An Act to amend and reenact § 24.2-673.1 of the Code of Virginia and to repeal the fourth enactment of Chapter 1054 of the Acts of Assembly of 2020, relating to elections; conduct of election; ranked choice voting; locally elected offices; report.
HB630 amends Virginia’s ranked choice voting law for locally elected offices, specifically county boards of supervisors, city councils, and town councils. The bill keeps ranked choice voting available for these local elections through July 1, 2031, and clarifies how a local governing body may choose to use it by majority vote after consulting with the local electoral board and general registrar. It also requires the State Board of Elections to assess technical feasibility within 10 days after a local decision and to explain what steps would be needed if implementation is not technically feasible.
The bill further directs the State Board to establish standards for vote-tabulation software used with existing voting systems and allows software vendors to seek State Board examination of their products. It authorizes regulations for administering ranked choice elections, including round-by-round tabulation, winner determination for single- and multi-seat contests, and ballot standards. The bill also addresses final tabulation procedures, requires bipartisan duplication of damaged machine-readable ballots, and mandates public reporting of round-by-round results and ballot-level ranking data to the extent feasible while protecting voter privacy.
HB630 updates § 24.2-673.1 of the Code of Virginia and repeals a prior enactment from Chapter 1054 of the 2020 Acts of Assembly, thereby extending and refining the statutory framework for ranked choice voting in local elections. It affects local governing bodies that choose to adopt ranked choice voting, the State Board of Elections, local electoral boards, general registrars, and software vendors supporting election tabulation. The bill also creates potential cost-reimbursement obligations for towns using ranked choice voting when county election costs increase because of that choice.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote history, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the provided materials. The enacted chapter text suggests the measure advanced successfully through the legislative process and was approved as Chapter 1062 on April 22, 2026. Based on the bill’s structure, the overall posture appears to be supportive of allowing localities to use ranked choice voting while adding administrative safeguards and reporting requirements.
The main points of potential contention are administrative feasibility, cost, and election administration complexity. Local governing bodies may favor the flexibility to adopt ranked choice voting, while election administrators and the State Board may be concerned with software certification, ballot standards, and timely implementation. The reimbursement provision for towns could also be a point of dispute between towns and counties over who bears added election costs. Another likely area of concern is the public release of ballot-level ranking data, which must be balanced against voter privacy protections.