Note: the link(s) on this page may send you to another site’s page that may/may not still be present depending on age of the post.
Wisconsin Legislature’s Chapter 19, section 59, Covering Ethics in Government. Current as of February 27th, 2024 and courtesy of the Wisconsin State Legislature.
Or download the .pdf below.
Note: the link(s) on this page may send you to another site’s page that may/may not still be present depending on age of the post.
Nevada Legislature’s Chapter 281A, Covering Ethics in Government. Current as of February 27th, 2024 and courtesy of the Nevada State Legislature.
Or download the .pdf below.
Note: the link(s) on this page may send you to another site’s page that may/may not still be present depending on age of the post.
Georgia title code 45 – 10 – 21, current as of April 14, 2021 and courtesy of Findlaw.com
Or download the .pdf below.
Note: the link(s) on this page may send you to another site’s page that may/may not still be present depending on age of the post.
The Ethics page for the Arizona City/County Management Association.
Or download the .pdf below.
Note: the link(s) on this page may send you to another site’s page that may/may not still be present depending on age of the post.
The Arizona Revised Statutes have been updated to include the revised sections from the 56th Legislature, 1st Regular Session. Please note that the next update of this compilation will not take place until after the conclusion of the 56th Legislature, 2nd Regular Session, which convenes in January 2024.
Or download the .pdf below.
Note: the link(s) on this page may send you to another site’s page that may/may not still be present depending on age of the post.
Officials said they fixed coding errors that created problems with the state’s online voting records, primary election results not affected.
Here’s a quick preview!
The Nevada Secretary of State’s office announced it had fixed coding errors in files used to provide nightly updates on voter registration history that led to misreported records.
In a statement issued by the office early Monday evening, officials said that some of the steps county workers are required to file in the system ”were not taken, resulting in inaccurate data” and re-emphasized that the errors did not affect the results of the presidential primary election.
Specifically, officials explained that every county uploads its voter registration data to the secretary of state’s database each night. The secretary of state’s office then executes code to create a single voter registration file that users see when they log into the website.
Or download the .pdf below.
Warning: The article is neither owned nor written by the Citizens Election Research Center. The provided .pdf is only for the purposes of ease of viewing.
Note: the link(s) on this page may send you to another site’s page that may/may not still be present depending on age of the post.
Article: Arizona elections official calls for federal lawmakers to include funding for election administration and security.
Congress recently cleared legislation to extend government funding into March, but one Arizona elections official would like to see federal lawmakers include funding for election administration and security.
Patty Hansen, recorder for Coconino County in Northern Arizona, has been involved with elections administration for 36 years, and said with the continuing exodus of many election recorders and directors in recent years because of increased threats and harassment, what remains is what she called a “huge institutional void.”
She pointed out in rural counties such as hers, funding to improve election systems would go a long way.
“Some jurisdictions are wealthier than others and have a better tax base,” Hansen observed. “I do think it is something the federal government should be looking at for providing the necessary funds across the nation because elections are the foundation of our democracy.”
Or download the .pdf below.
Warning: The article is neither owned nor written by the Citizens Election Research Center. The provided .pdf is only for the purposes of ease of viewing.
Note: the link(s) on this page may send you to another site’s page that may/may not still be present depending on age of the post.
Article: While the Left continues to deny partisanship involvement with “Zuckerbucks,” CTCL now has a new program, the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence.
It turns out that right-wing activists have learned the same lesson as Hollywood: Everyone loves a sequel.
You may remember the nonprofit Center for Tech and Civic Life from the so-called “Zuckerbucks” controversy during the 2020 election. That was when a couple of nonprofits including the Center for Tech and Civic Life distributed hundreds of millions of dollars that had been donated by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, as no-strings-attached grants to local election officials. Despite no evidence of partisanship (and lots of people checked), right-wing activists and critics labeled the funding a political act aimed at boosting turnout of Democratic voters.
CTCL now has a new program, the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence. It’s a group of 15 counties, all of whom submitted applications, who work together to share best practices and create things such as a voluntary set of standards for recruitment, training, management, and retention of poll workers, a major concern for election officials around the country.
Or download the .pdf below.
Warning: The article is neither owned nor written by the Citizens Election Research Center. The provided .pdf is only for the purposes of ease of viewing.