2009 Burlington mayoral election explained

Election Name:2009 Burlington mayoral election
2Data4:2,554 (28.4%)
1Data2:2,951 (32.9%)
1Data4:2,063 (23.0%)
1Data5:1,306 (14.6%)
2Blank:Best round
2Data1:4,313 (48.0%)
2Data2:4,061 (45.2%)
2Data5:1,306 (14.6%)
1Blank:First round
1Data1:2,585 (28.8%)
Party5:Independent (United States)
Type:Presidential
Mayor
Ongoing:No
After Election:Bob Kiss
After Party:Vermont Progressive Party
Before Party:Vermont Progressive Party
Before Election:Bob Kiss
Country:Vermont
Flag Image:Flag of Burlington, Vermont (1990-2017).jpg
Party4:Democratic Party (United States)
Election Date:March 3, 2009
Nominee1:Bob Kiss
Nominee2:Kurt Wright
Nominee4:Andy Montroll
Nominee5:Dan Smith
Party1:Vermont Progressive Party
Party2:Republican Party (United States)
Previous Election:2006 Burlington mayoral election
Previous Year:2006
Next Election:2012 Burlington mayoral election
Next Year:2012
Map Size:200px

The 2009 Burlington mayoral election was the second mayoral election since the city's 2005 change to instant-runoff voting (IRV), after the 2006 mayoral election.[1] In the 2009 election, incumbent Burlington mayor (Bob Kiss) won reelection as a member of the Vermont Progressive Party,[2] defeating Kurt Wright in the final round with 48% of the vote (51.5% excluding exhausted ballots).

The election created a controversy as a result of several election pathologies, after Kiss was declared winner as a result of 750 votes cast against his candidacy (ranking him last), over the objections of the 54% of Burlington voters who had preferred Andy Montroll.

Unlike the city's first IRV election three years prior, however, Kiss was neither the plurality winner (Republican Kurt Wright) nor the majority vote winner (Democrat Andy Montroll).[3] [4] This led to a controversy about the use of IRV in mayoral elections,[5] culminating in a successful 2010 citizen's initiative repealing IRV's use by a vote of 52% to 48%.[6] [7] [8]

Background

See also: Instant-runoff voting and 2006 Burlington mayoral election. The city of Burlington, Vermont, approved IRV for use in mayoral elections with a 64% vote in 2005, at a time when IRV was used only in a few local elections in the United States.[9] The 2006 Burlington mayoral election was decided by two rounds of IRV tallying, selecting candidate Bob Kiss of the Vermont Progressive Party (VPP). In the election, Kiss prevailed over Democrat Hinda Miller and Republican Kevin Curley. With his election Kiss became the second member of the VPP to be elected to the office after Peter Clavelle.

Candidates

Results

Unlike Burlington's first IRV mayoral election in 2006, the mayoral race in 2009 was decided in three rounds. Bob Kiss won the election, receiving 28.8% of the vote in the first round and 48.0% in the final round (51.5% excluding exhausted ballots), defeating final challenger Kurt Wright (who received more votes than Kiss in the earlier rounds, but only received 45.2% in the final round).

The elimination rounds were as follows:[10] [11]

Candidates1st round2nd round3rd round
Candidate PartyVotes%% Active±Votes%% Active±Votes%% Active
Bob KissProgressive2,58528.8%28.8%+3962,98133.2%33.8%+13324,31348.0%51.5%
Kurt WrightRepublican2,95132.9%32.9%+3433,29436.7%37.3%+7674,06145.2%48.5%
Andy MontrollDemocrat2,06323.0%23.0%+4912,55428.4%28.9%Eliminated
Dan SmithIndependent1,30614.5%14.5%Eliminated
James SimpsonGreen350.4%0.4%Eliminated
Write-in 400.4%0.4%Eliminated
Exhausted 00.0%0.0%+147 1511.7% +4556066.7% 
Total 8980100.0% 8980100.0% 8980100.0% 

Analysis

FairVote touted the 2009 election as one of its major success stories, with IRV helping the city avoid the cost of a traditional runoff (which would not have affected the results). They also argued IRV prevented a spoiler effect that would have occurred under plurality.[12] Later analyses showed the race was still spoiled, however, with Wright acting as a spoiler pulling moderate votes from Montroll, who otherwise would have been able to defeat Kiss in a one-on-one race.[13] [14]

FairVote also claimed the election as a success story because 99.9% of voters were able to fill out at least one preference on their ranked-choice ballot. Other election observers questioned this interpretation, after analyses showed 16% of voters cast plurality-style ballots for only one candidate[15] and 7% of ballots did not rank either of the candidates in the last round, leaving them unrepresented.

