10
Loading video...
By Tom Sanders
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The mayoral race in Minnesota’s Spring Lake Park may be decided by a “game of chance” after both candidates received the exact same number of votes.
Both incumbent mayor Robert Nelson and challenger Haylen Roth tied in the race with 1,401 votes apiece, while write-in candidates received 13 votes, denying either man a victory.
Under Minnesota law, in the event of a tie, the impasse will be broken by drawing lots, which means the next mayor will be decided by chance at the next city council meeting, due to be held at 5:30 p.m. on Monday.
Read More on News
City officials first plan to canvass the results. If there is still a tie, they will then print each candidate's names on slips of paper, fold them up, and place them into two small containers. These will then be placed into a bag and selected randomly, with the winner becoming the new mayor of Spring Lake Park.
The loser then has the opportunity to request an official recount, which could potentially delay the victory until November 17.
...
"While I don't love the idea of randomly picking our next Mayor, I understand that Minnesota State law is quite clear on the issue," Roth told Newsweek. "Hopefully, this race might spark lawmakers to look at reforming the law.
"If I am the loser, I do intend on requesting a recount. I feel like we owe it to the residents of Spring Lake Park to make sure every single vote was counted accurately."
He added: "I've heard from many people who are frustrated by this process. Here's what I can tell them: call or write to our state legislature and ask them to change the law. My understanding is that this rule has been on the books for a very long time. In these times where people are so evenly divided, it's possible that more tied votes will occur. I think it's reasonable for lawmakers to revisit the statute to ensure it is actually the best way to settle a tied vote.
City Administrator Daniel Buchholtz was more upbeat about the process however, telling CBS “It's a process that's been outlined in state law for a long time and it's a process that I believe is fair.”
Newsweek has contacted both candidates and Mr Buchholtz for additional comment.
An Unusual But Not Unprecedented Outcome
Although the process of deciding elections by chance is exceedingly rare, its use is not unprecedented and many states have some form of tiebreaking statute on the books.
Thirty five states employ some form of drawing lots to break the deadlock if a vote ends in a tie, according to a 2014 study by the Washington Post. While most do not specify the specific game of chance used to select a winner, some states do - Idaho in particular decrees the winner be chosen by a coin toss, while others have drawn straws or picked the winner from a hat.
Fourteen states simply cancel the election and hold a new one if the result ends in a tie, while others defer to their state’s legislators and canvassing board to pick a winner.
In 2017, a crucial legislative race in Virginia was decided by drawing lots after Republican incumbent David Yancey successfully challenged one ballot against Democratic challenger Shelly Simonds, leading to a tie. Following a protracted legal dispute, each candidate's name was placed inside a film canister, which was then placed into a bowl before being picked by legislators. Yancey's name was picked, meaning the Republicans won the election and maintained control of the state’s House of Delegates.
In 2016, a mayoral race in Bradenton Beach, Florida, was determined by a Vegas-style game of cards following a tie. Each candidate was required to draw a card, with the highest number winning. Incumbent Mayor Jack Clarke drew a 10, which gave him a significant advantage, but he was later defeated by challenger Bill Shearon after he bested him by drawing an Ace.
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Tobias Meyjes and Cristina Diciu.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines