The Boston City Council on Wednesday voted 8-4 to move to a ranked-choice voting system for municipal elections, a notable victory for the measure’s proponents who have advocated for the city to adopt the electoral change for years.
The proposal still faces several hurdles before the city would implement the switch: It requires the mayor’s signature and the state Legislature’s approval, and then voters would get the final say through a ballot measure.
Advocates of ranked-choice voting argue that the system reduces polarization and division by requiring candidates to appeal to a broader range of voters, and leads to representation that is more reflective of the electorate as a whole. Opponents dispute those claims, and say ranked-choice voting is confusing for voters, especially non-native English speakers, and could hurt voter turnout and participation. Others worry it could exacerbate problems in the city’s election department that led to widespread failures like ballot shortages and communication breakdowns during the November 2024 election.
Massachusetts voters previously weighed in on the issue in 2020, after a billionaire-backed coalition successfully put the question of ranked-choice voting on the statewide ballot. It ultimately failed after 55 percent of voters opted against the change. But advocates for the measure noted the idea was more popular in Boston, where it won a majority of the vote.
Since then, dozens of political and community groups, unions, and civil rights organizations advocated for moving to ranked-choice voting on the city level.
Council President Ruthzee Louijeune, along with Councilors Julia Mejia and Henry Santana, sponsored the measure the council voted to approve Wednesday.
“This is an exciting day for the city of Boston, it’s an exciting day for democracy and for what it looks like to bring people closer to the work of democracy,” Louijeune said before the council Wednesday. “So often, people who don’t vote [say], ‘Oh, my vote won’t matter.’ When you rank candidates, your vote has a stronger chance of mattering.”
Under Louijeune’s proposal, the city would not use ranked-choice voting in state or federal elections, or in preliminary municipal elections. However, it would increase the number of municipal candidates that would advance from preliminary to general elections: Instead of two candidates facing off in the general elections for mayor and district council seats, four per race would move forward from the preliminary. Eight at-large candidates would proceed to the general election and compete for four seats, as is currently the case.
Ranked-choice voting would then apply to all general and special elections for mayor and district council seats where there are three or more candidates, and in all general elections for at-large council positions. Voters would be able to rank up to four candidates in order of preference.
In some instances, the procedures would be simple. For mayoral and district council races, if any candidate wins a majority of first-choice votes, that candidate wins.
If not, the process would grow more complicated. The candidate who received the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who ranked that candidate first will have their vote count for their next choice. The process continues until there is a winner with a majority of votes.
For at-large seats, the process has more steps. The election department would calculate a number known as the “election threshold” based on the number of votes cast. In the first round of ballot tabulation, all ballots would count toward voters’ first preferences. Candidates who have enough first-choice votes to meet or exceed the election threshold would be elected, in order of how many votes they received.
There are other twists: For candidates who received more votes than the threshold, their so-called surplus votes will go toward each ballot’s second choice. Then, if fewer than four candidates still have not met that threshold, the lowest vote-getters are eliminated and their votes redistributed to ballots’ next choice. The process continues until four candidates have been elected.
Louijeune’s proposal would require the city’s election department to oversee outreach efforts to educate voters on how ranked-choice voting works, and to print instructions on the ballot.
Several councilors on Wednesday expressed optimism that the change would benefit Boston voters.
“It promotes consensus, not division,” Mejia said before her colleagues Wednesday. “This is how we build government that truly reflects the people.”
But others were more hesitant. Councilor Ed Flynn said now is not the right time to make changes to municipal elections, when the city’s election department is already under state receivership.
“Let’s fix our current voting system first. Let’s not set up the Boston election department for failure,” he said.
Councilor Erin Murphy said that ranked-choice voting could confuse voters.
“Adding ranked-choice voting would introduce unnecessary complexity to the process,” Murphy said.
Councilor Sharon Durkan also spoke against the proposal, saying she worries it would reduce voter turnout, and cautioned that she’s heard it has “no future at the State House.”
Niki Griswold can be reached at niki.griswold@globe.com. Follow her @nikigriswold.