What happens to existing local ordinances that currently allow ranked choice voting if this bill becomes law?
Short answer
If Michigan House Bill 4707 is enacted into law, any existing city or township ordinance that authorizes ranked choice voting (RCV) would become void and unenforceable. The state legislation explicitly overrides local charters or laws that permit this voting method, requiring local jurisdictions to cease its use in future elections.
What the bill or law says
House Bill 4707 amends the Michigan Election Law by adding a new section, 642e. This section prohibits the state, cities, and townships from conducting any election using ranked choice voting Engrossed Bill Text. The text specifically addresses local authority, stating that local governments cannot enact or enforce any law or ordinance that authorizes RCV. It declares that any existing or future local law violating this prohibition is void and unenforceable Engrossed Bill Text. This provision ensures that state law supersedes local home rule provisions regarding voting methods.
How it works in practice
For cities and townships that have already adopted ranked choice voting, the practical effect would be a mandatory reversion to traditional voting systems. Local officials would need to adjust ballot designs, voting equipment, and tabulation processes to comply with the state prohibition. Voters in these jurisdictions would no longer have the option to rank candidates, returning to the standard method of selecting one candidate per office. The bill defines ranked choice voting broadly, covering systems where voters rank candidates by preference and ballots are tabulated in multiple rounds, as well as methods that allow voters to select more candidates than there are positions to fill Engrossed Bill Text. This centralizes election procedure standards at the state level, removing the ability of local jurisdictions to experiment with alternative voting methods.
What the source does not answer
The provided legislative records do not detail specific fiscal impacts or costs associated with reversing RCV preparations. While local governments that have invested in RCV infrastructure may face costs, the exact financial burden is not quantified in the available documents House Fiscal Note: Summary as Reported. Additionally, the sources do not specify a timeline for how quickly localities must transition back to traditional voting methods after the bill takes effect, beyond noting that the House gave the bill immediate effect. The records also do not list which specific Michigan cities currently have active RCV ordinances that would be affected.