Special to the Times
Last week, the Boston City Council approved a Home Rule Petition to adopt Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for city elections by a vote of 8-4.
The proposal, introduced by Council President Ruthzee Louijeune and co-sponsored by Councilors Julia Mejia and Henry Santana, now heads to Mayor Michelle Wu for approval before advancing to the Massachusetts Legislature. If passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor, Boston voters will have the opportunity to decide on RCV through a ballot referendum.
In addition to the sponsors, the measure was supported by Councilors Enrique Pepén, Gabriela Coletta Zapata, Brian J. Worrell, Liz Breadon, and Benjamin J. Weber. Councilors Ed Flynn, Erin Murphy, John Fitzgerald, and Sharon Durkin voted in opposition. Coletta-Zapata, chair of the Committee on Government Operations, received praise from councilors voting both ways for shepherding the bill through her committee in a thorough and transparent process.
“This is a historic day for Boston,” said Louijeune last week.. “Today’s vote brings us closer to a more inclusive, representative, and transparent democracy—one that ensures our elected leaders have broad support and are chosen by the majority of voters. Ranked choice voting is not only simple, it’s powerful. It gives voters more voice and more choice.”
RCV allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference, eliminating the fear of “spoiler” candidates and promoting coalition-building over division, according to its proponents. Under the proposal, RCV would apply to general and special elections for mayor and district councilor (when three or more candidates run), and general elections for at-large councilors.
“Ranked choice voting is a tool to disrupt the status quo, shift power to the people, and amplify the voices of communities historically excluded from decision-making processes,” said Mejia. “This vote is a declaration that our democracy belongs to all of us.”
Santana stated that more than 60 percent of Bostonians supported RCV in 2020.
“This isn’t just about policy—it’s about trust, representation, and making sure our government reflects the diversity of our city,” Santana stated.
Flynn, who voted against the proposal, expressed concerns about the city’s preparedness and whether residents are asking for this reform in the first place.
“The Election Department pretty much told me that they don’t want to see this implemented,” Flynn said during the Council meeting before the vote. “They don’t believe now is the time to make such a dramatic, significant change to how people vote.”
Flynn cited issues from recent municipal elections – such as lighting failures and polling locations running out of ballots, requiring police to transport ballots – as signs that the city should focus on fixing its current voting infrastructure before adopting a new system.
“I would have a very difficult time explaining this process to my constituents in District 2,” he said. “Many of them don’t speak English, many of them live in public housing, many of them are seniors, English Language Learners. […] I don’t want to set us up for failure. That’s what we’re doing.”
Murphy, who also voted against the measure, cited concerns about accessibility and potential voter confusion. She said that the existing voting system already works and that adding new layers of complexity could have unintended consequences for vulnerable populations.