IFTA Ballot Proposals Comments

IFTA Ballot Comments

You can now browse through past ballot comments using the tools below.


BALLOT #3 • 2022

1st Period comments

Jurisdiction feedback for BALLOT #3.

32Support
0Oppose
1Undecided
JurisdictionPositionComments
ALABAMAALABAMASupport
ALBERTAALBERTASupportAs written it is not clear if the board is requesting a resolution under the provisions of the DRP, or if the jurisdiction has failed to bring its IFTA program into compliance under the provisions of the DRP. 

The DRP remedies 3 and 4 imply that it is the resolution that is requested pursuant to the Articles. For clarity Alberta suggests that the wording of R1555.300.005 be amended as follows:

The IFTA, Inc. Board of Trustees may request, under the provisions of the IFTA Dispute Resolution Process, a resolution to expel a member jurisdiction which has failed to bring its IFTA program into compliance
ARKANSASARKANSASSupport
BRITISH COLUMBIABRITISH COLUMBIASupport
CONNECTICUTCONNECTICUTSupport
IDAHOIDAHOSupport
ILLINOISILLINOISUndecidedThe issues discussed in Ballot #1, would have application here in that a Jurisdiction’s expulsion could be accomplished with fewer than a majority of eligible members voting.
 
INDIANAINDIANASupport
KANSASKANSASSupport
KENTUCKYKENTUCKYSupport
MANITOBAMANITOBASupport
MARYLANDMARYLANDSupport
MICHIGANMICHIGANSupport
MINNESOTAMINNESOTASupport
MISSOURIMISSOURISupport
NEBRASKANEBRASKASupport
NEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICKSupport
NEW HAMPSHIRENEW HAMPSHIRESupport
NORTH CAROLINANORTH CAROLINASupport
NORTH DAKOTANORTH DAKOTASupport
ONTARIOONTARIOSupportPlease use interlining and underlining to indicate deletion/addition. 
OREGONOREGONSupport
PENNSYLVANIAPENNSYLVANIASupport
PRINCE EDWARD ISLANDPRINCE EDWARD ISLANDSupport
QUEBECQUEBECSupport
SASKATCHEWANSASKATCHEWANSupport
SOUTH CAROLINASOUTH CAROLINASupport
SOUTH DAKOTASOUTH DAKOTASupport
TENNESSEETENNESSEESupport
VIRGINIAVIRGINIASupport
WASHINGTONWASHINGTONSupport
WEST VIRGINIAWEST VIRGINIASupport
WYOMINGWYOMINGSupport