Those of us who have spent years working toward a more just democracy understand something that most people learn only after years of frustration: the problem is rarely just the people in power. The problem is the system that puts them there and keeps them there.
San Diego is a clear example of this truth. Our city has seen decades of serious government failures: pension scandals, the 101 Ash Street debacle that cost taxpayers millions on a building too toxic to use, and a recent audit showing $15 million in unauthorized contract spending by the mayor’s office. The damage shows in public opinion: 78% of San Diego voters believe corruption is a problem in local government, and 70% say that people like them have little influence on how city government works.
Most people blame bad actors. But those of us focused on structural change know better. These failures are the result of a system that concentrates power, limits competition, and shields officials from real accountability. If you want different results, you have to change the rules.
What We Are Advocating
My organization, The Justice Workshop, together with San Diegans for Justice, is working to place a Choice Voting charter amendment on the San Diego ballot in 2028 through a citizens’ petition. (https://thejusticeworkshop.org/ )
The amendment makes three changes. First, all San Diego city elections would use ranked choice voting: voters rank candidates in order of preference rather than picking just one. Second, primaries are eliminated. They cost the city millions to run, most voters skip them, and they give incumbents an unfair edge over challengers. Third, the city council grows from nine members to fifteen: the nine existing district seats stay as they are, and six new citywide seats are added, filled through a ranked citywide election where all six winners are chosen at the same time. (https://thejusticeworkshop.org/the-proposed-san-diego-city-charter-amendment-for-choice-voting-an-overview/ )
Why the Current System Fails
San Diego’s primary elections use a system where each voter picks one candidate and whoever gets the most votes advances, even without a majority. This creates the spoiler effect, where voters feel forced to abandon the candidate they prefer in order to block a worse outcome. It also causes vote-splitting, where two similar candidates divide the same pool of supporters and allow a less popular candidate to move forward. And it rewards attack campaigns, because tearing down opponents is often easier than building broad support.
Our current system makes things worse. Each of San Diego’s nine council members represents roughly 156,000 residents. That is nearly double the 80,000 to 100,000 range that serves as a functional benchmark for responsive local representation. If your preferred candidate finishes second, you have no one fighting for you, no matter how close the race was.
The effects of this are not random; they follow from the design. Special interest groups with money and organization do far better than their size would suggest in low-turnout races decided by slim margins. When only one person can win each district, powerful interests have strong incentives to manipulate where district lines are drawn in order to lock in favorable outcomes. And political division grows because the system rewards firing up a base rather than finding common ground.
What Makes Choice Voting Different
Choice Voting brings together two reforms that election experts have long called the best tools for fair representation: Ranked Choice Voting and Proportional Representation. (https://www.representwomen.org/proportional_ranked_choice_voting_prcv; https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/proportional-representation/ ; https://thefulcrum.us/electoral-reforms/ranked-choice-voting-study )
With Ranked Choice Voting, voters can back the candidate they genuinely believe in without fear of wasting their vote. If that candidate cannot win, their vote moves to their next choice. Candidates do better by running positive campaigns, because they need second- and third-choice support from a wide range of voters. Working together becomes smarter than tearing others down.
Proportional Representation means that the makeup of a council reflects how people actually voted, rather than handing everything to whoever wins by the smallest margin. The six new citywide seats in our proposed charter amendment work this way. Groups of voters who share common concerns but live across the city rather than in one district can elect someone who genuinely represents them.
Together, these changes mean more votes count, more people have real representation, and elected officials answer to a wider range of residents rather than to the narrow groups that the current system rewards.
Relevant History
Neither of these ideas is new or untested. Cambridge, Massachusetts has used proportional ranked choice voting for city council since 1941. Albany, California adopted a similar system in 2020. New York City and San Francisco use ranked ballots for major offices. More than sixty places across the United States now use systems like these.
The history goes deeper than that. Systems like these were actually more common in American cities in the early twentieth century. They were often repealed not because they failed, but because they worked too well. They produced more diverse councils that were harder for powerful interests to control. That is worth keeping in mind when people say this kind of reform is too radical or too complex for voters to accept.
Why Pay Attention?
Those of us committed to real democratic reform have always understood something that entrenched political interests prefer to keep quiet: election rules are not neutral. Those rules shape who runs, who wins, how campaigns are run, and how officials act once in office. A system built on districts where only one person can win tends to shut out the people and ideas that challenge those already in power.
Choice Voting changes that. It is not a reform that helps one party or faction. It simply makes election results better reflect what voters want. It gives candidates with real community support a fair shot against those backed by big money and political machines.
For those who believe democracy works best when it includes everyone, when it draws people in rather than pushing them away, and when it holds leaders accountable to the public rather than to donors: Choice Voting is not just one option among many. It is the base on which a more responsive local government can be built.
Get Involved
Getting this charter amendment on the 2028 ballot means gathering tens of thousands of signatures in a short window. That work has already begun. If you live in San Diego and want a government that serves its residents, sign up at https://thejusticeworkshop.org/ . We will contact you when the petition is ready. You can also volunteer, donate, and help get the word out.
San Diego’s election rules have been failing residents for a long time. We have the chance to fix them, and the people ready to do that work are already at it.
