WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1662

ELEC CD-VOTERS PER PRECINCT

104th Regular Session Introduced by Laura Fine and 2 co-sponsors

Raising target voters per precinct from 1,200 to 1,800 in Illinois triggers post-census redistricting and potentially larger precincts, affecting polling places and staffing.

0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1662

Summary — SB 1662 (Election Code: Voters per Precinct)

Status: Introduced (Senate Bill) — First reading 02/05/2025; referred to Assignments and other committees. Sponsor: Sen. Julie A. Morrison (IL).
Subject heading in legislative docket: “ELEC CD‑VOTERS PER PRECINCT”

Purpose / intent

SB 1662 amends Illinois’ Election Code to change the target number of registered voters that election precincts should contain. The bill raises the statutory guideline for precinct size from 1,200 to 1,800 registered voters (and makes conforming changes regulating when and how precinct boundaries are redrawn).

Key provisions

  • Amends Sections 11‑2 and 11‑3 of the Election Code regarding establishment and revision of election precincts.
  • Changes the target number of registered voters per precinct “as near as may be practicable” from 1,200 to 1,800 for counties that historically used the 1,200 threshold.
  • Aligns the post‑census precinct‑boundary adjustment rule so that after each decennial census (and following completion of congressional and legislative redistricting) precincts should be changed so they contain, as nearly as practicable, 1,800 registered voters (removes the prior split threshold that applied different targets by county size).
  • Retains procedural timing language about when County Boards (or Boards of Election Commissioners in some counties) must divide or redivide precincts (e.g., regular June meeting or other specified times), and keeps other existing locality‑specific administrative rules intact (e.g., polling‑place siting considerations).

Who would be affected

  • County Boards of Election and local election administrators (responsible for redrawing precinct boundaries and selecting polling places).
  • Boards of Election Commissioners in counties that use that governance model.
  • Voters (each precinct would encompass more registered voters on average).
  • Local governments and election suppliers (potential changes to number/distribution of polling places, equipment needs, and poll worker staffing).

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Administrative/fiscal: Fewer precincts could reduce costs for staffing, polling places, and administrative overhead. Offsetting costs may include needs for more voting equipment per polling place, larger facilities, or vote‑center-style accommodations.
  • Voter access and experience: Larger precincts may increase travel, queueing, and wait times at polling sites unless mitigations (more equipment, early voting, vote centers, or staffing) are implemented. Effects may vary between urban and rural areas.
  • Implementation timing: Changes to precinct boundaries will typically follow the decennial census and the completion of redistricting, per the bill’s language, but county boards also may act at regular scheduled meetings as provided in current law.
  • Legal / operational: Conforming statutory changes will require local election authorities to update precinct plans, notify the State Board of Elections as required, and revise polling‑place assignments.

Current procedural status / next steps

  • Introduced and assigned to committee(s); pending committee consideration and subsequent legislative action. If advanced and enacted, changes would take effect according to any statutory effective‑date language in the enacted bill.

If you want, I can:
- Pull the exact redrafting language for Sections 11‑2 and 11‑3 to show line‑by‑line changes, or
- Prepare a short briefing on likely operational steps counties would need to take to implement the new threshold.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.