Comments on: Column: Mapping Ann Arbor’s 2012 Elections

By: David Cahill

David Cahill — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 02:16:32 +0000

Rukiddingme, I was including students as renters. Sorry I didn’t mention this explicitly in my original comment.

By: Rod Johnson

Rod Johnson — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 17:09:41 +0000

I’m not surprised there was a dropoff for the library bond question. It was a really difficult vote for me, with what seemed like strong arguments on both sides. I wasn’t sure how I was going to vote until the day before, and I think I’m a fairly informed voter. In fact, I think this was a vote where the more you knew, the harder it was to decide, as opposed to people who just went on “libraries are good!” or “taxes are bad!”

By: Margaret Leary

Margaret Leary — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 17:27:35 +0000

Thanks, Dave, for another astute examination of local politics.

I’m no expert, but I did my own assessment, which includes votes Dave didn’t assess.
Live voters on 11/6, in the city of ann arbor, rejected the library bond 52% to 48%.
Absentee voters in the city of Ann Arbor, and all voters in the townships (as separate categories but with the same result) rejected the library bond 59% to 41%.

A significant percentage of voters did not vote on the library bond. I want to compare that “dropoff” to the art millage and park renewal but haven’t done so yet. Within the city of Ann Arbor, 12% of those who cast ballots did not vote on the library bond. District wide the dropoff was 11%. However even if all of those people had voted “yes”, the bond would have passed by only a few votes.

One of the keys to Bridget McCormack’s success running for the MI Supreme Court was her focus throughout the campaign, and especially on 11/6, on showing voters how to vote for her, and that checking the Dem. box would not do it.

By: RUKiddingMe

RUKiddingMe — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 03:36:15 +0000

I think Mr. Cahill is correct, but I also think the U of M student (who ALSO do not pay property taxes) voting played a big part in close-to-downtown results as well. In fact, the Public Art Commission blatantly stated that they wanted this vote to take place while students were in town, which I found to be a telling indication of their convictions about the millage; if it is a good idea, they shouldn’t need to chase the votes of non-property tax paying “in town for the moment” residents.

By: fridgeman

fridgeman — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:49:27 +0000

Tom (#14), thanks for the link. It’s fascinating to see the population-scaled maps. Much better than the NBC ice rink!

Donna (#5), I agree. I tried to pop in to the Pittsfield branch library late morning yesterday, and could not find parking. This was during the middle of the day on a weekday! So although Steve (#7) does not approve of speculating, here goes: I believe that the Pittsfield branch was overflowing with neighborhood folks going to their neighborhood library, and had the proposal been to fund *their* library, they would have wholeheartedly supported it.

In my opinion, the AADL (unintentionally?) doomed the downtown library by investing in attractive full-service branches. Anyone who remembers the former Northeast branch, and compares it to the new Traverwood branch knows that NE was no destination, whereas Traverwood is a welcoming community resource. Despite what we’d like to believe, Ann Arbor may not be big enough to support the full-services branches as well as a downtown temple. The other important dynamics are the transition to digital information, and the suburbanization of Ann Arbor.

By: Tom Whitaker

Tom Whitaker — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 20:16:08 +0000

If you like election maps, check these out: [link]

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:04:57 +0000

Re: [12] "In the central city there are far more renters than elsewhere." In support of that contention, here's another map: [.jpg of map showing owner-occupied housing distribution within Ann Arbor] from ESRI.

By: Dave Cahill

Dave Cahill — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:54:14 +0000

I think I’ve figured out why the vote was higher in favor of the Art in Public Places millage and the Library bond in the central city than elsewhere.

In the central city there are far more renters than elsewhere. Renters don’t pay property tax directly, while property owners do. So when the renters went to the polls they saw only the benefits (art and a new library). They didn’t see the costs as applying to them. So they voted more heavily in favor of these two proposals.

My analysis is far from perfect. There are precincts that don’t fit. But the relationship between high renter percentage and high vote percentage is significant.

By: Kathy Griswold

Kathy Griswold — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 00:57:54 +0000

I’ve had great fun studying these maps. Thanks Dave. Regarding the library bond vote in the townships, there are three outliers (AV voters not included):

Scio Township, Precinct 2 where 75% voted for the library bond out of a total of 4 voters. This is a small area north of Jackson and west of Zeeb in AADL area.

Pittsfield Township, Precinct 2 where 51.78 voted for the library bond out of a total of 1149 voters. Mostly middle class single-family homes in the area bounded by US 23, Washtenaw, Golfside, and Packard.

Pittsfield Township, Precinct 4 where 57.08 voted for the library bond out of a total of 1109 voters. Many apartment complexes, including Glencoe Hills, are in the area bounded by US 23, Washtenaw, Golfside, and Clark.

Does anyone have an explanation for the positive vote in Pittsfield, Precinct 2?

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 23:12:58 +0000

Re: [8]

Already noted in the caption to Map 8. Outside Ann Arbor, the library bond proposal had 41.2% yes votes. Inside the city yes votes were 46.4%.