[EM] [RangeVoting] Re: voting reform effort in DENVER - PLEASEHELP

James Gilmour jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk
Sun Jun 11 16:07:35 PDT 2006

Some factual corrections needed.

If you look at the Denver City website at:
you will find this statement:
Since 1971, the Council has had 13 members -- 11 from equally populated districts and two elected at large.

That's why I wrote in an earlier message "(a body of 13 members)" as quoted below.  I did not say anything about the
electoral districts at that point because it was not relevant to the point I was making.

> > Promoters of the many different voting systems need to stand back from all the
> > competing technicalities for one moment
> > and ask the question: "What is the purpose of this election?"  In the case of Denver it
> > appears to be to elect a 'city council'  (a body of 13 members) that is supposed to be representative of the
> > community it is elected to serve.

Jan wrote
> Right now it's 13 single-winner elections.

Not correct. See above.

> > Warren D Smith wrote:
> > Gilmour seems to think it is a 13-winner election.

Gilmour never suggested any such thing.  Gilmour knew it was 11 single-member districts plus 2 at large.  Please read
what is written, in context, and please do not make unjustified assumptions.

However, as there are already two "at large" members, the ideas of "at large" elections or multi-member electoral
districts are not completely alien to the council and the electors of Denver City.  That seems to me to be a base on
which to start to build the case for STV-PR, either electing all 13 at large, or in two multi-member districts.

James Gilmour

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list