View Ballot Comments

Comments on FTPBP #3 - 2012

Jurisdiction	Position	Comments
ALABAMA	Support
ALBERTA	Support
ARIZONA	Support
Audit Committee	Support	The AC is in support of this ballot.
BRITISH COLUMBIA	Support
CALIFORNIA	Support
COLORADO	Support
CONNECTICUT	Oppose	We would prefer to see ITAC as a Special Committee with the Clearinghouse Advisory Committee becoming a subcommittee of ITAC.
IDAHO	Support
ILLINOIS	Oppose
IOWA	Support
KANSAS	Support	Kansas supports this ballot; ITAC will continue to have projects etc. to do with the growing technology changes happening every day to help keep IFTA working toward the future and changes that will need to be made to the agreement etc.
MAINE	Support	The ITAC is a valuable resource. It is logical to make this committee a standing committee.
MANITOBA	Support
MARYLAND	Support
MASSACHUSETTS	Support
MICHIGAN	Support
MINNESOTA	Support	Establishing the Information Technology Advisory Committee as a standing committee makes sense and consistent with the other standing committees.
MISSOURI	Support
MONTANA	Support
NEBRASKA	Support
NEVADA	Support
NEW BRUNSWICK	Support
NEW HAMPSHIRE	Support
NEW JERSEY	Support
NEW MEXICO	Support
NEW YORK	Support
NORTH CAROLINA	Support
NORTH DAKOTA	Support
NOVA SCOTIA	Support	The ITAC is another resource area and should be a standing committee.
OHIO	Support
ONTARIO	Support	Ontario supports the valuable work of this committee.
PENNSYLVANIA	Support
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND	Support
QUEBEC	Support
SASKATCHEWAN	Support
TEXAS	Support
UTAH	Support
VERMONT	Support
VIRGINIA	Support
WEST VIRGINIA	Support
WYOMING	Support
Support: 40 Oppose: 2 Undecided: 0