Read the full stored bill text
1
____________________________ 2
Councilmember Wendell Felder 3
4
5
A BILL 6
________ 7
8
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 9
_________________ 10
11
12
To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955 to require the 13
Board of Elections to conduct a comprehensive needs assessment to ensure the District’s 14
institutional readiness for implementing ranked choice voting, to analyze voter awareness 15
and public perceptions of the ranked choice voting system, to assess the equity and access 16
implications of ranked choice voting for historically marginalized communities, to review 17
best practices and implementation experiences from other jurisdictions, and to require the 18
Board to submit a report to the Mayor and the Council that includes a RCV 19
implementation plan, a full cost model, an operational timeline with critical milestones 20
and a comprehensive voter outreach and education plan. 21
22
BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, That this 23
act may be cited as the “Board of Elections Ranked Choice Voting Needs Assessment 24
Temporary Amendment Act of 2025”. 25
Sec. 2 Section 8a of the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955, effective March 21, 26
2025 (D.C. Law 25-295), D.C. Official Code § 1-1001.08a), is amended by adding a new 27
subsection (n) to read as follows: 28
“(n) No later than January 1, 2027, the Board Shall conduct a comprehensive needs 29
assessment to support the effective and efficient implementation of Ranked Choice Voting. 30
“(1) The assessment shall include: 31
“(A) An institutional readiness review, including: 32
“(i) An evaluation of Board’s capacity to implement ranked choice 33
voting, including ballot design, vote tabulation system and associated staff training; and 34
“(ii) Identification of necessary systems upgrades, operational 35
process, and logistical requirements for successful implementation; 36
“(iii) Projected costs of implementation, including equipment, 37
staffing, technology, translation, accessibility services, and public education. 38
“(B) Development of proposed regulations governing the implementation 39
of RCV that includes at a minimum: 40
“(i) ballot structure, ranking limits, tabulation sequencing, tie-41
breaking procedures, ballot adjudication, recount triggers, certification and public reporting 42
“(ii) a timeline for public notice, comment, final rulemaking and 43
Council review. 44
“(C) A public knowledge and perception evaluation to measure: 45
“(i) General voter awareness and understanding of rank choice 46
voting; and 47
“(ii) Targeted analysis of awareness among populations with 48
limited English proficiency, seniors, and communities with historically low civic engagement; 49
“(D) An equity and access impact analysis to assess the potential effects of 50
ranked choice voting on historically unrepresented communities, including Black, Latino, low-51
income, and returning citizens populations; and 52
“(E) A best practices review, including: 53
“(i) A summary of implementation strategies from other 54
jurisdiction; and 55
“(ii) Identification of success factors and common implementation 56
challenges. 57
“(2) Upon completion of the assessment, the Board Shall submit to the Mayor and 58
the Council a report that includes: 59
“(A) A proposed plan regarding ranked choice voting implementation; 60
“(B) A timeline for phased implementation that includes critical 61
milestones; and 62
“(C) A robust outreach and education plan.” 63
“(3) The Board of Elections shall not implement or administer any new voting 64
policies, procedures, or election system modifications, including but not limited to ranked choice 65
voting, unless it has first conducted a comprehensive needs assessment addressing operational 66
capacity, budgetary requirements, staffing, technology, public education needs, and equity 67
impacts and submitted to the Mayor and the Council a detailed implementation plan, finalized 68
regulations, a budget analysis, and operational timelines with key milestones. 69
Sec. 3. Fiscal impact statement. 70
The Council adopts the fiscal impact statement of the Budget Director as the fiscal impact 71
statement required by section 4a of the General Legislative Procedures Act of 1975, approved 72
October 16, 2006 (120 Stat. 2038; D.C. Official Code § 1-301.47a). 73
Sec. 4. Effective date. 74
(a) This act shall take effect following approval by the Mayor (or in the event of veto by 75
the Mayor, action by the Council to override the veto), a 30-day period of congressional review 76
as provided in section 602(c)(1) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, approved December 77
24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. Official Code § 1-206.02(c)(1)). 78
(b) This act shall expire after 225 days of its having taken effect. 79