Calhoun County's District 1 Has a Housing Problem — But Not the One People Think

If you only looked at population, District 1 might seem like it is carrying its fair share of Calhoun County.

District 1 has about 21,625 people, which is roughly 18.6% of Calhoun County’s population. In a county with five commission districts, that is about where one district should land. But when you look at housing, the picture changes fast. District 1 has 11,638 housing units, including 3,007 vacant units. That means District 1 holds 32.41% of all vacant housing units in Calhoun County — nearly one out of every three vacant homes in the county. Meanwhile, Calhoun County overall has 53,626 housing units, 44,348 households, an 83% occupancy rate, and a 70% owner-occupied rate.

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau. Table S0101: Age and Sex. 2024 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

That is the issue in one sentence:

District 1 has about 18.6% of the people — but more than 32% of the county’s vacant homes.

That is not a minor imbalance. That is a warning light.

Vacant homes are not just ugly. They can drag down neighboring property values, attract dumping, create safety concerns, weaken block stability, and make it harder for families to feel confident investing in a neighborhood. When vacancy stacks up in one part of the county, the effects ripple outward.

The real problem is not just blight. It is weak ownership.

District 1 is not only dealing with empty houses after the fact. It is also dealing with a housing pattern that makes blight more likely in the first place.

Across District 1, there are about 4,737 owner-occupied homes and 3,894 renter-occupied homes. That puts the district’s overall homeownership rate at about 54.9%, well below the countywide 70% owner-occupied figure.

That matters because neighborhoods with stronger homeownership usually have more long-term maintenance, more stability, and more people with a personal stake in keeping up property. Neighborhoods with weaker ownership patterns are more vulnerable to churn, neglect, absentee ownership, and investor speculation.

So this is not just a blight story.

It is also a story about whether homes stay in the hands of residents, families, and working people — or keep cycling through unstable rental patterns and disinvestment.

District 1 by the numbers:

Overall district snapshot

• Population: 21,625

• Housing units: 11,638

• Vacant units: 3,007

• Owner-occupied homes: 4,737

• Renter-occupied homes: 3,894

• Share of county population: 18.6%

• Share of county vacant housing: 32.41%

County comparison

• Calhoun County population: 116,427

• Calhoun County housing units: 53,626

• Calhoun County households: 44,348

• County occupancy rate: 83%

• County homeownership rate: 70%

• County poverty rate: 19%

What the neighborhood-level numbers show

The census tract groupings inside District 1 tell us this is not one single housing market. Different communities are dealing with different versions of the problem.

West-Central Anniston (Downtown, Noble 17th-30th)

• Vacant units: 608

• Approximate homeownership rate: 38.1%

This is one of the clearest signs of stress in the district: high vacancy combined with weak ownership.

Rocky Hollow (String Fellow, Lott Mosby Area)

• Vacant units: 430

• Approximate homeownership rate: 63.1%

• Approximate rental vacancy indicator: 27.1

This suggests a neighborhood where ownership is stronger than some other parts of the district, but instability in the rental market is still a serious issue.

Lenlock / Blue Mountain

• Vacant units: 416

• Approximate homeownership rate: 74.3%

This is one of the district’s strongest ownership areas, but the vacancy total is still too high to ignore.

Hobson City

• Vacant units: 333

• Approximate homeownership rate: 64.6%

A relatively stronger ownership base, but still carrying a significant vacant housing burden.

Thankful

• Vacant units: 319

• Approximate homeownership rate: 57.8%

This sits closer to the middle: not collapsed, but vulnerable.

West Anniston (Clydesdale, Crawford, Pipe Street Area)

• Vacant units: 315

• Approximate homeownership rate: 73.5%

This area shows that even neighborhoods with stronger ownership can still struggle with vacancy.

West End Cobb Town

• Vacant units: 286

• Approximate homeownership rate: 42.8%

This is another area where ownership is weak enough that long-term instability becomes a real risk.

