Secretary of State Steve Simon is praising a new law that will help replace Minnesota’s aging election equipment, calling it a “critical and necessary investment” to ensure voting equipment works properly and consistently in precincts all around the state. Replacing aging equipment has been a major priority of Secretary Simon’s since taking office and was signed into law May 30.

The bill creates a $7 million grant fund to replace Minnesota’s aging election equipment by 2018. It provides up to a 50 percent match between the state and counties for mandatory equipment and up to a 75 percent match for electronic poll books. The bill was authored by Rep. Tim O’Driscoll (R-Sartell) and Sen. Kiffmeyer (R-Big Lake) and included in the State Government Finance Bill.

“I have traveled throughout Minnesota and met with local elections officials and the number one issue that always comes up is replacing aging election equipment before it is too late,” said Secretary of State Steve Simon. “This is a critical and necessary investment in Minnesota’s election system, and I applaud the Governor and the legislature for recognizing the importance of this issue. Unlike some responsibilities undertaken by counties and municipalities, administering a statewide election in over 4,000 precincts is not optional. It is required by law and an important part of our democracy, and that is why it has been one of my top priorities. I look forward to working with the legislature in the future as we continue to address this pressing need and ensure voting equipment works properly and consistently in precincts all around the state, and is up to the standards Minnesotans expect.”

It is expected to cost counties and municipalities $28 million to replace all aging equipment and is largely a problem faced by counties in Greater Minnesota. Secretary Simon’s push to replace Minnesota’s aging election equipment has been endorsed by newspapers throughout the state.

The Duluth News Tribune put it bluntly: “Getting out ahead of this before Minnesota becomes the next ‘Florida in 2000,’ simply put, would be responsible.”

Load comments