Could Ranked Choice Voting Be Coming to Connecticut's Municipal Elections? Pros and Cons Take Center Stage

A bipartisan coalition of municipal leaders from across Connecticut has sent a joint letter to Governor Ned Lamont and legislative leaders urging passage of legislation to authorize Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) as an opt-in option for municipalities.

The call for action comes as Senate Bill 386 - legislation that would allow Connecticut municipalities to voluntarily adopt Ranked Choice Voting for municipal elections and party primaries - received a favorable vote this month from the Government Administration and Elections (GAE) Committee in the Connecticut General Assembly, advancing the proposal in the legislative process.

The letter - addressed to Democratic and Republic legislative leaders - emphasizes that the proposal would not mandate RCV statewide, but instead empower cities and towns to adopt the system for their own municipal elections if they choose.

Signatories include mayors and local officials representing communities including Stamford, New Britain, Norwalk, Norwich, Bridgeport, and Hartford, which advocates say underscores the broad geographic and bipartisan support for the reform.

“This is a practical, incremental reform that respects local control,” the municipal leaders write. “It gives communities the freedom to strengthen democratic participation in ways that best reflect their residents’ needs.”

The coalition points to what they describe as “troubling declines in civic engagement” during the 2023 municipal elections. Bridgeport’s turnout fell to 19.98% (down from 21.98% in 2019), while Hartford’s dropped to 13.74% (down from 18.14% in 2019). The municipal leaders argue that these numbers reflect both voter disengagement and diminished confidence in a system that frequently produces plurality winners without majority support.

Ranked Choice Voting allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference, ensuring that winners secure majority backing in multi-candidate races. Supporters contend that this approach reduces negative campaigning, encourages coalition-building, and leads to more issue-focused elections.

The letter also notes that the opt-in municipal framework is consistent with the Governor’s Working Group on RCV and is unaffected by the Attorney General’s recent opinion concerning constitutional offices, as the proposal applies only to municipal elections and party primaries—well within the authority of the General Assembly.

At the recent public hearing, testimony in favor of RCV came from a wide-ranging bipartisan coalition, including municipal leaders, veterans, labor organizations, environmental advocates, student leaders from UConn and Yale, good-government groups, and representatives from both major parties as well as the Connecticut Independent Party.

Research cited during the hearing highlighted increased engagement under RCV systems elsewhere. In Minneapolis–St. Paul, voter turnout increased by 9.6% after adopting RCV, with the most significant gains in higher-poverty areas, they noted. Advocates argue that similar outcomes could help reverse declining participation in Connecticut’s cities and towns.

With recent Quinnipiac polling showing that nearly 70% of voters express concern about the future of democracy, municipal leaders describe RCV as a timely, constitutional, and community-driven reform that can help restore public trust.

“As a mayor, my priority is making sure residents feel heard and represented,” said Norwalk Mayor Barbara Smyth. “Ranked Choice Voting offers a way to encourage broader participation and ensure that winners in multi-candidate races have true majority support. Giving cities like Norwalk the option to adopt RCV is a practical step that strengthens local democracy while preserving our ability to choose what works best for our community.”

Mayor Caroline Simmons of Stamford said, “This opt-in framework is exactly the kind of practical, incremental reform that respects local control while modernizing our democratic processes. Allowing municipalities to adopt Ranked Choice Voting voluntarily ensures that communities can evaluate and implement reforms that strengthen participation and better reflect the will of their voters.”

Norwich Mayor Swarnjit Singh added, “Ranked Choice Voting allows residents to rank candidates in order of preference, ensuring that winners earn majority support—particularly important in races with multiple candidates. Providing municipalities the option to adopt RCV would give local leaders the flexibility to strengthen democratic participation and give voters more voice in their communities.”

The letter states that “This simple but meaningful reform would not mandate RCV statewide; rather, it would empower local governments—should they choose—to adopt RCV for their own municipal elections. We believe local leaders deserve the freedom to use tools that strengthen democratic participation and give voters more voice in their communities.”

The bottom line, they explained, was clear:  “RCV restores trust, strengthens representation, and improves the tone and quality of our politics.”  They noted that “This local-choice approach is pragmatic, flexible, and deeply aligned with our shared commitment to strengthening democratic participation across the state.”

In addition to significant support for the legislation, the public hearing testimony, both in-person and submitted in writing, was also characterized by substantial opposition.  Lisa Amatruda, Republican Registrar of voters in Woodbury, Chair of the Litchfield County Registrars of Voters of Connecticut (ROVAC) representing 26 mostly small towns in Connecticut, and Co-Chair of the ROVAC Legislative Committee explained why. 

“While ranked choice voting (RCV) is often presented as a modernization effort, it introduces significant challenges at a time when election systems are already undergoing major transitions. Election administration is already absorbing multiple major changes. New tabulators, the rollout of early voting, and the upcoming statewide voter registration system represent substantial operational shifts. Adding RCV now would strain local election offices and increase the risk of errors.”

She went on to explain that “RCV complicates the voting process. Many voters are unfamiliar with ranking candidates, and registrars—who interact directly with voters—would bear the burden of explaining a more complex ballot and tabulation method. RCV threatens timely and transparent results.”

Amatruda went on to indicate that “RCV tabulation relies on algorithmic redistribution of votes, which can delay results and make the process harder for voters to understand. Slower, more opaque results risk undermining voter confidence at a time when trust in elections is critical. Given the volume of recent changes and the potential for confusion, the registrars believe Connecticut should pause before introducing another major shift in election procedures,” she concluded.

Waterbury Town Clerk Antoinette “Chick” Spinelli and Peter C. Smith, Milford Town Clerk, who serve as Co-Chairs of the Legislative and Elections Committee of the Connecticut Town Clerks Association also highlighted their concerns in joint testimony.

“Over the past several years, election officials have worked diligently to implement numerous substantial changes, including early voting, new voting tabulators, and a new statewide election management system utilized by Registrars of Voters, Town Clerks, and election workers,” they explained.

“Each of these initiatives has required extensive training, voter education and procedural updates. The adoption of ranked-choice voting would represent a major structural change. Such a system would require considerable time and resources for the Secretary of the State to develop regulations and procedures, conduct comprehensive training for Town Clerks, Registrars of Voters, and election workers, and educate the electorate.

Connecticut voters are accustomed to a straightforward ‘fill in the oval’ voting method. Transitioning to ranked-choice voting would necessitate a robust and sustained public education effort to ensure voters understand how to properly cast their ballots.”

They concluded that “Connecticut’s election system is also unique in that elections are administered locally by 169 separate towns and cities. Coordinating the collection, aggregation, and reporting of ranked choice voting results from all municipalities for statewide races could present operational and logistical challenges, particularly in delivering timely and accurate results.”

State Senator Cathy Osten (D-Sprague), co-chair of the legislature’s Appropriations Committee and Deputy Senate President Pro Tempore, who served as one of the Co-Chairs of the Governor's Ranked-Choice Voting Working Group in 2024, testified that she “was happy to recommend that the legislature take up legislation on RCV. Connecticut has already taken significant action to modernize and enhance the voting process and RCV is the next logical step.”  She added, in addressing her legislative colleagues, “We must ensure that proper funding is in place for all necessary equipment, software, training, and education so that people may exercise their franchise in the most secure and convenient manner possible.”