Laserfiche WebLink
b) statewide standards for those cities <br />that choose to adopt RCV to ensure it <br />is implemented consistently <br />throughout the state to give voters <br />confidence in the fairness of the <br />alternative process of casting their <br />ballots and in the outcome of such <br />elections; <br />c) a state certification process for voting <br />systems used in tabulating RCV <br />elections; and <br />d) allowing for the use of more than one <br />ballot should a city with RCV conduct <br />a municipal election in conjunction <br />with a state general election. <br />SD- 74. Voter Assistance <br />Issue: Increasingly, voters may need <br />assistance with language translation. <br />Currently state statute does not allow for the <br />hiring of language interpreters for the sole <br />purpose of assisting voters with ballot <br />language interpretation; they must also be <br />trained as and serve as election judges. This <br />limits the availability and access to language <br />interpretation for voters. <br />The federal Uniformed and Overseas <br />Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) <br />provides the legal basis for absentee voting <br />requirements for U.S. citizens who are <br />active members of the Uniformed Services, <br />the Merchant Marine, and the commissioned <br />corps of the Public Health Service and the <br />National Oceanic and Atmospheric <br />Administration, their eligible family <br />members and U.S citizens residing outside <br />of the United States. This process allows a <br />voter to complete a ballot electronically and <br />then return it via mail. Voters with <br />disabilities may have assistive technology <br />within their homes that best meets their <br />needs. Allowing them to receive a ballot <br />electronically, similarly to UOCAVA voters, <br />would subsequently allow them to complete <br />their ballot utilizing their own personal <br />63 <br />assistive technology. State statute does not <br />allow a voter to complete a ballot <br />electronically. <br />As election equipment and assistive <br />technology continues to evolve, it is critical <br />that local elections administrators have <br />flexibility in purchasing equipment and <br />technology that will best meet the needs of <br />voters within their communities. <br />Issue: The League of Minnesota Cities <br />supports the ability of elections <br />administrators to respond to the needs of <br />voters who may benefit from assistance to <br />ensure the greatest level of participation <br />by those eligible to vote. This includes: <br />a) <br />b) <br />c) <br />Allowing the hiring of second language <br />interpreters to staff polling places; <br />Extending electronic voting to people <br />with disabilities; and <br />Increasing flexibility for elections <br />administrators to purchase assistive <br />voting equipment and technology that <br />best meets the needs of voters with <br />disabilities. <br />SD-75. Electronic Rosters <br />Issue: While electronic rosters (or "e-poll <br />books") may increase efficiency and <br />decrease cost for some cities, this may not <br />be true for all. As cities explore the use of <br />electronic rosters, data collected from the <br />Office of the Secretary of State and from <br />jurisdictions that have used the technology, <br />may be helpful in determining next steps <br />and to improve the process. Currently when <br />a voter verifies their identity at a polling <br />place via an electronic roster, they sign a <br />paper form. State law does not allow voters <br />to sign the e-poll book. <br />Response: As the Legislature continues to <br />examine the use of electronic rosters, <br />cities should retain the option of utilizing <br />