after this fall’s election that also failed 8-8.