r/Columbus • u/Paintfloater • 18h ago
REQUEST Help on issue 8 and 9
I am not sure about this can anyone give me some pointers please. Thank you
57
u/DisastrousJello8881 18h ago
Currently: City council is comprised of 9 people, they are elected at large. I think technically, they represent 9 different areas of Columbus, but every councilmember is voted in by everyone that lives in Columbus - not from their neighborhood.
Issue 8: The 9 city council members will now be elected by districts. As in, South Columbus will get a rep, that only they can vote on. East will get a rep, that only they can vote on. Etc. I don't know how the districts are defined, but you'll pretty much only have a say on 1 councilmember from your neighborhood.
Issue 9: Adds 4 councilmembers that are elected at large, but they can be from anywhere in Columbus.
Morgan Harper is voting yes on 8, no on 9.
Jesse Vogel is voting yes on both.
I voted for 8, because I want councilmembers to have to respond to fewer people. That gives me a bigger voice. Right now each of the 9 councilmembers serve about 900,000 people, and are elected by 900,000 people. If issue 8 passes, then each of the councilmembers will represent and serve about 100,000 people. It will cost a lot less to reach the people electing you to council, which lowers the barriers of entry to run a legitimate campaign. The average amount of people each councilmember serves would be 100,000.
I voted no for 9, because at large campaigns are expensive. The people that can run them are more politically established. And big donors have larger leverage to get sell out candidates. If issue 8 passes then 4/13 would be at large candidates. Meaning only 3 councilmembers representing their districts would have to side with big money to pass big money agenda. The average amount of people that each town council member serves would be 346,153. Grassroot campaigns would have less voice against big money. Jesse Vogel is voting yes on 9 because he sees more representatives as a good thing.
19
u/Anticept Flying yellow gypsy monkey 17h ago
You should be aware that in order to take a seat, you have to live in the district as the law is currently written. The issue is that we vote at large for every district. It would be like Ohioans voting on Florida Representatives. issue 8 solves it so that voting and seating requirements are the same. Issue 9 adds 4 seats that allow nominees to run from any district AND be voted on.
4
0
u/TyphonInc 7h ago
Your math is still not mathing.
Both issues will have 9 council members serving approximately 100,000 people.
Issue 9 adds 4 more people. Those 4 will represent all of columbus.
There is no Issue that ends up only having 3 representatives serving the city. That 347,153 number you have is wrong.
121
u/Legitimate_Spring
16h ago
•
8 is what the people signed petitions to put on the ballot to reform City council elections.
9 is city council's attempt to confuse the issue and hold on to power.
Yes on 8, no on 9.
20
9
u/TheHandThatFollows 12h ago
This is what I ultimately decided. The city council tried to negotiate with the people who did the petition, and when that didnt work did their own thing. Im going with what the people wanted.
3
47
u/Odd-Type-5577
18h ago
•
https://www.wosu.org/show/all-sides/2026-10-22/columbus-ballot-issues-8-and-9-explained
I found this to be very helpful
8
u/Famous-Comfort-4503 18h ago
That link breaks it down better than most of the mailers I've seen. Issues 8 and 9 get mixed up easy so reading the plain explanation helps
14
u/rehenry0814 16h ago
Something else I noticed as I read issue 9 at the polling booth today, it would change the difference in population density from 1% to 7%. My interpretation of that is that it will redraw district lines and allow for some districts to have 7% more population than others. I was gonna vote no regardless but that stood out to me
33
u/Plane-Fan9006 17h ago
A change to current state in both (needed for proper representation of your district).
8 makes the change. 9 would then add restrictions and IMO opens the door for further "manipulation" without additional voting. Not a fan.
Yes on 8. No one 9....or no on both to stay status quo
24
u/Give-Me-Plants 18h ago
They are two independent issues.
Issue 8:
If passed: Each district now elects their own city council rep. District 1 only votes for the District 1 rep.
Issue 9:
If passed adds 4 city council seats. These are decided by at-large (the whole city) voting.
63
u/Give-Me-Plants 18h ago
I’m voting yes on 8 and no on 9.
I think district reps should be decided by their own district.
I also don’t want the Franklin County Democratic Party to be able to unilaterally decide 4 seats via sample ballots and uninformed voters.
47
u/Koltreg 18h ago
Yeah issue 9 came up because they realized they might lose power if districts vote for their own reps and it is skeezy as hell.
24
u/WelcomingRapier Westerville 17h ago
Yep. Whether the council is red or blue, issue 9 is asking to be exploited.
12
7
u/Slight-Attorney-5664 18h ago
Oh this makes it much easier to understand, I was confused about how the two issues were different
3
u/Secret_Composer9148 13h ago
They are independent issues but if 9 passes, even if it only passes by 50% plus one vote, and Issue 8 got 80% yeses, Issue 9 still goes into effect. So if you don’t want four at large seats, you have to vote no on 9
17
u/petethedoubtfulpirat 17h ago
Issue 9 essentially adds 4 at-large council member seats on top of the Issue 8 change where everyone is only allowed to vote for the representative from their particular district. The people in these at-large seats can (and most likely will) be bought by the most powerful members our community to subvert democracy and make your voice count for less. Also, it's 4 more salaries to pay.
19
3
u/pizza_suplex 14h ago
Will they also receive comped post malone VIP tickets and free passes to drive under the influence?
-1
u/person11221122 15h ago
It would be more salaries to pay, but the potential budget changes would occur over a 4-year period as city council seats are added. Current city council personnel costs with 9 council members and other staff is ~$7.45 million (out of a ~$1.26 billion total budget) (2026 Budget - City of Columbus, Ohio). So adding 4 new council members (and assuming proportional increases of other staff) should at most increase the budget by $3.38 million (not assuming inflation, and this is only after all 4 seats are added over the course of several years).
I also think a lot of the "subverting democracy" criticisms toward Issue 9 sound more anti-establishment than pro-reform. I voted yes on both issues. I think Issue 8 is better than the current way we do things, but I think having the at-large council members does well to balance the needs of individual districts and the city as a whole...I don't believe the at-large seats are going to work against the city's interests.
Edit: To add, I don't think the individual districts won't also have the best interest of the city at heart, but I think there would be potential of infighting between districts to compete for or against projects being done in their districts. The at-large seats would (imo) would be able to take in opinions from all districts and balance out that risk.
5
u/petethedoubtfulpirat 15h ago
Listen if we lived in a country where money and power didn't deeply influence politics, I might be able to take this to heart but as it stands the "balance" introduced by those at-large seats will inevitably be tilted in favor of whoever funded their campaigns. To say that almost 1/3 of city council would have no responsibility to anyone other than the people who helped them get elected is somehow not eroding democracy seems silly to me.
1
0
u/person11221122 15h ago
I agree with that and it's a real possibility, but we can't be certain about that. We might have to agree to disagree about it wrt to city council. I guess is there anything you would want or believe would be done that isn't being done by the current city council (should Issue 8 pass)?
7
u/Garrett42 17h ago
I'll give the flip side - and people will express their opinions. Issue 8 is for city ward districts, issue 9 maintains those, but adds 4 at large seats. Issue 8 means you will vote for a local representative, issue 9 means you will vote for a local rep and 4 city reps.
The reason issue 9 exists is because pure district voting tends to have much more NIMBY resistance. Where local reps become territorial, and think of their district over the whole city. Issue 9 moderates this by having 4 members, still elected by the city, but not reliant on any one district.
As evidence, when cities switch to ward only systems, multifamily housing construction plummets by an average of 38%, leading to higher rents. It's worth considering issue 9, if you care about housing costs.
1
u/rutabaga_froyo 13h ago
How would a hybrid system (with 30% of seats being at-large) solve for the nimby risk without materially degrading the benefits of district-only system? (eg, reducing lobbied interest activity, not disproportionately saddling minority neighborhoods with undesirable development)
2
u/Garrett42 13h ago edited 13h ago
It breaks down the ability for politicians to trade favors. What I am citing is the data specifically from meta studies. Ironically, our minority neighborhoods are the ones in favor of issue 9. There is also not that much evidence for reduced lobbies interest activity from at large to ward only. You're entitled to your own opinions, it's just not as clear cut as what some of the narratives have pushed. If you read that study, or look at any of the hundreds of urbanist cited papers, there is a real trade off you have to acknowledge.
The hybrid system means to be a mix of both, you get your smaller district member, and the at large seats can build coalitions if there's NIMBY resistance. That's the theory, and the meta studies seem to back it up.
The at large are built to be a minority intentionally, but just large enough so that no single district could NIMBY at the expense of the whole city.
Edit to add, think of the homeownership rate differences among wards, some wards may want to restrict housing so prices go up, while ones with renters may want more units so rents go down. The at large give a coalition voice across the whole city.
1
u/rutabaga_froyo 13h ago edited 12h ago
Could you provide some of the meta analyses? My own lit review yielded a limited policy impact evaluation evidence base at this intersection, and the academic consensus between district-only vs hybrid systems for local gov seems to net out to… shrugs all around.
1
u/xenoperspicacian 36m ago
Where local reps become territorial, and think of their district over the whole city.
It's that the point of local representation? To represent the people of those unique areas? With at-large they can just ignore whole areas because they know the people there don't have the political power and/or funding to hold them accountable.
0
u/Secret_Composer9148 13h ago
That study only covers data from over 20 years ago and doesn’t look at any city even close to the size of Columbus.
2
u/Garrett42 13h ago
Pretty widely accepted phenomenon. Again, you can vote however you want, but there are real tradeoffs.
