Seattle, Washington, Proposition 1A and 1B, Approval Voting Initiative and Ranked-Choice Voting Measure (November 2022)
| Seattle Proposition 1A and 1B | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Local elections and campaigns and Local electoral systems |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Initiative |
|
Seattle Proposition 1A and 1B was on the ballot in Seattle on November 8, 2022. Proposition 1A was a citizen-initiated measure, Initiative 134, and the Seattle City Council referred Proposition 1B to the ballot as an alternative measure.
Voters first decided on Question 1, which asked whether approval voting or ranked-choice voting should replace the existing system. Voters then decided on Question 2, which asked voters to choose between Proposition 1A (Initiative 134) and Proposition 1B (City Ordinance 126625). Proposition 1A would have enacted approval voting. Proposition 1B enacted ranked-choice voting.
Voters approved the first question, replacing the existing system, and selected ranked-choice voting as the new system.
Question 1
A "yes" vote supported adopting a new voting system for Seattle primary elections for mayor, city attorney, and city council — either an approval voting system as proposed under Proposition 1A (Initiative 134) or a ranked-choice voting system as proposed under Proposition 1B (City Ordinance 126625). |
A "no" vote opposed adopting an approval voting or ranked-choice voting system for Seattle primary elections for mayor, city attorney, and city council, thereby leaving in place the then-existing plurality voting system. |
Question 2
| Voting for "Proposition 1A" supported implementing Initiative 134, which was designed to enact approval voting for Seattle primary elections for mayor, city attorney, and city council. |
| Voting for "Proposition 1B" supported implementing the city council's proposed alternative measure, which was designed to enact ranked-choice voting for Seattle primary elections for mayor, city attorney, and city council. |
Election results
Below, "Yes" votes corresponds to votes for "Either" and "No" votes correspond to votes for "Neither."
|
Seattle Proposition 1A and 1B |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
160,141 | 50.95% | ||
| No | 154,169 | 49.05% | ||
| Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
 Proposition 1A (Approval Voting) | 69,015 | 24.23% | ||
 Proposition 1B (RCV) | 215,789 | 75.77% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot question for Proposition 1A and 1B was as follows:[1]
| “ |
Proposition 1A (submitted by Initiative Petition No. 134) and Proposition 1B (alternative proposed by the City Council and Mayor) concern allowing voters to select multiple candidates in City primary elections. Proposition 1A (Initiative 134) would allow voters in primary elections for Mayor, City Attorney, and City Council to select on the ballot as many candidates as they approve of for each office. The two candidates receiving the most votes for each office would advance to the general election, consistent with state law. The City would consult with King County to include instructions on the primary ballot such as “vote for AS MANY as you approve of” for each office. As an alternative, the Seattle City Council and Mayor have proposed Proposition 1B (Ordinance 126625), which would allow primary election voters for Mayor, City Attorney, and City Council to rank candidates by preference. In the first round of processing, each voter’s top preference would be counted. The candidate receiving the fewest would be eliminated. Successive rounds of counting would eliminate one candidate each round, counting each voter’s top preference among remaining candidates, until two candidates remain to proceed to the general election. King County would include instructions on the ballot for voters. 1. Should either of these measures be enacted into law?
|
” |
Full text
- The full text of Initiative 134 is available here.
- The full text of Seattle City Ordinance 126625 is available here.
Measure design
As of October 2022, Seattle used a top-two primary voting system for primary elections for mayor, city attorney, and city council, in which the candidate receiving the most votes advanced to the general election.