Some mathematicians and voting theorists criticized the election results as revealing several pathologies associated with instant-runoff voting, noting that Kiss was elected as a result of 750 votes cast against him (ranking Kiss in last place).[16] [17]

Several electoral reform advocates branded the election a failure after Kiss was elected, despite 54% of voters voting for Montroll over Kiss,[18] [19] violating the principle of majority rule.[20] [21]

The results of every possible one-on-one election can be completed as follows:

Andy Montroll (D)6262 (Montroll) –591 (Simpson)4570 (Montroll) –2997 (Smith)4597 (Montroll) –3664 (Wright)4064 (Montroll) –3476 (Kiss)4/4 Wins
Bob Kiss (P)5514 (Kiss) –844 (Simpson)3944 (Kiss) –3576 (Smith)4313 (Kiss) –4061 (Wright)3/4 Wins
Kurt Wright (R)5270 (Wright) –1310 (Simpson)3971 (Wright) –3793 (Smith)2/4 Wins
Dan Smith (I)5570 (Smith) –721 (Simpson)1/4 Wins
James Simpson (G)0/4 Wins
This leads to an overall preference ranking of:
  1. Montroll – defeats all candidates below, including Kiss (4,064 to 3,476)
  2. Kiss – defeats all candidates below, including Wright (4,313 to 4,061)
  3. Wright – defeats all candidates below, including Smith (3,971 to 3,793)
  4. Smith – defeats Simpson (5,570 to 721) and the write-in candidates

Montroll was therefore preferred over Kiss by 54% of voters, preferred over Wright by 56% of voters, over Smith by 60%, and over Simpson by 91% of voters.[22]

Hypothetical results under various voting systems

Because all ballots were fully released, it is possible to reconstruct the winners under other voting methods. While Wright would have won under plurality, Kiss won under IRV, and would have won under a two-round vote or a traditional nonpartisan blanket primary.

Montroll, being the Condorcet winner, would have won if the ballots were counted using ranked pairs (or any other Condorcet method).[23] Analyses suggested Montroll also would have won under most rated voting methods, including score voting, approval voting, majority judgment, or STAR voting.

Effect on IRV in Burlington

Repeal of RCV
Date:2 March 2010
Yes:3,972
No:3,669
Total:7,641

There was post-election controversy regarding the IRV method, and in March 2010 a citizen's initiative resulted in the repeal of IRV in Burlington.[24] The initially "stagnant" repeal campaign drew renewed interest as Kiss became embroiled in a series of controversies.[25] In December 2009, a group called "One Person, One Vote", made up of Republicans and Democrats unhappy with the election outcome, held a press conference to announce that they had collected enough signatures for an initiative to repeal IRV.[26] [27] According to a local columnist, the vote was a referendum on Kiss's mayoralty; Kiss had allegedly become a "lame duck" because of a scandal relating to Burlington Telecom and other local issues. However, in an interview with Vermont Public Radio, Kiss disputed that claim,[28] and those gathering signatures for the repeal stated that it was specifically a rejection of IRV itself.

Locals argued the system was convoluted, turned the 2009 election into a "gambling game" by disqualifying Montroll for having won too many votes,[29] and "eliminated the most popular moderate candidate and elected an extremist".

The IRV repeal initiative in March 2010 won 52% to 48%. It earned a majority of the vote in only two of the city's seven wards, but the vote in those 2009 strongholds for Kurt Wright was lopsided against IRV. Republican Governor Jim Douglas signed the repeal into law in April 2010, saying "Voting ought to be transparent and easy to understand, and affects the will of the voters in a direct way. I'm glad the city has agreed to a more traditional process."

The repeal reverted the system back to a 40% rule that requires a top-two runoff if no candidate exceeds 40% of the vote. Had the 2009 election occurred under these rules, Kiss and Wright would have advanced to the runoff. If the same voters had participated in the runoff as in the first election and not changed their preferences, Kiss would have won the runoff.[30]

The following decade saw continuing controversy about voting methods in Burlington. In 2011, for example, an initiative effort to increase the winning threshold from the 40% plurality to a 50% majority failed by 58.5% to 41.5%,[31] while in 2019, instant-runoff voting was once again proposed for Burlington by Councilor Jack Hanson but went unapproved by the Charter Change Committee for the March 2020 ballot.[32]

One year later, in July 2020, the city council voted 6–5 in support of a measure to reinstate IRV, but it was vetoed by Mayor Miro Weinberger the following month.[33] The council then amended the measure to apply only to the council itself, which the Mayor accepted, and on March 2, 2021, Burlington voters voted in favor of IRV for its city council by 64% to 36% (8,914 to 4,918).[34] [35] [36] The charter change required approval by the Vermont legislature, which enacted it in May of 2022, and which the governor allowed to become law without his signature.[37] The council in September 2022, the voters in March 2023, and the legislature in May 2023 approved the expansion of use of IRV for mayor, school commissioners, and ward election officers, with first use in March 2024.[38] [39] [40]

