The Columbus city council approved one major change while rejecting another during Tuesday’s regular meeting.
The council voted, 5-1, to maintain its 14-year-old ban on new billboards in the city. The council also approved the redistricting plan developed by its consulting firm — a change made necessary by the city’s recent annexation — although it took mayor Robert Smith’s vote to break a 3-3 deadlock.
The decision to maintain the moratorium on new billboards ended a two-month debate over whether the city should allow two billboard companies to erect new electronic billboards in the city.
Leonard Busby, a billboard company owner based in Laurel, had approached city officials in October with plans to erect an electronic billboard on Highway 45 near Walmart. Earlier this month, Busby had been given approval by the Lowndes County Board of Supervisors to erect a new billboard on county-owned land within the Columbus City limits, although he still needed city approval and approval from the Mississippi Department of Transportation before proceeding with those plans.
Another billboard company, Lamar Outdoor Advertising, which has a number of billboards in the city, also expressed an interest in removing some of its existing billboards if the city lifted the moratorium and allowed the company to erect electronic billboards.
Last week, the city’s billboard committee recommended that the council discuss the moratorium at Tuesday’s meeting.
Ward 6 councilman Bill Gavin was the most vocal opponent of lifting the moratorium.
“I’m against changing the billboard ordinance,” Gavin said. “We presently have 33 billboards along Highway 45, which is where most of the talk about the new billboard is focused. We already have 33 billboards between the Magnolia Bowl and the city limits on Highway 45.
“As new retail continues to come into the area, we’re getting more and more traffic and I’m concerned that these new electronic billboards will be a distraction and could lead to more accidents.
“It also contradicts what we’ve been trying to do on Highway 45,” he said. “I’ve been working for some time about an over-lay plan for Highway 45. We don’t have a final plan together, but I can tell you that this runs counter to that effort. We’re trying to the hodge-podge we already have to make the area more attractive, not only to residents but to the new retail we are trying to recruit. I think changing the billboard ordinance would really hurt that effort.”
Ward 4 councilman Marty Turner said that while he understood Gavin’s concerns, he felt lifting the billboard ordinance would help land owners in the area maintain their property rights.
“I’ve spoken to the person who owns the land where the new billboard would be located,” Turner said. “Right now, he’s paying $10,000 in property taxes. Allowing the new billboard would help him pay those taxes. I just don’t see how we can tell a property owner what he can do with his own land. You should be able to build what you want to on your land.”
Gavin countered by saying that all land owners are subject to codes and restrictions.
“You can’t just do whatever you want to,” Gavin said. “That’s not the way it works in any city.”
The vote to maintain the billboard moratorium passed, 5-1, with Turner in dissent.
The debate over whether the city should accept the redistricting plan presented to the council by Chris Watson of the Bridge & Watson consulting firm, was far more divided than the billboard debate.
While all six wards were affected by the redistricting plan Watson presented, Ward 2 councilman Joseph Mickens and Turner raised the most strenuous objections.
Mickens was concerned that the area added to his ward included a large number of apartments. The percentage of black residents of voting age will increase from 50.2 percent to 62.8 percent in the ward.
“I don’t see why all those apartments should be moved to Ward 2,” he said. “Ward 2 and Ward 3 already share a lot of streets. My question is why Ward 2 should get all those apartments? Usually, people who live in apartments move in and out, so they don’t vote. I’m concerned over how that would affect Ward 2 because I’m here to represent my constituents.”
Turner, meanwhile, also expressed some concern over the changes the redistricting would create in his ward. Although the percentage of black residents of voting age decreased from 79 percent to 70 percent under the proposed redistricting plan, Turner said he was more concerned about losing another area where he has political support.
Ward 1 councilman Gene Taylor made a motion to accept the plan with Ward 3 councilman Charlie Box providing the second.
A substitute motion by Turner, seconded by Mickens, to have Watson consider other redistricting options resulted in a 3-3 vote, with Mickens, Turner and Ward 5 councilman Kabir Karriem voting in favor and Box, Gavin and Taylor voting no. Smith, who votes only in the event of ties, voted against considering other options.
The previous motion to accept the redistricting plan again resulted in a 3-3 tie (Box, Gavin and Taylor voted “yes” and Mickens, Turner and Karriem voted “no”).
Again, Smith broke the tie, voting to accept the redistricting plan.
“I think it’s a good plan, so I’m voting to accept it,” Smith said.
The new ward map and ward-by-ward data is available online at cdispatch.com.
Slim Smith is a columnist and feature writer for The Dispatch. His email address is [email protected].
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 36 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.