Utah votes down RCV, citing monotonicity and not wanting to go with a stepping stone reform and then have to change again.

  • Take a look at this video. A City in Utah just voted 5-2 against implementing IRV. Stated reasons, they'd rather have STAR voting and don't want to pass a stepping stone and then change it, and monotonicity.

    Here's a discussion at one of the more interesting comments. https://youtu.be/TQbr4KYzxR4?t=11667

  • So are they likely to implement STAR then?

  • The situation in Utah with their "Alternative Voting Methods Pilot Project" is awfully confusing. Some municipalities (but not all the ones in the pilot, but it isn't clear which ones) are using a primary, like Payson and Vineyard did two years ago. Of course RCV is meant to avoid the need for primaries, but go figure.
    Worse, those two cities did NOT do IRV, since there were two winners in the primary. And they did NOT do STV, which would have been proportional and thus would have made some sense, They did an awful method that has had many names and many detractors, e.g. Sequential IRV, Multi-Pass IRV, Sequential AT-Large IRV, or Block Preferential Voting .
    Note that voters who picked the first winner first, get to vote a second time for the next winner, so I dare say it is anti-proportional, though I haven't seen a proper analysis.

  • It always blows my mind how little effort the people in charge put into the final details of picking systems.

Log in to reply