The Dispatch endorses No on Issue 1

Today, the Columbus Dispatch officially endorsed a no vote on Issue 1. At the same time, the Dispatch supported the responsible, public committee announced to study city council and recommend modernizations for our local government. Be sure to exercise your right to vote — and vote NO on Issue 1. You can vote early now or on Election Day.

Here are a few our our favorite observations (and warnings) from the editorial:


Against Issue 1

“…Issue 1, on the Aug. 2 ballot, is a heedless way to enact a massive change in governance.”

“As Columbus grows, the number of wards would, too, producing a council of as many as 25 members. The larger the group, the less that gets accomplished. Add turf fights and ever-shifting alliances, and dysfunction is probable. One needs only to look at Congress to see district representation in action.”

“Backers of Issue 1 are asking voters to buy a pig in a poke. No one knows what the district boundaries would look like, or who would sit on the apportionment committee.”

“The drawing of wards would greatly determine the racial makeup of the council and which areas would gain clout. Would community civic associations and neighborhood commissions be divided, dissipating their effectiveness and identities?”

“If this sounds complicated, our point is made.”

For the Council Charter Review Committee

“If Columbus is to change its governing structure, it shouldn’t be rushed, a flaw of Issue 1. The community’s best minds — Democrats, Republicans, neighborhood representatives and experts on urban governance such as those at Ohio State University— should have time to examine alternatives, weigh the pros and cons and propose options vetted by the community.”

“On Wednesday, Mayor Andrew J. Ginther and the council announced such a Charter Review Committee. It is to conduct a comprehensive review of the council’s structure, and examine the vacancy-appointment process, the number of members, wards and other reforms.”


2 thoughts on “The Dispatch endorses No on Issue 1

  • Why do we need to go through the extra expense of a special election to vote on this? Why can’t it wait until November?

    • The pro-Issue 1 campaign filed the petitions and that determines when the election happens. The city didn’t have a choice, so we’re stuck with the $1,000,000 bill for a special election.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *