To be frank, it’s nuts Dodge only has one polling place. But, they are busing there. There is no case to force adding another location. The city is right.
I heard in an earlier news report that there are buses being provided to take people from the original voting site to the new one. If people can get to the old site, they can get to the new site (for FREE!).
These things always come down to last minute complaints. I believe the plaintiffs attorneys (rightly) believe their side will receive favorable treatment because anything short of capitulation will be played up as disenfranchisement.
Adding the LOL was unprofessional and can be construed as a flippant disregard to a real issue.
Bad move.
I have to agree at least a bit with the ACLU on this. Moving a voting site outside the city limits seems a bit odd. If there were truly no schools or libraries that could accommodate a contingency such as construction blocking the usual place, they could close half a block of 1 street for a day and put up a temporary tent location. But I find it hard to believe there was not a single adequate location inside the city limits.
That said, offering free rides to the voting booth also seems like at least a step towards accommodation.
Exactly what rights are Latinos missing?
A lot of polling sites end up on private property (churches, lodge halls, even some garages). It is not easy to get owners to agree to host one. Compensation if any is minimal, and increasingly your building becomes the target of whackjob protests.