By popular demand, here’s a quick follow-up to my last post with two more maps: one on the ranked-choice voting ballot initiative, and another on the Lakeside liquor law.
Nonbinding Vote to Repeal the Lakeside Liquor Ban
The entire city, for some reason, got a say on whether the Lakeside neighborhood should sell alcohol or not. The initiative had more than 50 percent support in every precinct, but the four precincts that represent Lakeside had the four lowest percentages of people in support. While a narrow majority supported liquor sales in three of the four, and a somewhat larger percentage did so in a fourth, opinion remains divided. The west side, meanwhile, really supports booze on the far east end. The results in Lakeside had a 3 percent shift toward the pro-alcohol side since the 2008 referendum, so things are starting to move, but it’s hardly a mandate from the people of Lakeside.
Cards on the table: I vote absentee in Precinct One (the far east part of Lakeside) and support opening up the neighborhood to liquor sales. However, given this shifting but still divided electorate, I think a compromise is in order. The city already bent the rules once for the area to allow liquor sales at the Lester Park Golf Course clubhouse, so I think it’s perfectly reasonable to do the same for New London Café or any other restaurants that may pop up in the neighborhood, if they so desire. That could even pump some life into the neighborhood’s little downtown. If they want to continue to block liquor stores until there’s broader support, I think that would be a reasonable accommodation of public opinion. Of course, there are arguments that cast aside public opinion in favor of ideals, but this is probably the best way to find some middle ground.
Ranked Choice Voting
First off, there’s one very clear outlier. RCV had majority approval in the precinct that covers the UMD campus; it didn’t get over 36 percent of the vote anywhere else. To the extent that many UMD students vote from their on-campus address, they tend to be mobilized by student groups or activist organizations, so their support makes some sense. That precinct also had the smallest number of votes of any precinct—less than one-third the average, and one-fifth that of some the largest—making it more vulnerable to swings related to sample size. It could be interesting to see an age breakdown, though I’d add that an informal sampling of my own peer group (mid-20s people) revealed widespread skepticism. I’d guess this is a localized result, and little more.
The other four precincts that mustered over 30 percent support for RCV are on the near east side, and in areas with fairly high poverty rates. While this is still a pretty decisive rejection, the somewhat higher approval rate here might stem from the (highly questionable) claim that the voting system somehow increases the number of diverse voices. Basically everyone else rejected it by a very large margin, and I don’t think one can read much into an east-west narrative here. The unease with it cut across all parts of the city and demographic groups. It’s time to find some methods to increase citizen participation with broader support, even if they may take more work within the community.
That’s all I’ve got for this election cycle. I’ll have some final words on the outgoing politicians when their terms come to an end in January, and we’ll see how the newcomers do when they make their way into office.