See also

External links

Notes and References

  1. http://www.burlingtonvotes.org/faq 4. How did this change to IRV come about?
  2. Web site: Mayor Bob Kiss. City of Burlington. https://web.archive.org/web/20071129081028/http://www.ci.burlington.vt.us/mayor/. November 29, 2007. dead. November 16, 2007.
  3. Web site: Point/Counterpoint: Terry Bouricius Attempts To Rip Professor Gierzynski A New One Over Instant Runoff Voting Controversy (Now With All New Gierzynski Update!) . https://web.archive.org/web/20110726125759/http://vermontdailybriefing.com/?p=1215. July 26, 2011. dead. December 30, 2010.
  4. Stensholt . Eivind . What Happened in Burlington? . SSRN Electronic Journal . Elsevier BV . 2015 . 1556-5068 . 10.2139/ssrn.2670462 . 10-12. 11250/2356264 . free .
  5. Web site: Voting Paradoxes and Perverse Outcomes: Political Scientist Tony Gierzynski Lays Out A Case Against Instant Runoff Voting. Baruth. Philip. March 12, 2009. Vermont Daily Briefing. https://web.archive.org/web/20110726125814/http://vermontdailybriefing.com/?p=1213. July 26, 2011. dead.
  6. Web site: Burlington voters repeal IRV. March 2, 2010. Wcax.com. https://web.archive.org/web/20160409132306/http://www.wcax.com/story/12074080/burlington-voters-repeal-irv. April 9, 2016. March 28, 2016.
  7. Web site: Instant run-off voting experiment ends in Burlington : Rutland Herald Online. April 27, 2010. Rutlandherald.com. April 1, 2016. https://web.archive.org/web/20160304055602/http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20100427/NEWS03/4270339/1004/NEWS03#. March 4, 2016. dead.
  8. Web site: Official Results Of 2010 Annual City Election. March 2, 2010. City of Burlington.
  9. News: Vt. City Offers Instant Runoff in Race. Ross. Sneyd. March 16, 2006. The Guardian. https://web.archive.org/web/20060316031012/http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5669646,00.html. March 16, 2006. dead. June 3, 2018.
  10. Web site: ChoicePlus Pro 2009 Burlington Mayor Round Detail Report. July 25, 2011. https://web.archive.org/web/20110725111725/http://www.burlingtonvotes.org/20090303/2009%20Burlington%20Mayor%20Round.htm. July 25, 2011. January 3, 2018.
  11. Web site: ChoicePlus Pro 2009 Burlington Mayor Round 4 Report. March 3, 2009. https://web.archive.org/web/20110725111051/http://www.burlingtonvotes.org/20090303/2009%20Burlington%20Mayor%20Round4.htm. July 25, 2011. dead. February 28, 2011.
  12. Web site: Bouricius . Terry . March 17, 2009 . Response to Faulty Analysis of Burlington IRV Election . October 1, 2017 . FairVote.org . successfully prevented the election of the candidate who would likely have won under plurality rules, but would have lost to either of the other top finishers in a runoff.
  13. Web site: Laatu . Juho . Smith . Warren D. . March 2009 . THE RANK-ORDER VOTES IN THE 2009 BURLINGTON MAYORAL ELECTION .
  14. Lewyn . Michael . 2012 . Two Cheers for Instant Runoff Voting . Phoenix L. Rev. . en . 6 . 117 . 2276015 . election where Democratic candidate for mayor was Condorcet winner but finished third behind Republican and 'Progressive.
  15. Web site: Voter Paradox in the 2009 Burlington IRV Mayoral Race . Figure: Percent of voters who made a 1st choice, 2nd choice, etc., 2006 and 2009 Burlington mayoral election. 2 choices = 83.5%.
  16. Felsenthal . Dan S. . Tideman . Nicolaus . 2014 . Interacting double monotonicity failure with direction of impact under five voting methods . Mathematical Social Sciences . 67 . 57–66 . 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2013.08.001 . 0165-4896 . A display of non-monotonicity under the Alternative Vote method was reported recently, for the March 2009 mayoral election in Burlington, Vermont..
  17. Ornstein . Joseph T. . Norman . Robert Z. . October 1, 2014 . Frequency of monotonicity failure under Instant Runoff Voting: estimates based on a spatial model of elections . Public Choice . en . 161 . 1–2 . 1–9 . 10.1007/s11127-013-0118-2 . 0048-5829 . 30833409 . Although the Democrat was the Condorcet winner (a majority of voters preferred him in all two way contests), he received the fewest first-place votes and so was eliminated ... 2009 mayoral election in Burlington, VT, which illustrates the key features of an upward monotonicity failure.
