Vote Yes on Issue 9: Looking at Reform Through the Eyes of Black Community Leaders

October 20, 2026

Opinion

Columbus voters are looking at two ballot issues to change Columbus City Council’s structure on the November 2026 ballot. While Council is now being attacked for submitting a counterproposal to the citizen ballot initiative, council was in fact responding directly and appropriately to protect the interests of Black Columbus, as requested by Black community leaders.

The current council configuration is a strange system where each member must reside in one of nine “residential districts,” and all members are subject to citywide (at-large) elections. While originally promised by the city to be a “best practice,” it never was. It was a poorly conceived proposal, cynically adopted by the council which was expecting to face a citizen ballot initiative to reform council’s structure to 3 at-large and 10 from districts along with campaign finance restrictions. The weird system council hurriedly put on the ballot that is no in place needs to be changed.

Issue 8 is a citizen-initiated charter amendment proposal launched by citizens in reaction to candidate Jesse Vogel’s 2025 loss of the District 7 citywide election to Tiara Ross, even after Vogel spent more than $660,000 and received more votes than did Ross from voters within that district in which they reside. The proponents of Issue 8 say they seek to fix “a rigged City Council election system, that gives the appearance of district representation while maintaining the at-large (citywide) voting system that Columbus residents have worked for decades to end.” While well-intended, Issue 8 has significant policy defects in that “simple fix” and Issue 9 is the better proposal for all Columbus residents.

The biggest flaw in Issue 8 is that it maintains the current “residential district” boundaries, and repurposes those boundaries to define voters, rather than candidates. This new purpose for the existing boundaries creates legal and representational problems.

None of these “residential districts” that Issue 8 preserves is majority-Black, which is problematic under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which generally requires that geographically concentrated minority groups have a right to elect candidates of their own choosing without having their votes diluted by the majority. In the words of Leah Aden, Chief Legal Counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, our nation’s top civil rights law firm “One of the chief purposes of Section 2 is to prohibit minority vote dilution, which can occur when an at-large electoral system denies Black voters of the opportunity to participate equally in the political process and elect their preferred candidates because their votes are canceled out by the white majority who vote as a bloc.“ (We note that Columbus’s power elite has sidestepped this provision for decades through the practice of appointing Black citizens to fill council mid-term vacancies, and running said appointees as incumbents with party support and money from big business. In this manner, Columbus has given the appearance of having non-discriminatory elections --- though the presence of an unlikely majority-minority council can certainly raise eyebrows and suspicions that the system is being manipulated. We further clarify that the Voting Rights Act was never intended to ensure candidates with darker skin would be elected, but to ensure the voting power of cohesive minority communities to elect the candidate of their choice -- regardless of the candidate’s skin color -- was protected.)

Issue 9 is Columbus City Council’s response to Issue 8, originating from the request of a group of Black community leaders and elders (Cecil Ahad, Kujenga Ashe, Jon Beard, Denise Benning, Tom Dillard, Calvin Hairston, James Jones, Jr., Asad Shabazz, and Tyrone Thomas) that one group of citizens (Our City, Our Say with Columbus Stand Up) not be allowed to disenfranchise Black voters. A March 27, 2026 cover email to Shannon Hardin and council from the self-named Petition Committee for Black Columbus reads:

“Attached please find a letter from elders, advocates, and leaders in Columbus's Black community, seeking council's support for a charter amendment to finally comply with the spirit and letter of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. These federal protections have been too long denied to Black Columbus and must be preserved at this time.

Also attached is a brief showing the long history of the Democratic Party's support for a district-based electoral model that comports with the Voting Rights Act. Unfortunately, it never has been effected. We believe the time is right now, for the council to provide the leadership that citizens want and are demanding.

We are concerned that the current citizen effort does not support the federally-recognized electoral interests of our people in our neighborhoods, and that council must act to preserve these rights, now threatened by a radical Supreme Court. At a time when our nation needs a strong Democratic Party, the party has been weakened over the years by talking the talk, but not walking the walk. Now is the time for Columbus City Council to step up and show the difference between Democrats and Republicans.

These issues have been long-vetted in Columbus, and our materials provide ample background for those not as familiar with the issues. It is said that voting rights are the fundamental rights in our republic, because they are preservative of all other rights. We are asking for your responses within a week's time, and appreciate your giving this the attention it deserves.”

The letter itself says:

“This issue came out of the pain of the Black community, and Our City, Our Say has appropriated the issue without seeking to address the harm that spawned it. Allowing that proposal to the ballot without council proposing a more rational alternative would be an aggressively anti-Black community action by this council which is comprised of 4 Black city councilmembers – including the council President – plus one Latina…

It is not their (Our City, Our Say) job as citizens to secure those federal rights for the citizens of Columbus: it is ultimately the job of our representative elected officials to do so. We ask that you fix the current broken council election system by rapidly advancing to the ballot a district-based electoral method along with an electoral map that finally (after 60 years), seeks to secure those hard-won federal rights for Black voters in Columbus.

… the outcome [of current poor political representation of Black Columbus] can be encapsulated in the remarks of petition committee member Tom Dillard on February 17, 2026, in the Press Release that accompanied our petition filing: ‘From the year 2000 – 2020, according to a report by One Columbus, homeownership rates for Black families have plummeted to 33% from 40%, while rent burden has increased among Black households from 42% to 51%’ -- a majority of Black families now pay more than 30% of our incomes on rent – Black infant mortality is up over that 20 year period at the same time wealthy developers are taking millions of dollar in tax abatements from our city schools and a report says that ‘Black and Latinx workers are significantly less likely than their white counterparts to be earning at least $15/hour—a bare minimum living wage level in the region.’”

Council president pro tem Rob Dorans held a public hearing and conducted community outreach to lead council in the creation of a proposal that combines 4 at-large seats with 9 true district seats (where candidates who live within one of nine districts are elected solely by the voters of such districts).

My own April 20, 2025 written testimony on behalf of this group of Black leaders said:

“I urge council to support its geographically-concentrated Black constituents and such other minority groups by creating for the November ballot, a council format with at least 9 electoral districts (potentially adding up to 4 more to get a ratio of roughly 1 member: 70,000 residents), while creating new district boundaries that comport with the Voting Rights Act, and possibly add 2 to 4 members at-large. Such a format is typical for big cities, with the average Top 50 city having 2 members at-large and 11 from districts, as shown in the attached analysis from 2012. Further, having 4 at-large and 9-to-13 from districts may nearly maximize the power of individual voters, as suggested in the Edelman study “In Defense of At Large Representation” submitted along with this testimony, which posits that voter power is maximized when the number of at-large members is the square root of the number elected by district.”

Summarized, that testimony further called for a proposal that:

Has at least 9 council districts
Has new district maps supporting the Voting Rights Act
Loosens the current 1% population variance limit between districts
Reduces the number of petition signatures candidates need to get on the ballot
Considers a number of at-large seats (from 2 to 4), noting that the average top 50 city has 2 at-large and 11 districts
Reconsiders the change from part-time council to full-time.

Council was responsive to the requests from citizens:

Issue 9 proposes redistricting upon approval of the ballot issue, with new boundaries to take effect in the next city (2029) election to ensure full compliance with the Voting Rights Act. This redistricting takes place in a contested mayoral election season (2027), ensuring visibility and political accountability as to result. Issue 8 would maintain the current redistricting schedule, with boundaries redrawn in 2032 to take effect in the 2033 elections. Black community leaders expressed concern to City Council about such delay, noting that the Roberts Supreme Court had a court case pending (Louisiana v. Callais) that could upend the Voting Rights Act and deny forever rights Black Columbus has been denied in 60 years of at-large rule.

In addition, Issue 9 changes the maximum population deviation between districts to 7.5%, while Issue 8 maintains the current 1% maximum population difference. The current 1% spread works just fine for its current purpose to define only the residence of the candidates. However, once the underlying purpose for districts is changed to address eligible voters, the 1% variance becomes unworkable, as it would cause neighborhoods to be split for the sole purpose of keeping the size of all districts so restrictively equal. Other traditional map drawing criteria such as maintaining “communities of interest” together, trying to not cross rivers and highway would be impossible to achieve. In contrast, the population of Ohio legislative districts must be within 10% of each other.

Issue 9 also increases competition for elective office by lowering the number of signatures needed to get on the ballot from 250 to 150.

Thus, beyond the Voting Rights Act issues, Issue 9 again provides for a better and more cohesive public policy and addresses directly concerns raised by citizens. Black Columbus elders, advocates and leaders are urging Columbus residents to vote Yes on Issue 9.