IFTA Ballot Proposals Comments

IFTA Ballot Comments

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

1st Period Comments on BALLOT #3 - 2022

Jurisdiction Position Comments

ALABAMA		 Support

ALBERTA		 Support As 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

ARKANSAS		 Support

BRITISH COLUMBIA		 Support

CONNECTICUT		 Support

IDAHO		 Support

ILLINOIS		 Undecided The 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.
 

INDIANA		 Support

KANSAS		 Support

KENTUCKY		 Support

MANITOBA		 Support

MARYLAND		 Support

MICHIGAN		 Support

MINNESOTA		 Support

MISSOURI		 Support

NEBRASKA		 Support

NEW BRUNSWICK		 Support

NEW HAMPSHIRE		 Support

NORTH CAROLINA		 Support

NORTH DAKOTA		 Support

ONTARIO		 Support Please use interlining and underlining to indicate deletion/addition. 

OREGON		 Support

PENNSYLVANIA		 Support

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND		 Support

QUEBEC		 Support

SASKATCHEWAN		 Support

SOUTH CAROLINA		 Support

SOUTH DAKOTA		 Support

TENNESSEE		 Support

VIRGINIA		 Support

WASHINGTON		 Support

WEST VIRGINIA		 Support

WYOMING		 Support
Support: 32
Oppose: 0
Undecided: 1

© Copyright 2024 IFTA, Inc. All Rights Reserved