http://www.hometownargus.com/2005/April/5townships.html
The
Caledonia Argus
Houston
County's News Source for over 130 years
Posted:
4/5/05
Some polling
places might be combined
Houston
County auditor explains voting changes to township officers
By David
Heiller
Argus News
Editor
Some major
changes in elections are scheduled to start next year.
That was one
of the messages that about 40 Houston County township officials heard at their
annual meeting on March 28.
County
auditor Pete Johnson spoke about the voting changes for about half an hour at
the Four Seasons Community Center.
The meeting
also included a legislative update by Rep. Greg Davids, and a presentation on
anaerobic digesters (see related story).
The voting
changes are partly due to the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), Johnson told
township officers. HAVA is a federal law that was passed in 2002 as a result of
the voting controversy in Florida during the 2000 presidential election.
The law
requires that every voter should get equal opportunity to cast their vote in
secrecy, regardless of disability, Johnson said.
In addition,
Houston County’s central count equipment that has been in use since 1992 is
outdated and needs to be replaced. Rather than do that, Johnson is recommending
that each polling place have its own precinct counter.
If some
precincts share polling places, as Johnson is also recommending, the total
price tag for Houston County with the HAVA law and precinct counters would be
about $150,000. It would cost about $195,000 if all of the county’s 27 polling
places stay separate with no combined precincts.
“This
(combining polling places) will streamline what we’re doing as far as elections
go,” Johnson said.
Some federal
grant money will be coming to help pay for the HAVA requirements, Johnson said.
All of these
changes are for state and federal elections, Johnson said. He hopes they won’t
apply to township elections, at which voter turnout is usually very low.
“We feel
that the townships can count the ballots like they have in the past,” Johnson
said.
Houston
County has always used a central counter. It’s current one was bought in 1992
and has handled 14 elections. It is outdated and vendors are not supplying
parts for it anymore, Johnson said..
The HAVA
equipment will accommodate people in wheelchairs, and people with handicaps
related to eyesight, hearing, or using their extremities.
County
auditors don’t expect usage will be high for any of this equipment, especially
the HAVA machines, Johnson said. One county auditor told him it would be
cheaper to buy a HAVA machine for every person who needs one in the county
rather than for every precinct. Johnson said he has never heard a complaint
from someone not being able to vote.
Another wrinkle
in the HAVA requirement is that the federal government hasn’t nailed down all
the requirements for the equipment, Johnson. “We can try to anticipate what
they’re going to say,” he said. But it could lead to a big scramble in the fall
to get the equipment purchase and in place by January 1. It’s an unrealistic
goal in Johnson’s opinion, and there has been discussion that HAVA compliance
be put off until the 2008 election.
Precinct
counters are straight orward, Johnson said, and have been in place in many
Minnesota counties for 15-20 years or more.
Minnesota
Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer wants precinct counters in every polling
place so that mistakes can be corrected right at the time that they are made,
Johnson said. The machines reject incorrect ballots. That way the voter has the
opportunity to vote correctly. With the central count system, correcting
spoiled ballots was impossible.
The HAVA law
and the move to new precinct counters did not receive a warm welcome from
people at the meeting last week. “We’re being forced to fix something that
quite frankly doesn’t need fixing,” second district county Kevin Kelleher said,
echoing comments that were murmured around the tables in the room. “I’m not
sure at the end we’re going to have anything better.”
Leaders
support proposed bill
In other
comments at the meeting, Greg Davids, Minnesota State Representative from
District 31B, said that he supported a bill (H.F 1752) that would change the
involvement of the MPCA and Department of Agriculture in the review and
adoption of feedlot ordinances in counties and township. He said he had heard
from opponents of the bill that it would take away local control, but does not
agree.
Gary
Pedersen, the District 1 representative for the Minnesota Association of
Townships, agreed with Davids. “We’re viewing this bill as being friendly to
the townships,” he said.
Polling
places could be shared
Houston
County has 27 voter precincts. Combing polling places into 12 locations could
save about $35,000 in the purchase of new voting machines, according to auditor
Pete Johnson. He suggested the following combinations at the annual township
officers meeting on March 28. The number of registered voters is given in
parentheses. Houston County has 11,933 registered voters.
• Houston
city (555), Houston (275), Money Creek Township (367);
• Sheldon
(176), Yucatan (241);
• Black
Hammer (179), City of Spring Grove (690), Spring Grove (246);
• City of
Caledonia, precinct one (722), precinct two (944);
• Caledonia
(380), Mayville (236);
• City of
Eitzen (143), Wilmington (275), Winnebago (149);
• City of
Brownsville (346), Brownsville (250);
• Crooked
Creek (186), Jefferson (77);
• City of
Hokah (355), Hokah (354), Union (218), Mound Prairie (408);
• La
Crescent, precinct one (1,475);
• La
Crescent, precinct two (1,275), precinct three (423);
• La
Crescent (988).
Top of Page
Caledonia
Argus
121 West
Main
P.O. Box 227
Caledonia,
MN 55921-0227
507/724-3475
E-Mail:
editor.argus@ecm-inc.com
FAIR USE
NOTICE
This site
contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our
efforts to advance understanding of political, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes. For more
information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish
to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.