Fact Sheet for 11/03/09 City of Minneapolis
The Minneapolis Method: Hand-counting a Ranked Choice election
Staffing the 11/03/09 election
- Staff
- Interim Director & 4 full-time staff
- Seasonal staff: 8 = all returning from 2008
- Health Care Coordinator & Election Judges: 16
- Contract: RCV Outreach Coordinator
- Contract: Impartial Survey of Voters, Candidates and Election Judges
- Election Judges
- 15 Precinct Support Judges (13 ward & 2 sign inspectors)
- 262 Chair and Assistant Chairs
- 1,200 Team Judges
- 108 Student Election Judges
- 20 Reserve Team Judges – not used
- Election Judge training
- 14 Chair & Assistant Chair classes of up to 20
- 22 Team Election Judge classes of up to 60
- 2 Precinct Support Judge classes
- 6 Student Election Judge classes at high schools
- 4 Sorter/Counter/Data entry training classes of up to 60
Staffing the Count
- Human Resources
- Manager & crew of 2
- Supply & Transit
- Manager & crew of 6
- Sort/Counters
- 270 signed up, 240 actually served
- 90+ per day for full 8-hour coverage (4 or 8 hour shifts)
- Manager & crew of up to 5
- Data Entry
- Manager & 10-12 staff per day
- Data Analysis
- Manager & 4 staff per day
11/21/09 Completed unofficial results for 22 offices
- Single-seat offices
- Mayor – city-wide
- Council members – 13 by Ward
- Park and Recreation Board – 6 by District
- Multi-seat offices
- Board of Estimate and Taxation – elect 2
- Park and Recreation Board – elect 3
12/04/09 Results were certified
Single seat offices
- 16 of 20 offices decided in one round
- 19 of 20 winning candidates surpassed threshold
- 4 offices decided in two rounds
- Council Wards 4 & 5, and Park District 6: The winning candidates surpassed threshold
- Park and Recreation District 5: The winning candidate won as the highest vote-getter of the last two candidates remaining
Multiple seat offices
- Board of Estimate and Taxation – elect 2
- A candidate surpassed the threshold in Round 1. In Round 2 this candidate was elected and surplus votes from the winning candidate were proportionately distributed to next ranked choices on those ballots.
- Candidates with no mathematical chance of winning were defeated in Rounds 3, 4 and 5.
- The second candidate was elected in Round 5 after two candidates were mathematically defeated. This candidate was elected as the highest vote-getter but did not reach threshold.
- Park and Recreation Board – elect 3
- Candidates with no mathematical chance of winning were defeated in Rounds 2 through 6
- In Round 5, the first candidate elected passed threshold but no surplus votes were ever distributed
- In Round 6, a candidate with no mathematical chance of winning was defeated, and the second and third elected candidates were the highest vote-getters remaining, but did not reach the threshold.
- The ordinance gives priority to defeating candidates with no mathematical chance of winning before distributing surplus votes of elected candidates. No surplus votes were distributed in any round for this office.
Last updated Sep. 27, 2011