On this week's episode of OPEN AGENDA (S3 E7) we analyze why city council president Angela Blake and her cohort, Michele Gregory, continue to push for “ranked choice voting” in city elections. Despite their assertions, there are no indications that Salisbury voters support ranked choice voting, or for that matter, even understand how it works. Historically in Salisbury, very few candidates run for any particular office and elections are often uncontested (only a single candidate). Ranked choice voting only makes sense when many candidates typically compete for the same office, thus making it difficult for any one of them to receive a majority of the votes. This is almost never the case in Salisbury, but the last mayoral election was unusual because there were multiple candidates. Ultimately, no candidate received a majority of the votes, so Randy Taylor was elected with a plurality (he got the most votes but not a majority). This is not extraordinary and happens frequently in races ranging from the local to the national levels. Thus, it is clear that council members Blake and Gregory are motivated only by their opposition to Mayor Taylor, and their push for ranked choice voting is only a scheme to diminish his chances for reelection. The kind of election reform that voters are really interested in is giving the people a say in how city council vacancies are filled. The current system denied voters a voice as to who will represent them in District 2 after D'Shawn Doughty was recently forced to resign. That decision was made for them by the remaining city council members--a decidedly undemocratic process. But councilwomen Blake and Gregory seem disinclined to change the system because it would diminish their power, and are simply using ranked choice voting to distract voters from the real problem. Should any “representative” who doesn't want voters to determine their own destinies be trusted? Tune in and be informed.