Connecticut Senate Bill SB01014

Connecticut 2021 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/4/21
• Refer: 3/4/21
• Report Pass: 3/30/21
• Refer: 4/8/21
• Report Pass: 4/14/21
• Refer: 4/28/21

Caption

An Act Concerning A Municipal Election Monitor For The 2021 Municipal Election And The 2022 State Election.

Impact

The implications of this bill target the oversight of electoral processes within larger municipalities. By introducing a dedicated monitor, SB01014 aims to enhance transparency and accountability in local elections, thereby potentially alleviating concerns related to election fraud and mismanagement. Funding for the monitor's costs is to be covered by appropriated funds allocated to the Secretary of State, indicating a state-level commitment to uphold election integrity.

Summary

SB01014 proposes the establishment of an election monitor for municipalities with a population of at least 140,000 during the upcoming 2021 municipal election and the 2022 state election. This appointed monitor's role is to oversee the elections, ensuring proper management and the detection of any irregularity or impropriety in election administration procedures. The Secretary of the State is tasked with contracting an individual to fulfill this role until December 31, 2022, provided that the contract remains unbroken by the Secretary.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB01014 appears to be largely favorable among proponents who advocate for stricter oversight related to elections in larger municipalities. These supporters cite the importance of maintaining the integrity of the electoral process, especially in light of growing concerns about election security. However, there may be dissenting opinions regarding the need for such oversight and whether it could inadvertently lead to overreach or infringements on local governance.

Contention

Notably, the bill could face scrutiny regarding the implications of state intervention in local electoral processes. Critics may argue that while oversight is necessary, appointing monitors could lead to increased state control over what should remain a local responsibility. Additionally, the funding and administrative logistics of effectively implementing such a monitoring system will be points of contention among legislators as discussions move forward.