My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9/5/1989
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1989
>
9/5/1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:01:03 PM
Creation date
6/15/2015 4:53:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/05/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
5 1989F <br />BOOK. � � <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- <br />missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously adopted <br />Resolution 89-85 opposing H.R. 2190 and S. 874. <br />RESOLUTION NO. 89- 85 <br />A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, <br />FLORIDA, THROUGH ITS BOARD OF COUNTY <br />COMMISSIONERS, IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. <br />2190 AND S. 874 AND THEIR VOTER <br />REGISTRATION MANDATES_AND.PREEMPTION <br />OF LOCAL AUTHORITY. <br />. L <br />WHEREAS, H.R. 2190 and S. 874 have been introduced in <br />Congress; and <br />WHEREAS, this legislation would preempt state and local <br />government authority in the area of voter registration and <br />create a series of new a costly federal mandates including: <br />1. requiring a system to register to vote in <br />connection with driver's license renewal and application, <br />2. voter registration by mail, <br />3. establishment of a variety of county and <br />private -sector sites for the purpose of distributing and <br />processing voter registration applications, and <br />4. imposing federal standards for the conditions under <br />which individuals can be removed and purged from county <br />registration lists; and <br />WHEREAS, such voter registration mandates involve the <br />federal government In an area that has been traditionally <br />reserved for state and local governments; and <br />WHEREAS, these voter registration mandates would be <br />very costly for individual counties to implement; and <br />WHEREAS, these voter registration procedures could <br />Increase the likelihood of voter fraud; and <br />WHEREAS, additional personnel, equipment, postage, <br />and computerization are costs which would have to be <br />absorbed by the county, <br />62 <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.