Proposition 1A and 1B asked voters to decide whether either of the two proposed voting systems - approval voting or ranked-choice voting (RCV) - should be adopted. Voters then chose between Proposition 1A (Initiative 134) for approval voting or Proposition 1B (City Ordinance 126625) for ranked-choice voting. Voters opposed to adopting a new voting system who vote no on Question 1 could vote for their preferred option in Question 2. As the first question was approved by a majority of voters, the outcome of Question 2 was also adopted. Voters selected ranked-choice voting.[1]
Proposition 1A: Approval voting
Adoption of Proposition 1A would have enacted Initiative 134, which would have established approval voting for Seattle primary elections for mayor, city attorney, and city council. Under the approval voting system, voters would vote for however many candidates they approve of. The primary ballot would have included instructions stating, "vote for AS MANY as you approve of" for each office. The top-two candidates receiving the most votes would have advancced to the general election.[1][3]
Proposition 1B: Ranked-choice voting
Adoption of Proposition 1B enacted the city council's proposed alternative measure, which established ranked-choice voting (RCV) for Seattle primary elections for mayor, city attorney, and city council. Proposition 1B provided that voters rank candidates, and the candidates with the fewest votes are eliminated and the voters' next choice would be counted for the remaining candidates until two candidates remain to advance to the general election. Proposition 1B was designed to allow voters to rank up to five candidates. Under Proposition 1B, ballot instructions were to read, “Rank candidates in the order of your choice.”[1][4]
Support for Proposition 1A, approval voting
Seattle Approves led the campaign in support of Proposition 1A (Initiative 134).[5]
Supporters
- Center for Elections Science[6]
Arguments
- Seattle Approves said, "[Adopting approval voting] will eliminate endemic vote-splitting. Similar candidates will no longer 'split the vote' and all lose; match voters’ preferences better than any other system in the country; turn every election into an honest measurement of how many voters support each candidate ... ensure that ballots are simple and accessible to everyone, including non-native English speakers and voters who are short on time; make politics less divisive. Campaigns won’t fight each other over voters — they’ll fight for wider support."[7]
- Sarah Ward, volunteer co-chair of Seattle Approves, said, "Seattle’s leaders must represent everyone, Initiative 134 will make Seattle’s elections as representative as possible, so that its leaders represent the entire electorate. This initiative puts voters first."[8]
- Logan Bowers, volunteer co-chair of Seattle Approves, said, "If you've ever debated between voting for a candidate that you really like and another you like less but has the big money backing to win, you've experienced the problem with our existing elections. The money flowing into elections combined with the flaws in our current voting system means our elections aren’t a fair assessment of what voters want. Too often, voters feel compelled to vote strategically based on who they think can win."[8]
Support for Proposition 1B ranked-choice voting
Seattle for RCV Yes on 1B led the campaign in support of Proposition 1B.[9] A full list of endorsements on 1B can be found here.
Supporters
- FairVote Washington[10]
- Win Win Network Washington[11]
- League of Women Voters Seattle-King County[11]
- King County Democrats[11]
- Young Democrats of Washington[11]
- King County Young Democrats[11]
- 32nd District Democrats[11]
- 34th District Democrats[11]
- 36th District Democrats[11]
- 43rd District Democrats[11]
- 46th District Democrats[11]
- Transit Riders Union[11]
- Sightline Institute[11]
- More Equitable Democracy Action[11]
- PRO TEC 17[11]
- Democracy for America Advocacy Fund[11]
- Washington Community Alliance[11]
- Northwest Progressive Institute[11]
- Puget Sound Sage[11]
- BIPOC ED Coalition[11]
- Washington for Equitable Representation[11]
- Washington Community Action Network[11]
- Entre Hermanos[11]
- Faith Action Network[11]
- Rainier Valley Corps Seattle[11]
- Fix Democracy First[11]
- UAW Western States[11]
- UAW 4121[11]
- Washington Conservation Voters[11]
- FUSE[11]
- Washington Bus[11]
- Latino Community Fund[11]
Officials
- State Sen. Rebecca Saldana (D)[11]
- State Rep. Noel Frame (D)[11]
- State Rep. Gerry Pollett (D)[11]
Arguments
- RCV 4 Seattle said, "Ranked-choice voting (RCV) is a simple improvement to the way we vote in Seattle. With RCV, you can rank candidates on your ballot in the order you prefer: 1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, and so on. If your favorite can’t win, your vote counts for your next choice. Ranked-choice voting is the fastest-growing non-partisan reform in the U.S. Voters who try RCV say it’s simple and they want to keep using it. More women and people of color run and win with RCV, so governments better reflect their communities."[11]
- FairVote Washington said, "RCV is the fastest-growing non-partisan reform in the U.S. Voters who try RCV say it’s simple and they want to keep using it. More women and people of color run and win with RCV, so governments better reflect their communities. RCV gives you more say. Vote for who you really want, then rank your backup choices. No more voting for the lesser of two evils. RCV rewards politicians who reach beyond their base to build common ground, producing civil, issue-focused campaigns that focus on solutions."[9]
- Lisa Ayrault, director of FairVote Washington, said, "We think it would be an unfortunate choice for Seattle to go in that direction (of approval voting), when ranked-choice voting has such a proven track record of success. Where people tend to have strong preferences about their first choices and care a lot about the outcomes … ranked-choice voting is the best."[10]
Background
Voting in Seattle
- See also: Plurality voting system
Going into the election, Seattle used a plurality voting system for primary elections for mayor, city attorney, and city council, in which the candidate receiving the most votes advanced to the general election. This system is sometimes referred to as first-past-the-post or winner-take-all. As of 2022, this was the most common voting system used in the United States.[9][12]
Approval voting
- See also: Approval voting
Approval voting is an electoral system in which voters may vote for any number of candidates they approve of. The candidate(s) receiving the most votes advance to the general election.
