Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.
Ojai, California, Measure M, Ranked-Choice Voting Measure (November 2022)
Ojai Measure M | |
---|---|
Election date |
|
Topic Local elections and campaigns and Local electoral systems |
|
Status |
|
Type Referral |
|
Ojai Measure M was on the ballot as a referral in Ojai on November 8, 2022. It was approved.
A “yes” vote supported establishing the use of ranked-choice voting, starting in the November 2024 general election. |
A “no” vote opposed establishing the use of ranked-choice voting, starting in the November 2024 general election. |
A simple majority was required for the approval of Measure M.
Election results
Ojai Measure M |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
1,909 | 55.84% | |||
No | 1,510 | 44.16% |
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Measure M was as follows:
“ | Shall the voters authorize, at the discretion of the City Council, the use of ranked choice voting, also known as instant runoff voting and allowing voters to rank candidates for elected office in order of preference, to elect City offices at-large, thereby amending the Ojai Municipal Code to no longer elect City Council members by district, if the City Council implements it starting with the November 2024 general election? | ” |
Support
The Ojai Valley Democratic Club led the campaign in support of Measure M.[1]
Arguments
You can share campaign information or arguments, along with source links for this information, at editor@ballotpedia.org.
"Ojai is a community with a history of creative decision making that protects the distinct character we celebrate.
Due to the threat of a costly lawsuit under the California Voting Rights Act, Ojai was forced to move from at-large voting to districts. This has degraded our governance and discourse. Voters are confused to discover they can only vote for candidates living in their small area of what is already a small town, rather than candidates for all the Council seats throughout our town.
The commonly adopted remedy to protect minority candidates and women candidates from discrimination in voting is district voting. But because minorities live across Ojai rather than in one area, district voting actually has the opposite effect, reducing rather than protecting their voting power. Districts also reward negative campaigning, which discourages minority and women candidates from running.
Fortunately, there is a proven remedy: at-large Ranked Choice Voting. This method gets rid of restrictive districts. It ensures representation from all segments of our community while maintaining critically important community cohesion. You vote for your preferred candidates from anywhere in the city, and rank your choices, ensuring your support goes to your most preferred candidate that can win. This will give us a city government that:
Accurately reflects our values, Holds elected officials accountable to all voters across our city, Increases opportunity for women and candidates of color to gain office, and Promotes more positive, civil, and issue-oriented campaigns.
Significantly, the League of Women Voters has endorsed ranked choice voting.
If this measure passes, it authorizes Ojai to enact at-large, ranked choice voting, when it is legally feasible, thus avoiding costly litigation.
Vote Yes. We deserve a government that represents our values, our diversity and our strength as a unique small city.
s/Suza Francina Ojai City Council Member
s/William Weirick Ojai City Council
s/Brenna Furness Business Owner
s/Judy Murphy Planning Commissioner"
Opposition
Arguments
You can share campaign information or arguments, along with source links for this information, at editor@ballotpedia.org.
"Vote No!
Ranked choice is no choice, not allowed under the State of California Constitution as a General Law city, Which Ojai is and has been for over 100 years. Only 7 of 478 cities in California use ranked choice. Why is this a last-minute issue? Why now? Why be a “test case”? Why risk the costs of a lawsuit? Why are we fallowing Santa Monica who spent $7 million and counting this folly? Our city attorney said “it could cost us hundreds of thousands”!
No advance notification, keeping the public from weighing in, until the last minute. Stop wasting our time and money. If the voters want to get away from districting, then the voters would speak out. They haven’t! We haven’t even implemented all our districts and they want to get rid of what hasn’t been a problem, except in their minds.
The council only supports ballot initiatives that are in the favor of council. They have opposed ballot initiatives brought by the citizens. The yes votes to forward these propositions are from councilmembers whose positions are at high risk due to the re-districting policy. Is that coincidence? If you can’t win an election for Mayor, then just agree with your buddies to get appointed. Convenient, Council is creating problems that don’t exist, reacting to problems that only they see. They don’t like an elected Mayor, even though the voters have chosen it twice. They don’t like districting because it makes it more difficult for them to get reelected. They want the voters to relinquish their future rights to determine how we vote so they can preserve their jobs. All this at the cost of nearly $100,000, creating risks of wildly expensive litigation, and the distraction of our city resources from the real problems they should be solving.
s/Robert Daddi Ojai Voter"
Background
Ranked-choice voting (RCV)
Ranked-choice voting (RCV) ballot measures | |
---|---|
Pages: • Ranked-choice voting (RCV) • History of RCV ballot measures • Electoral systems on the ballot • Local electoral systems on the ballot • Electoral systems by state |
- See also: Ranked-choice voting (RCV)
The ballot measure has played a role in shaping electoral systems in the U.S., including ranked-choice voting (RCV) for state and local elections.
Since 1915, there have been more than 150 ballot measures to adopt or repeal ranked-choice voting systems. Ashtabula, Ohio, was the first jurisdiction to approve a ranked-choice voting measure in 1915.
RCV is an electoral system in which voters rank candidates on their ballots. RCV can be used for single-winner elections or multi-winner elections; when used for multi-winner elections, the system has also been called single-transferable vote or proportional representation. These terms were often used to describe multi-winner RCV before the 1970s. You can learn more about ranked-choice voting systems and policies here.
Local RCV ballot measures
Between 1965 and 2024, 79 ranked-choice voting (RCV) local ballot measures were on the ballot in 58 jurisdictions in 19 states.
- Ballotpedia has located 71 local ballot measures to adopt RCV. Voters approved 52 (78.9%) and rejected 15 (21.1%).
- There were eight local ballot measures to repeal RCV. Voters approved four (50.0%) and rejected four (50.0%).
- The year with the most local RCV ballot measures was 2022, when nine were on the ballot in nine jurisdictions. Voters approved seven of them.
- The state with the most local ballot measures related to RCV is California, where there have been 13.
The following table shows the number of ranked-choice voting measures by topic.
Local ranked-choice vote measures by topic and outcome, 1965 - April 2025 | |||||
Topic | Total | Approved | Approved (%) | Defeated | Defeated (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Adopt RCV | 72 | 57 | 79.2% | 15 | 20.08% |
Repeal RCV | 8 | 4 | 50.0% | 4 | 50.0% |
Total | 80 | 61 | 76.3% | 19 | 23.7% |
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a vote of the governing body of Ojai.
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in California
See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in California.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ " accessed February 19, 2022
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Section 3: Polling Place Hours," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Voter Registration," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 California Secretary of State, "Registering to Vote," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Same Day Voter Registration (Conditional Voter Registration)," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ SF.gov, "Non-citizen voting rights in local Board of Education elections," accessed November 14, 2024
- ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "What to Bring to Your Polling Place," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, "Section 20107," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ Democracy Docket, "California Governor Signs Law to Ban Local Voter ID Requirements," September 30, 2024
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
![]() |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
---|---|
Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |