Let’s try something different with our elections: ranked choice voting

The mayoral candidates now attacking one another likely know, deep down, that after the votes are counted we must work together if we are to flourish as a city, state and country. But how much better it would be if elections didn’t add to our divides.

Let’s try ranked choice voting next election. With ranked choice, we could select not just one candidate, but also state our second, third and so on choices. No one could win without some support from a majority of Chicagoans.

In 2019, the top two mayoral candidates moved to the runoff, yet more than 70% of the voters had supported someone else. Eliminating the need for a runoff election would save the city millions. And voters wouldn’t be thinking, “How do I prevent my least favorite from getting in the runoff?”

Best for voters and for Chicago, there would be more positive, informative campaigning. Candidates would have to appeal to all Chicagoans. Attacking other candidates might antagonize the supporters a candidate needs in order to be voters’ second or third choice, if not their first choice.

Abigail Nichols, Streeterville

Voters, consider candidates’ stance on public school funding

In his recent very creative column, “Don’t divert public money to private use,” Neil Steinberg metaphorically describes private schools in Chicago, where the average school tuition is $11,000 a year, as a beautifully groomed private Sky Sidewalk looming over the cracked and dirty city sidewalk of the public schools below.

Ironically, this members-only “Sky Sidewalk” receives city school voucher money, paid for by us Chicago taxpayers. Steinberg views this to be wrong and claims this money should instead be spent on helping to make our public schools better. I wholeheartedly agree.

Hopefully, this issue will be discussed more prominently with the mayoral candidates in the next few weeks Check out their positions on this important subject and also the positions of candidates running for alderpersons in your wards.

What would they pick to help fund with our money — a cleaner city sidewalk school or an attractive privately-run Sky Sidewalk school? Your vote on this will count.

Jeanine Tobin, Galewood

Public should be willing to spend more on police training

Many thanks to Mona Charen for her recent columns calling for police reform. And these from a Reagan conservative!

Charen has pointed out the reverse relationship between the amount of police training in various countries and killings of citizens by the police. Charen also suggested one change police could make that would cost nothing: Stop escalating situations needlessly. Stop cursing at citizens.

This suggestion, though, does not diminish the need to increase police training substantially. Maybe if it sank in more how much they risk their own lives and careers by acting recklessly, police officers would be more likely to behave professionally.

Yes, this training would cost substantially more. But would it cost more than the hundreds of millions in settlements stemming from police misconduct? Would it cost more than the number of lives ruined among both the citizenry and police due to the way some police behave? What dollar value should be placed on police losing trust among the citizens?

Kevin Coughlin. Evanston