As of 2022, it had been adopted in Fargo, North Dakota, and St. Louis, Missouri. In Fargo, voters approved the measure 63.5% to 36.5%. In St. Louis, voters approved the proposition by a vote of 68% to 32%.
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
Initiative 134
In Seattle, initiative petitions must be filed with the office of the City Clerk. The Clerk then reviews the form to ensure it complies with the city's requirements. The signature requirement is 10% of the total votes that Seattle's mayor received in the last mayoral election.[13] King County validated 26,942 signatures for Initiative 134, surpassing the requirement of 26,520 signatures. The Seattle City Council had 45 days to pass the initiative as an ordinance, reject it, or send it to voters.[14]
Ordinance 126625, City Council alternative measure
On July 14, 2022, the Seattle City Council voted 7-2 on Ordinance 126625 (Council Bill 120369), to reject Initiative 134 and adopt a ranked-choice voting system instead. Councilmember Andrew Lewis sponsored a resolution to place the ranked-choice voting alternative proposal on the ballot along with Initiative 134's approval voting proposal. Lewis said, "This discussion has gotten to a point where we run a risk of making a more undemocratic decision by depriving the voters of making that choice [between approval Voting and RCV]. In essence, there would be a proxy vote where voting ‘No’ on approval voting would be reflecting a ‘Yes’ vote for [RCV] anyway."[15]
Substitute Version 2 of Resolution 32057 directed the Seattle City Clerk, Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission, and King County Elections Director to place both questions on the ballot.[16]
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in Washington
See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Washington.
See also
External links
- King County: City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B
- Initiative 134 full text
- Seattle City Ordinance 126625 full text
- Seattle City Council Central Staff Memo on Initiative 134 and Council Bill 120369
Support for Proposition 1A
Support for Proposition 1B |
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 King County, "November 8, 2022 General and Special Election Ballot Measures: City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ King County, "Proposition 1A (Initiative 134) full text," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ King County, "Proposition 1B (Ordinance 126625) full text," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ Seattle Approves, accessed June 21, 2022
- ↑ Seattle Times, "Should the Seattle area adopt new voting systems for elections? The conversation is growing," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ Seattle Approves, "Home," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 Seattle Approves, "Seattle voting reform initiative qualifies for November 2022 ballot," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 FairVote Washington, "Home," accessed September 2, 2022 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "fv" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 10.0 10.1 Seattle Times, "Should the Seattle area adopt new voting systems for elections? The conversation is growing," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ 11.00 11.01 11.02 11.03 11.04 11.05 11.06 11.07 11.08 11.09 11.10 11.11 11.12 11.13 11.14 11.15 11.16 11.17 11.18 11.19 11.20 11.21 11.22 11.23 11.24 11.25 11.26 11.27 11.28 11.29 11.30 11.31 11.32 11.33 11.34 RCV 4 Seattle, "Endorsements," accessed October 12, 2022
- ↑ ACE: The Electoral Knowledge Network, "Electoral Systems," accessed August 3, 2017
- ↑ Seattle Office of the City Clerk, "Initiative Petition Guide" accessed June 21, 2022
- ↑ U.S. News & World Report, "Initiative to Change Seattle Elections Heads Toward Ballot," June 15, 2022
- ↑ The Stranger, "Seattle City Council Puts Ranked-Choice Voting on Ballot," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ City of Seattle, "Seattle City Council Central Staff Memorandum from Lish Whitson," accessed September 2, 2022
- ↑ Washington Secretary of State, “Frequently Asked Questions on Voting by Mail,” accessed April 20, 2023
- ↑ 18.0 18.1 Washington Secretary of State, "Voter Eligibility," accessed April 20, 2023
- ↑ Washington State Legislature, "Voter registration deadlines," accessed April 20, 2023
- ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 The Hill, "Wash. gov signs universal voter registration law," March 20, 2018
- ↑ Washington Secretary of State, "Washington State Voter Registration Form," accessed November 2, 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."
- ↑ Washington State Legislature, "RCW 29A.40.160," accessed October 9, 2025
| ||||||||||
