View Ballot Comments

Comments on FTPBP #3 - 2012

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