Madam Chairwoman and members of the committee. I am Melody Clarke with Virginia Institute Action. I urge you to oppose SB428 AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE, regarding the process of ranked choice voting. Please do not further enable bad legislation by passing this RCV bill. If RCV were a simple process, we would not now be playing clean-up on the original enabling legislation. Extensive research has shown that ranked-choice voting disenfranchises and suppresses the vote of minority voters. We need to look no further than Washington DC, which is a majority-minority jurisdiction where the DC City Council heeded the sage advice of the Washington DC Democratic Party and did not implement ranked-choice voting because they care about the voting rights of their minority population. pointing to data showing residents were already more likely just to pick one candidate in races where they are allowed to vote for two. The party also noted that an analysis of ranked-choice voting in New York City indicated that lower-income areas were less likely to participate in the voting process when ranked-choice voting was used. In addition, Deirdre Brown, a longtime Democratic Party member and LGBTQ community ally, is on record against RCV. Please vote NO on this legislation. Refrain from further enabling a process that disenfranchises our Virginia voters, increases the cost and time necessary to obtain election results, makes elections less transparent, and leaves all of our voters with less confidence in our electoral process and those elected to office. Sincerely, Melody Clarke

Ranked Choice Voting disenfranchises voters. The principle of one person-one vote is stripped away under the guise of providing the public with moderate candidates via RCV. At present, tabulators cannot calculate votes using RCV yet the Senator is pushing this bill forward. Senator Vanvalkenburg's bill requires that all ballots be brought to a centralized location for tabulation thus incurring risks of chain of custody of ballots. The national movement towards ranked choice is a current distraction by the hard left and is heavily funded by partisans operating as charitable organizations with no transparency. I urge the Committee to vote no on SB428.

The League of Women Voters of Virginia supports the clarification of processes for Ranked Choice Voting Elections, as described in SB 428. We believe that ranked choice voting, or RCV, would make our elections more accessible, would promote nominees with broad support, and would ensure that every voter's voice is heard. RCV often results in a more diverse slate of candidates who can run for office without the fear of being a "spoiler" or splitting the vote. RCV allows voters to express their choice of candidates fully, without worrying about "wasting their vote" if a preferred candidate drops out before election day, and without worrying about voting for the likely winner, rather than the candidate that most closely represents their personal views. RCV ensures that the winning candidate has the broad support of the majority of voters, rather than just a 22% or 34% plurality of voters. The League of Women Voters of Virginia asks this Committee to report out SB428 to the full Committee.

Please oppose Rank Choice Voting. RCV is very confusing and hard to count. There is a lack of accountability when a recount maybe needed. RCV will cause more distrust in Virginia's election process. As elected officials you should be working to improve the integrity of America's election system not making it more confusing. Virginia should ban RCV.

I oppose SB428 and ask you to vote against this bill. 1. Ranked Choice Voting does not treat voters equally. Some voters get many votes, as their second, third, fourth and sixth choice votes are counted, while other voters get only one vote. 2. Ranked Choice voting can not be audited and neither can recounts be done, so RCV should not be used in our elections. 3. Ranked Choice Voting is confusing to voters, which causes them to make mistakes and to cast a vote for candidates they would have never voted for, but do vote for, if they think they have to rank all the candidates listed. 4. The final results of the election are delayed for days and sometimes longer with RCV. 5. Often the winner with the initial majority of votes, does not win after ballots for the losing candidates are reallocated through several reiterations. 6 .Several of the RCV bills involved hiring a third party courier service to transport live ballots, which are still being processed for an unfinalized ongoing election. RCV creates unnecessary security and integrity problems, which don't happen currently when the election results are finalized in the precinct by bipartisan election officers and the ballots are transported to the election office by a team of bipartisan election officers. Vote No on SB428!

I oppose allowing or implementing Ranked Choice Voting. It is overly complex and non-transparent to the public. It disenfranchises voters, by forcing them to rank order candidates that they may wish to obstain, and when/if they do so they are penalized by having their ballot more likely to be thrown out due to ballot exhaustion. It is not compatible with precinct level reporting. It is capable of producing "perverse" outcomes, where candidates can be penalized for gaining support.

Rank choice voting has no place in a Democratic Republic. One person, one vote is the rule. Votes "moved" by committee is an attributed seen in dictatorial societies. Let's not go there. The "rules" to allocate votes to other candidates are not part of the election process. The people do not decide - a small group of election officials can decide the outcome of an election using "business rules" or something generated artificially. We HAVE the time to decide between a small slate of candidates when there is no clear winner. This is why we have run-off elections. There is no need to change what is working. Do it right. Let the VOTERS decide.

