Columbia City Council district 4
I’m working on a story for Sunday previewing the race for City Council district 4 (yes, there are other races going on besides the mayor’s race.)
Specifically, I’m trying to write about the interesting trend of the district 4 council person usually voting “no.” Whether it’s Kirkman Finlay or Hamilton Osborne, more often than not the district four representative is usually the person voting “no.”
Why? One of the theories I’ve stumbled across is that district 4 residents have higher valued homes. Because of that, they pay more taxes than other district residents, so they are more concerned with how the council spends money. Hence, their usual “no” vote.
There is some data to back up this claim. According to data from the Richland County Assessor’s office, district 4 has the highest average owner-occupied home value of any of the four council districts:
Some notes on this data: It only shows owner-occupied homes. That means it excludes rental homes, commercial properties and some condos and town homes (because the assessor’s office counts them differently). Rental homes are taxed at a higher rate, and the owner often times does not live in the city limits.
Notice, too, that district four had the highest number of owner occupied homes. Other districts have more renters, who are less likely to vote in city elections than home owners.
Adam Beam covers the City of Columbia for
2 Comments
I know you wanted thoughts on the District 4 Council race, but I am blown away by your data, and just have to comment on a side item.
I never realized before just how few residential homes there are in District 2. I knew that it contained a large portion of businesses (downtown) and apartments, but I’ve never seen the actual number of residential single/family homes published.
That reinforces some of the thoughts I’ve had about that particular Councilmember for sometime. One of the reasons he runs unopposed is that he panders to those constituents he knows will contribute to his campaign, and ignores anyone (business owners) who can’t cast a vote. Another reason is that he is just plain mean and threatening to anyone who challenges him.
Now I realize there is a third reason: The pool of eligible contenders is only about a third of the contenders in other Districts. Maybe when (if) the voters get a chance to vote on the strong-mayor form of government, they could also have the option to cast votes for re-districting.
In the meantime, I’m sure all those who contributed to his last campaign will be happy to see he wisely spent their hard-earned campaign contributions with one $7,500 meal at Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse (see his Jan 10th 2008 Campaign Disclosure).
Linda,
Keep in mind, those numbers are only for owner occupied homes. In district 2, owner occupied homes make up only 24 percent of the district’s population. Sixty-four percent of district 2’s residents are renters. They can still vote, and they can still run for office. It’s just that, historically speaking, they are less likely to do so.
— Adam Beam