McClellan

• Vacant units: 154

• Approximate homeownership rate: 31.4%

One of the lowest ownership levels in the district — a major signal of investor-heavy housing patterns.

South-Central Anniston (Tyler Hill, Gurnee, Leighton Area)

• Vacant units: 146

• Approximate homeownership rate: 37.6%

Again, low ownership points to a housing structure that is less stable and less rooted.

Big takeaway: this is not mainly a housing shortage

District 1 already has housing stock.

The problem is that too much of it is:

• vacant

• distressed

• poorly maintained

• tied up in legal limbo

• cycling through rentals instead of becoming stable owner-occupied homes

That is why this issue is better understood as a conversion problem, not just a supply problem.

Too many homes are moving away from stable ownership and toward vacancy, churn, or absentee control.

That weakens neighborhoods block by block.

What a serious response should look like

A real plan has to match the condition on the ground. Not every vacant property is the same, so not every solution should be the same either.

1. District 1 Blight Triage Map

We need a real property triage system that separates:

• homes worth saving

• structures that are unsafe and headed toward demolition

• properties trapped in tax-delinquent or title limbo

• lots that are ready for productive reuse

That helps limited dollars go where they can do the most good.

2. Vacant Lot Greening and Adoption Program

When structures are cleared, the work is not finished. We should push for mowing partnerships, neighborhood adoptions, community gardens, and small green-space improvements so empty lots do not become overgrown dumping grounds.

Cleaner lots mean less visible blight and stronger neighborhood pride.

3. Small Home Repair and Elder Repair Grants

One of the smartest anti-blight strategies is stopping blight before it starts.

Helping low-income homeowners, seniors, and struggling families with critical repairs — roofs, porches, accessibility needs, major safety hazards — can keep more homes occupied and keep more blocks from tipping into decline.

4. Side-Lot Transfer Program

When vacant lots are legally available, adjacent owners should have a clear chance to acquire them.

That can reduce dumping, improve maintenance, and put land into the hands of people who already live there and care about it.

5. County / City Land-Bank Framework

Some properties are not just vacant. They are frozen.

They sit abandoned, tax delinquent, tangled in title problems, or stuck in conditions that make private reuse nearly impossible. A stronger county-city framework could help move those parcels into a system for clearance, holding, and productive reuse.

6. Property Education and Family Preservation Initiative

A lot of property loss is not caused by fire or storm damage. It is caused by confusion.

Families lose houses because wills were never done, probate was never handled, taxes stacked up, or heirs’ property issues were never resolved. Free workshops and community education on probate, tax delinquency, title issues, and inheritance could help families hold onto generational property before it becomes another vacant address.

Why this matters for county leadership

This is not outside the scope of county government.

Based on the county commissioner's summary of powers, county commissions have authority to direct county finances through appropriations, acquire land for public purposes, support development efforts, spend certain fuel-tax proceeds on streets within municipalities, and adopt building laws and codes by ordinance. Those tools do not solve everything overnight, but they do create room for the county to fund, coordinate, partner, and help build a smarter system.

The bottom line

District 1’s housing numbers are telling us something important.

This is not just about old houses sitting empty.

It is about whether neighborhoods remain places where families can own, maintain, inherit, and invest — or whether they slowly slide toward vacancy, speculation, and decline.

District 1 is carrying a disproportionate share of Calhoun County’s vacant housing burden while trailing the county overall in homeownership. Calhoun County overall is about 70% owner-occupied, but District 1 is closer to 55%. That gap matters. It helps explain why blight feels heavier here, why vacancy is more visible here, and why solutions must be more intentional here.

Blight is not just a property problem.

It is a neighborhood problem. A safety problem. A quality-of-life problem. A wealth-building problem.

And if we are serious about restoring District 1, we have to be serious about understanding the data — and matching the right solution to the right kind of property.

That is the work.

And that is the kind of work I intend to do. #VoteHodges