D.C. Council approves ranked-choice voting, rejects rollback of tipped wage law (for now)

In a democracy, we trust voters to make key decisions about how government will run. Or … do we? 

During a testy debate in the D.C. Council on Monday, lawmakers somewhat hesitantly agreed to stand with the city’s voters on changes to how restaurant workers are paid and how residents will cast ballots in the future.

In two closely watched and hotly debated votes, the council agreed to pay for ranked-choice voting to be brought to the city by as early as next year’s elections while also rejecting a push to repeal a measure that phases out the tipped minimum wage, a subminimum wage largely paid to restaurant workers. 

Below are all the details.

Initiative 82: phasing out the tipped wage

I don’t think I have to repeat the entire tortured history of the tipped wage in D.C., but here’s a brief summary. In 2018 voters approved a ballot initiative to start phasing out the tipped wage – meaning restaurants and other employers would, over the course of years, be required to pay their employees the standard minimum wage, rather than allowing tips to make up a majority of a worker’s income. Supporters say the law is a way to provide steadier income for workers and also prevent wage theft by employers. Critics have claimed the law would harm the restaurant industry, send restaurant prices soaring, and eventually reduce tips (and income) for tipped workers. But soon afterwards, the council overruled voters and repealed the law. In 2022 D.C. voters came back and approved a second ballot initiative rolling back the tipped wage – this time with even higher levels of support. 

For years, the matter appeared settled. But recent changes to D.C.’s economic landscape, coupled with persistent lobbying from the restaurant industry and some tipped employees, have again rekindled discussions about repealing what’s known as Initiative 82.

Earlier this year Mayor Muriel Bowser included a repeal in her proposed budget for 2026. Lawmakers initially appeared to have little appetite for relitigating the issue, but this week it appeared they were moving in the direction of repeal. Ward 2 Councilmember Brooke Pinto introduced a “compromise” measure that would repeal the law and reduce tipped workers’ base wage (the amount an employer has to pay) to $8, but require that all tipped workers make at least $20 per hour, including tips. That would mean that if a worker did not make $20 per hour of work in base pay plus tips, the employer would be required to make up the difference. (The measure would also have capped service fees at 10%.)

But Pinto's proposal fell flat on Monday, with a majority of lawmakers voting against it. Critics, led by Ward 4 Councilmember Janeese Lewis George, said it would still amount to a decrease in the wage paid to tipped workers. A larger cross-section of the council – including some members who have expressed concerns over Initiative 82’s impact on restaurants – said the proposed compromise was being rushed through without proper consideration of who it would help, who it would hurt, and whether it could be fine-tuned.

“There are ways to find solutions to support our amazing restaurants’ bottom lines and protect the workers who make these things click,” said Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen.

Most lawmakers seem to be leaning toward making some kind of change or adjustment to Initiative 82, largely because of concerns that it isn’t meeting the current economic realities in the city. Critics of Initiative 82 say that as D.C.’s economy softens because of the sweeping changes to federal employment, the city has to do everything possible to lower operating costs for businesses. But proponents of the initiative say that employment remains steady in the restaurant industry, and wages are growing more equitably for all types of restaurant workers. 

“I’m not an initiative purist,” said At Large Councilmember Christina Henderson, who voted with Lewis George. “While I trust voters, I do believe sometimes these efforts don’t have all the context necessary. When it comes to Initiative 82, I think the economic landscape has drastically changed since voters weighed in.”

What might any solution look like? It’s unclear. But the council has two weeks to figure one out before a final vote on the budget, though they could delay the debate into the fall. But if there’s one thing that seems clear, it’s that most lawmakers want to move on from the years-long debate on the tipped wage.

“I’ll need to talk to a lot of my colleagues, many of whom have been saying for months that they want to pursue a compromise,” said Ward 2 Councilmember Brooke Pinto, who pushed the failed compromise on Monday. “There is an agreement by more of them than those who didn’t vote for the amendment that the status quo is not working. There were more colleagues who were supportive of this yesterday than were today. That’s politics.”

Initiative 83: ranked-choice voting and semi-open primaries

It was last November that voters approved Initiative 83, which would bring ranked-choice voting and semi-open primaries to D.C. by as early as 2026. (Here’s a full explainer.) Since then, though, the pending question was whether the council would actually allocate the money to implement the initiative.

Chairman Phil Mendelson voted against funding the initiative, siding with segments in the city’s Democratic Party that have steadfastly opposed any changes to how residents vote. But on Monday a majority of councilmembers sided with a push from Henderson and Ward 1 Councilmember Brianne Nadeau to fund the part of the initiative dealing with ranked-choice voting – which is currently used in New York City, Takoma Park, and Arlington, among several other cities and counties across the country. 

“It is the will of the voters,” Nadeau said. “We can advance something that will make a difference very soon in how we elect leaders in the city.”

“This increases choice. People are more sophisticated than we give them credit for. They can do this,” said Ward 3 Matt Frumin, addressing oft-repeated concerns that ranked-choice voting will be too confusing for some voters. “It improves our democracy.”

For his part, At-Large Councilmember Robert White said he wanted to support the will of the voters, and that ranked-choice voting can offer voters more and better choices. But he also asked that his colleagues keep in mind how ranked-choice voting plays out among different racial and economic groups, urging that a deep data dive happen after the first few election cycles. (Analysis has shown that low-income voters and voters of color more often cast “exhausted ballots,” or those where none of their choices reach the final round, meaning their ballot does not ultimately count). “I don’t think we should feel comfortable ignoring an equity issue,” he said.

That equity concern pushed At Large Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie to vote against the proposal to fund ranked-choice voting. 

“It forces voters to game out all these different choices rather than vote for the person they actually support. That complexity leads to higher rates of ballot errors, especially among Black voters. Instead of strengthening our democracy, this risks weakening it,” he said. “What D.C. needs is not some new complicated system. We need to increase turnout, especially in wards 5, 7, and 8. We need to reduce voter confusion. This is a huge mistake.”

Mistake or not, ranked-choice voting is moving forward. It will now be left to the D.C. Board of Elections to implement it ahead of next June’s primary election, including rolling out a public education campaign for voters.

“I believe we can move forward and work out the kinks,” Henderson said.