Council to consider keeping elections the way they are

State election law has changed, but the city council has a chance to override the changes and keep everything in Peoria status quo. Here’s the skinny:

The state legislature last year changed the requirements for when a primary election has to be held in municipal nonpartisan elections — things like mayor, councilman, clerk, etc. Under the old rules, you had to have a primary election if there were more than two candidates for each office.

For example, in the mayor’s race, if there were three or four people running for mayor, there had to be a primary to narrow the field to two. Then those two would face off in the general election. In the case of at-large council seats, the issue is simply multiplied. There are five at-large seats, and there can’t be more than two candidates per seat — that means that ten (5 x 2) is the magic number. If there are more than ten candidates for at-large seats, then a primary election must be held.

Clear as mud? Okay, so now the state legislature has gone and changed the numbers. You now have to have a primary election only if there are more than four candidates for each office.

So now, using the same examples above, if there are three or four people running for mayor, no primary needed. They’ll all face off in the general election. That means, of course, that one could win with a mere plurality of voters. And considering how low voter turnout is these days, that means a pretty small number of people could be deciding who the next mayor is. In the case of at-large seats, there can’t be more than four candidates per seat, and there are still five seats, which means twenty (5 x 4) is the new magic number. If there are more than twenty candidates for at-large seats, then a primary election must be held.

Peoria is a home-rule municipality, which means it can set its own rules for holding a primary election. But there’s a catch: they can only do it by referendum. So, on the council agenda for Tuesday (8/26) is resolution that would put that referendum on the November ballot. The question on the ballot would read as follows:

Shall the City of Peoria hold nonpartisan primary elections, to reduce the field of candidates to 2, when more than 2 persons have filed valid nominating papers and/or notice of intent to become a write-in candidate for the office of Mayor, Clerk, Treasurer or District Councilman; and, in the case of At-Large Councilmen, to 10, when more than 10 persons have filed valid nominating papers and/or notice of intent to become a write-in candidate?

YES or NO

My suggestion would be to vote yes. I don’t think we want a mayor to be elected by plurality. A win by plurality would arguably weaken that mayor’s administration. Same for the district council members.

Furthermore, this system seems to me to favor the incumbent. Imagine, for instance, if this had been in place when Gale Thetford, Bob Manning, and Angela Anderson were running in the third district, and Thetford was the incumbent. She probably would have won because the votes against her would have been split. That right there is enough reason to change it back!

UPDATE: I knew I was going to write on this, so I deliberately didn’t read Billy’s post on it until after I wrote my own. I’m amazed at how similar our conclusions were. He’s smarter than I thought….