Dear Committee Members: SB428: I have worked as an election officer, assistant chief, and chief for the past 5 years. I oppose Rank Choice Voting due to the following: 1) The possibility of many candidates to choose from which each voter must rank. For example, if there are 6 candidates, the voter must rank each candidate 1 – 6 by selecting the appropriate oval. The attached file shows an example of the instructions for Rank Choice voting ballot that took place at the Alaska’s Secretary of State election. 2) It will cause confusion for the voters which would lead to a high percentage of spoiled ballots especially if they mistakenly selected two candidates as first choices even though the instructions are presented. 3) Forces the voters to rank a candidate they don’t support. 4) If the voter does not rank all candidates, their ballot will not move forward to the next round which causes the voter’s ballot to be discarded. This is called “ballot exhaustion”. It means the ballot does not count toward the end election result which leaves voters and voices uncounted. This is not the American democratic way, and their voices are silenced. 5) The results can be skewed by rigging counting software each time it runs multiple rounds. 6) Particularly damaging to vulnerable voters (military, seniors, mail voters) who are unable to immediately correct mistakes. 7) Hinders recounts and audits. 8) Expect longer lines. As a chief election officer, it is great to see voters come out to exercise their right to vote. Let us not discourage the voters by complicating the election process. Thank you for your time, Carmen Torres-Nisbet, a concern citizen

I oppose Ranked Choice Voting for all offices in Virginia. The process is confusing. It is arbitrary because people may not be voting seriously for their second, third, fourth choice. It cannot be audited because it is not reproducible. It changes the "one person one vote" model with multiple votes for some people and disenfranchisement for others.

I strong oppose the use of RCV for any local, state and/or federal elections. * RCV results cannot be reported by precinct. * RCV allows some voters to have multiple votes in the same election. * RCV disenfranchises those votes who have their ballots thrown in the trash (ballot exhaustion). * RCV uses a false 50%+1 majority calculation to determine winner of race. For example, start with 100 voters - 20 voters with exhausted ballots = 80 votes) At the end of the RCV rounds, the 'winner' received 42 votes. However, 42 votes out of the original 100 is NOT a 50%+1 majority. *More and more states and localities that tried RCV are now working hard to eliminate RCV from the process. Most recent is Utah: https://thefederalist.com/2024/02/23/after-a-chaotic-tryout-utah-house-votes-to-ditch-ranked-choice-voting/ * Please DO NOT pass SB428 Here's a good brief video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3K3OWokYapU

We are 100% against Rank Choice Voting. People can just vote for their favorite candidate. Rank Choice Voting is a terrible idea on ten different levels.

I oppose SB428 Expanding Rank Voting for these reasons, 1. Rank Choice Voting is extremely complicated and difficult for voters to understand. We need to make our elections less complicated, not more complicated. 2. According to our election laws, we need to report election results by precinct. You can't report results by precinct with Rank Choice Voting. 3. Rank Choice Voting is more expensive and takes much longer to determine outcomes than our current election system.

Vote may not count if "exhausted" and violates the 1 person, 1 vote rule. Discriminatory.

Veterans for All Voters supports SB 428 In ranked choice voting elections, early voters and mail-in voters can rank the candidates, thereby, ensuring their votes "count" even if one or more of the candidates drop out of the race before election day. Because of their service to our nation, many military voters exercise their franchise using mail in ballots. During our RCV advocacy efforts, many local officials, including some veterans, asked us why their localities couldn't use RCV for school board and constitutional officer elections. We informed them that we were still waiting for the Virginia General Assembly to amend the law and give localities the option of using RCV for school board and constitutional officer elections. If you don't expand RCV this year, please consider expanding RCV next year.

The RCVRC is submitting brief written testimony in support of SB 428.

Please pass this bill. It will allow us to use the same approach for all of our local offices, which will simplify the voting experience.

Please pass SB428. Ranked choice voting is a positive upgrade to our current voting system. I had the opportunity to participate in Arlington’s ranked choice county board primary. I appreciated the opportunity to express my opinion in favor of more candidates than would be elected, since there were many candidates who I would have supported for the county board seats. I hope that all voters across Virginia are able to take advantage of this opportunity in the near future. I am a young voter and know many other young voters in support of ranked choice voting. It’s the voting system upgrade that we need to keep our democracy strong in the future.

I support SB428 which clears up some questions localities may have if they choose to exercise the ranked choice voting option.

Please pass SB428 to make the option of ranked choice voting available for local offices. There are currently four announced candidates for Mayor of Virginia Beach. I know that ranked choice voting can be used for City Council but I cannot get a definite answer about Mayor. This bill would resolve that question. Of the four candidates for Mayor there are two I favor. I don't want to have to guess which one is more likely to win - I want to vote for them as my first and second choices. I even have a preference between the other two for my third choice. Ranked choice will help me vote without having to think like a pundit. Ranked choice is also good for the person who is elected. That person will know that at least half the voters are satisfied with them instead of possibly 25% +1. And this bill does not require any locality to use ranked choice voting. It simply makes the option available.