  18. Web site: Burlington Vermont 2009 IRV mayoral election. Gierzynski. Anthony. Hamilton. Wes. March 2009. RangeVoting.org. October 1, 2017. Montroll was favored over Republican Kurt Wright 56% to 44% ... and over Progressive Bob Kiss 54% to 46% ... In other words, in voting terminology, Montroll was a 'beats-all winner,' also called a 'Condorcet winner' ... However, in the IRV election, Montroll came in third! ... voters preferred Montroll over every other candidate ... Montroll is the most-approved. Smith. Warren D..
  19. Bristow-Johnson. Robert. 2023. The failure of Instant Runoff to accomplish the purpose for which it was adopted: a case study from Burlington Vermont. Constitutional Political Economy. 10.1007/s10602-023-09393-1.
  20. Book: Ellenberg, Jordan . How Not to Be Wrong: The Power of Mathematical Thinking . May 29, 2014 . Penguin . 9780698163843 . 385 . en . a majority of voters liked the centrist candidate Montroll better than Kiss, and a majority of voters liked Montroll better than Wright ... yet Montroll was tossed in the first round. . registration.
  21. Stensholt . Eivind . October 7, 2015 . What Happened in Burlington? . NHH Dept. Of Business and Management Science . en . Discussion Paper No. 2015/26 . 10.2139/ssrn.2670462 . 2670462 . K was elected even though M was a clear Condorcet winner and W was a clear Plurality winner. . free . 11250/2356264.
  22. Web site: IRV and Core Support. The Center for Election Science. en-US. December 4, 2019.
  23. Graham-Squire . Adam T. . McCune . David . 2023-06-12 . An Examination of Ranked-Choice Voting in the United States, 2004–2022 . Representation . en . 1–19 . 10.1080/00344893.2023.2221689. 2301.12075 .
  24. Web site: Voting Paradoxes and Perverse Outcomes: Political Scientist Tony Gierzynski Lays Out A Case Against Instant Runoff Voting. Gierzynski. Tony. March 12, 2009. Vermont Daily Briefing. https://web.archive.org/web/20151019001805/http://vermontdailybriefing.com/?p=1213. October 19, 2015. September 27, 2017.
  25. News: IRV Repeal Signed into Law. April 26, 2010. Seven Days.
  26. News: Burlington Residents Seek Repeal of Instant Runoff Voting. Totten. Shay. Seven Days. March 17, 2018. en. We waited to bring in the signatures because we didn't want this to be about Kurt Wright losing after being ahead, or Andy Montroll who had more first and second place votes and didn't win. We wanted this to be about IRV..
  27. Web site: One Person, One Vote Press Conference. December 29, 2009. CCTV Center for Media and Democracy. en. April 10, 2018.
  28. Web site: Bob Kiss on IRV, Burlington Telecom and the Moran Plant – VPR Archive. vprarchive.vpr.net. en-US. April 10, 2018.
  29. News: IRV much worse than old runoffs. Dopp. Kathy. June 10, 2009. The Aspen Times. March 17, 2018. en.
  30. Web site: City of Burlington, Vermont Instant Runoff Voting. September 28, 2011. https://web.archive.org/web/20110928110147/http://www.ci.burlington.vt.us/ct/elections/irv/. September 28, 2011. April 8, 2018. – FAQ 5. for IRV: Under the old [pre-IRV] system a candidate could be elected with just over 40% of the vote, meaning a candidate could win even though seen as the last choice of nearly 60% of the voters.
  31. Web site: Annual City Election results . March 1, 2011. City of Burlington.
  32. Web site: Ranked-Choice Voting Proposal Advances in Burlington. Seven Days. en-us. December 4, 2019.
  33. Web site: August 10, 2020. Push for ranked-choice voting dies in Vermont's biggest city. September 22, 2020. The Fulcrum. en.
  34. Web site: Swann . Sara . Ranked-choice voting poised to return to Vermont's largest city . The Fulcrum . May 2, 2021.
  35. Web site: Huntley . Katharine . Voters approve all Burlington ballot issues . WCAX3 . May 2, 2021.
  36. Web site: Burlington, Vermont, Question 4, Ranked-Choice Voting Amendment (March 2021) . Ballotpedia . July 24, 2021.
  37. News: Ruehsen . Ella . Scott paves way for ranked choice voting in Burlington council elections . 2024-03-16 . VTDigger . 2022-05-20.
  38. News: Skillman . Kori . Burlington considers extending ranked choice voting to mayoral elections . 2024-03-16 . VTDigger . 2022-09-13.
  39. Web site: Burlington, Vermont, Question 6, Ranked-Choice Voting for Mayor, School Commissioner, and Ward Election Officer Amendment (March 2023) . Ballotpedia . Ballotpedia . 2024-03-16.
  40. News: Crowley . Patrick . Senate advances Burlington’s election-related charter changes . 2024-03-16 . VTDigger . 2023-05-10.