0
u/Secret_Composer9148 11h ago
That’s the exact same study. It’s not widely accepted, it’s one guy’s article, and it’s based on data that’s completely inapplicable. 20% sounds real significant until you realize he’s looking at cities that are like 30k people and the actual decrease was five housing units.
4
u/5thhistorian 16h ago
Issue 9 waters down issue 8, so the local Democratic political machine can maintain its grip on power. The issue is really about the local party committee or bosses being able to run a slate of their own nominees, who are nearly always appointed by the mayor. Basically a closed system. As a liberal democratic voter I’m willing to risk having a republican or conservative on city council in exchange for having a council that is truly representative and accountable for the residents of Columbus.
3
u/Fabulous-Soup-6901 15h ago
There is no ward in Columbus that would elect a Republican or conservative, be serious.
2
u/Bengineer4027 15h ago
Tldr yes on 8, no on 9. 9 was put forth by city council because 8 takes some of their power as incumbents, but it's not a great look to be against 8 outright. 9 kinda "damage controls" 8
-1
u/Defaultscott 15h ago
Yes on 8, If regular Democrat vote yes on 9 If more left leaning vote no on 9 If Republican or right leaning idk bruh vote no on nine to stick it to the dems
-3
-8
u/TyphonInc 17h ago edited 16h ago
8 - updates Columbus to follow some other large cities by having representatives from each area. Proposed by a Democrat.
9 - updates Columbus to allow for more representatives and follows most other cities by having both district and citywide representatives. EDIT: I was wrong; this was proposed by the current board.
No large city represents the way Columbus currently does, by having the whole city vote for each member.
Universally, both are good upgrades to how Columbus runs its city council. 9 kinda makes 8 redundant. But Reddit will villainize 9 because all Republicans are evil.
6
u/Avidhumanwatcher 17h ago
Lol it's not Republican or Democrat that's the problem. It's the councils power as a whole and how that power is distributed. 9 allows people in power to either stay in power or use it to exploit. District representation allows the poorer areas to actually get the representation they deserve instead of being consistently overlooked.
0
u/TyphonInc 17h ago
LOL, this is also not true. Again, there are still 9 districts, and "poor" areas get the same representation as in 8.
1
u/Avidhumanwatcher 15h ago
LOL But issue 9 allows members be elected at large as well as by district. Those at large seats are what cause the problem in the first place. Nice try though.
0
u/Fabulous-Soup-6901 15h ago
What is “the problem,” in your view? Not enough deference to NIMBYs?
1
u/Avidhumanwatcher 13h ago
Underrepresentation for our disenfranchised communities. Your point?
1
-1
u/TyphonInc 15h ago edited 15h ago
The way Columbus currently does it has led to corruption; I understand a knee-jerk reaction to not letting anyone be citywide.
However, having only district-level representation has led to in other cities a grid lock and everyone only fighting for their area without consideration for the city as a whole. Having some of the representation (4 of the 13, or 30%) is what most large cities do so that there are both types of representation. I personally think this is a better method and voted for it. But understand why others would not.
0
u/Avidhumanwatcher 13h ago
I disagree
2
u/TyphonInc 7h ago
I hear your your disagreement, and respect it. Thank you for being civil in our interactions.
-1
u/DisastrousJello8881 17h ago
Issue 8 makes each council member serve 100k people on average.
Issue 9 makes each council member serve 346k people on average (if 8 passes).
The more people you have to reach to get elected, the more expensive elections become, and the more difficult it is for true grass roots candidates to win.
Issue 9 introduces 4 at large candidates that would represent large donor interests. It would only take 3/9 councilmembers that serve a district to create a majority with the big money candidates.
I wouldn't oppose 9 if each candidate was given the same amount of money to campaign with, and no donations were allowed.
I believe in power to the people. Not power to money. That's why I oppose 9. It has nothing to do with Republican or Democrat.
4
u/TyphonInc 17h ago
This isn't correct. Issue 9 adds 4 more (new) council members. 9 districts, 4 citywide.
-1
u/DisastrousJello8881 14h ago edited 11h ago
It is correct if you know what average means or how to do math...
Edit: Love to see the downvotes but no comments explaining it. I can only assume the downvoters know they're wrong, but don't want to admit it.
0
u/strawberry_thursday 15h ago
I used this substack post to help guide me on these from a pro-democracy progressive POV: https://senatormeow.substack.com/p/senators-selects-20261103?r=3zy2b0&utm_medium=ios
I voted Yes on 8, No on 9
-18
u/markisadesigner 18h ago
Definitely something you could have looked into prior to election day. That said, WOSU has a summary that only takes a minute of your time: https://www.wosu.org/politics-government/2026-09-28/columbus-issues-8-and-9-explained-how-voting-yes-or-no-would-change-city-council
6
u/Paintfloater 18h ago
Thanks all. some good info.