[EL] Maricopa County, AZ polling place consolidations

[Michael McDonald]

Speaking narrowly on the VRA Section 5 issue, the reports are that some
predominantly Latino communities had no polling location. If Section 5 had
been in effect, Maricopa County would have had to provide evidence that
closing polling locations in minority communities would have no effect on
their turnout, even if there were vote centers elsewhere.


http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/elviadiaz/2016/03/22/maricopa-county-election-officials-writing-off-voters-you-bet/82145554/


============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor, University of Florida
352-273-2371
www.electproject.org
@ElectProject

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 3:12 PM, David Holtzman, Esq. <david at holtzmanlaw.com
> wrote:

> Busing, anyone?
>   ;-)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Tanner <john.k.tanner at gmail.com>
> To: David Becker <dbecker at pewtrusts.org>
> Cc: "law-election at uci.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
> Sent: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 10:49
> Subject: Re: [EL] Maricopa County, AZ polling place consolidations
>
> Ah!  Important point!
>
> Vote centers typically require longer for each person to cast a ballot, at
> least when there is more than one office on the ballot, and hence multiple
> ballot styles.   Relative mobility among white vs minority voters could
> lead to discrimination if some sites were known to have significantly
> shorter lines.
>
> On Mar 24, 2016, at 1:12 PM, David Becker <dbecker at pewtrusts.org> wrote:
>
> Without expressing any opinion on what occurred in Maricopa County this
> week, or whether the change would have been subject to a Section 5
> objection pre-Shelby, it’s important to note that this was not a “reduction
> in the number of polling places,” or “polling place consolidation,” per se,
> but rather a switch from single-polling-place precincts to vote centers,
> where any voter countywide could cast a ballot. Thus, while the overall
> number of voting locations was reduced, the number of locations where each
> voter could cast a ballot was increased, as each could vote at any vote
> center in the county.
>
>
> <image001.png>
> *David J. Becker*
> Director, Election Initiatives
> The Pew Charitable Trusts
> 901 E St NW, 10th Floor | Washington, DC 20004
> p: 202.552.2136 | dbecker at pewtrusts.org
> www.pewtrusts.org
>
> *Sign up
> <http://outreach.pewtrusts.org/ElectionInitiativesRegistration> for our
> monthly newsletter to receive the latest election updates.*
>
>
> *From:* law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [
> mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
> <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>] *On Behalf Of *John
> Tanner
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 24, 2016 12:29 PM
> *To:* Rick Hasen
> *Cc:* law-election at uci.edu
> *Subject:* [EL] Maricopa County, AZ polling place consolidations
>
> For those who are interested in the basis for Section 5 objections to the
> reduction in the number of polling places, pdfs of all objection letters
> are now on line at https://www.justice.gov/crt/section-5-objection-letters
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.justice.gov_crt_section-2D5-2Dobjection-2Dletters&d=CwMFAg&c=2qwu4RrWzdlNOcmb_drAcw&r=rN5rVT8Yp2mR5l9MiFbXS7Jfj1A01BLBW2RNVMqASpg&m=3kKvuOwCFKSm7M6DBP-cMtfbNsClIZugc2MTiygtmXA&s=0iawB_pikWUz5nJWYfK2TdelyUfQjlVJiTnqs6KX0HQ&e=>
> Note that the large majority of polling place objections were to the
> selection of an inconvenient site rather than the consolidation of
> precincts.  I went through quickly (using command/control-f) and found 11.
> One objection, the most recent, is available in html at
> https://www.justice.gov/crt/voting-determination-letter-35
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.justice.gov_crt_voting-2Ddetermination-2Dletter-2D35&d=CwMFAg&c=2qwu4RrWzdlNOcmb_drAcw&r=rN5rVT8Yp2mR5l9MiFbXS7Jfj1A01BLBW2RNVMqASpg&m=3kKvuOwCFKSm7M6DBP-cMtfbNsClIZugc2MTiygtmXA&s=IMAYs-xzViIZAAFezAxWI9OSsysYRliUELxIZ6JNxsw&e=>.
> There was a follow-up enforcement action, details of which are at
> https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2010/12/15/nharrismont_comp.pdf
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.justice.gov_sites_default_files_crt_legacy_2010_12_15_nharrismont-5Fcomp.pdf&d=CwMFAg&c=2qwu4RrWzdlNOcmb_drAcw&r=rN5rVT8Yp2mR5l9MiFbXS7Jfj1A01BLBW2RNVMqASpg&m=3kKvuOwCFKSm7M6DBP-cMtfbNsClIZugc2MTiygtmXA&s=3DKSx5luR2BuamqYP2VaWDPpCcWD9JN96-lrYVBNZCg&e=>
>  and https://www.justice.gov/crt/judgment-and-order
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.justice.gov_crt_judgment-2Dand-2Dorder&d=CwMFAg&c=2qwu4RrWzdlNOcmb_drAcw&r=rN5rVT8Yp2mR5l9MiFbXS7Jfj1A01BLBW2RNVMqASpg&m=3kKvuOwCFKSm7M6DBP-cMtfbNsClIZugc2MTiygtmXA&s=ip0dEui5rx69QgynUnvm8lLzsSKmmn4IFdv-ThswH_E&e=>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160324/a86f3638/attachment.html>