Eugene uses Approval Voting for Referendums

[Forest Simmons]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Richard Moore wrote:

> Moe St. EverGreen wrote:
> 
> > Maybe they don't call it Approval in Eugene,
> > but read this description of an upcoming referendum election:
> > 
> > "UPCOMING DECISION POINT: November 6 election. Voters will be asked to consider two ballot measures. One measure asks voters to
> > authorize the West Eugene Parkway and explains the funding tradeoffs. A second measure asks voters to cancel the Parkway and seek
> > other solutions to west 11th transportation issues. If both measures pass, the one with the most votes will prevail. "
> > 
> > I think this is a good method for organizations to make
> > mutually exclusive decisions.. much better than IRV.
> 
> 
> Actually I think this is standard procedure in many states. 
> It's not straight Approval but I think it is equivalent to 
> Demorep's method, that Forest calls ACMA.
> 

For more than two mutually exclusive measures it would be equivalent to
Approval with a 50% quota.

Demorep's ACMA uses the quota, but then tries for a CW before falling back
on Approval. 

ACMA = (Approval quota -> Condorcet -> Most Approval)

It's hard to beat for a practical method.

Forcing it into a simpler ballot (four or five allowed levels) is the only
practical improvement that I can suggest. 

Forest