| 10/9/2007 | Attorney's Office/Approval Group | This Ordinance wasApproved As To Form | |
| Notes: Substitute |
| 10/9/2007 | Attorney's Office | Fiscal Note Required / Approval to the Comptroller's Office/Approval Group due on 10/10/2007. Completed on 10/10/2007 | |
| 10/10/2007 | Comptroller's Office/Approval Group | Approved Fiscal Note By The Comptroller's Office to the Attorney's Office Completed on 10/10/2007 | |
| Notes: Bohrod |
| 10/10/2007 | Attorney's Office | This Ordinance was Referred for Introduction | |
| Notes: Building Code, Fire Code and Licensing Appeals Board, Commission on the Environment, Housing Committee, Public Safety Review Board, Solid Waste Advisory Committee |
| 10/16/2007 | COMMON COUNCIL | A motion was made by Ald. Bruer, seconded by Ald. Brandon, to Refer to the BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD. The motion passed by voice vote/other. | Pass |
| Notes: Additional Referral(s): Commission on the Environment, Housing Committee, Public Safety Review Board, Solid Waste Advisory Committee |
| 10/16/2007 | BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE, CONVEYANCE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD | This Ordinance was Refer to the COMMISSION ON THE ENVIRONMENT | |
| Notes: |
| 10/16/2007 | BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE, CONVEYANCE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD | This Ordinance wasRefer to the HOUSING COMMITTEE | |
| Notes: |
| 10/16/2007 | BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE, CONVEYANCE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD | This Ordinance wasRefer to the PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW BOARD | |
| Notes: |
| 10/16/2007 | BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE, CONVEYANCE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD | This Ordinance wasRefer to the SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE | |
| Notes: |
| 11/1/2007 | SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE | A motion was made by Shenot, seconded by Ingham, to Return to Lead with the Recommendation for Approval to the BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD. The motion passed by voice vote/other. | Pass |
| Notes: |
| 11/2/2007 | HOUSING COMMITTEE | Jennifer Feyerherm of the Sierra Club appeared in support. The Sierra Club talked to energy efficient experts from Energy Center of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation and MG&E. There hasn’t been a lot of energy efficient investments in rental properties as you would see in other segments of the market. Lighting was an issue where they saw savings for both the landlord and the tenant. The Energy Center of Wisconsin did a survey on rental properties in the State of Wisconsin and they found, in terms of lighting, units that have 20 units and more have already made the switch in common areas. In rentals that have small numbers of units, there was a lot of potential to upgrade lighting to much more efficient lighting. Numerous brochures were handed out on energy-efficient lighting.
Liesel Schulte of Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corp. appeared to answer any questions if necessary.
Becky Anderson asked if there had been research in other buildings, not just residential? Is the government doing anything to improve the energy efficiency of their buildings? Feyerherm noted that the State and University are. Anderson asked what the enforcement would be? Hank stated his staff would inspect as part of a systematic inspection and they would also respond to complaints. Anderson asked about the implementation of the ordinance? Feyerherm stated June 1, 2008 would be for common areas and June 1, 2009 for interior.
Villacrez moved to refer to the Landlord & Tenant Issues Subcommittee, second by Mandeville with unanimous approval.
This Ordinance was Refered to the LANDLORD AND TENANT ISSUES SUBCOMMITTEE | |
| Notes: |
| 11/2/2007 | Attorney's Office/Approval Group | This Ordinance was Approved As To Form | |
| Notes: Substitute. |
| 11/2/2007 | Attorney's Office | This Ordinance was Fiscal Note Required / Approval to the Comptroller's Office due back on 11/2/2007 | |
| Notes: |
| 11/19/2007 | COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT | A motion was made by Sonzogni, seconded by Palm, to Return to Lead with the Recommendation for Approval to the BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD. The motion passed by voice vote/other. | Pass |
| Notes: |
| 12/20/2007 | LANDLORD AND TENANT ISSUES SUBCOMMITTEE | Approved Fiscal Note By The Comptroller's Office to the Attorney's Office Completed on 10/10/2007 | |
| Notes: |
| 1/17/2008 | LANDLORD AND TENANT ISSUES SUBCOMMITTEE | A motion was made by Ejercito, seconded by Hassel, to Return to Lead with the Recommendation for Approval to the HOUSING COMMITTEE. The motion passed by voice vote/other.
An amendment to the motion was made by Brink, seconded by Hassel, to remove Item #3 from the Ordinance. The amendment to the motion was rejected on the following vote:
Yes – Brink & Hassel
Nos – Sparer and Ejercito
Sparer is against removing item #3 from the Ordinance. Hassel does not like the look and light from the light bulbs.
Ejercito would also like to see it Citywide but believes in how it was drafted to at least get 60% of Madison on board. It is time to phase out incandescent lightbulbs. Ejercito is a photographer and deals with lighting, color temperature and light balance, and it is far easier to compensate for compact fluorescents than it is for incandescent bulbs.
| Pass |
| Notes: |
| 2/6/2008 | | Approved Fiscal Note By The Comptroller's Office to the Attorney's Office Completed on 10/10/2007 | |
| 2/19/2008 | BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE, CONVEYANCE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD | A motion was made by Glueck, seconded by Christian, to RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL TO ADOPT - REPORT OF OFFICER. The motion passed by voice vote/other. | Pass |
| Notes: There was a feeling that the implementation date should be moved out to August 15th so owners could plan for it. In addition, any one year leases still in effect on August 15th would not be required to comply until that lease expires. |
| 3/5/2008 | HOUSING COMMITTEE | A motion was made by Judge, seconded by Rutten, to Return to Lead with the Following Recommendation(s). The motion passed by the following vote: | Pass
(11:0) |
| Notes: A motion was made by Ejercito, seconded by Konkel, to recommend approval of Ordinance 07734 to the Common Council.
Porterfield made an Amendment to the motion, seconded by Villacrez, to give until the end of 2009 for the interior of units.
Villacrez wants to separate out the part that has to do with the interior lights and refer it until the Committee can get some questions resolved. There are too many unknown factors on the interior part. There have a lot of meetings with a lot of different landlords and even through the Board of the Apartment Association on the hallways and the research done on the LED exit lights. The interior part seems unequal in the fact that we are not requiring all homeowners to do it.
Hirsch interrupted on a procedural basis because Villacrez was beginning to make a case. Hirsch said he heard Villacrez say that the Committee should recommend not covering the interior of the units at all. Hirsch asked if that was a friendly amendment to the previous amendment that was made. Villacrez said yes. Hirsch said the amendment under consideration would be to recommend passage without application to the insides of the units at all. Hirsch asked if there was discussion on that amendment.
Sparer recommended that the Committee not do as indicated above, but instead extend the date because it has been discussed at great length and presentations have been made. In his view, the only issue with whether to do it on the interiors is to make sure that people have the option of getting this done within the time period they needed. That is why the Committee would extend the date so that they could do that. Hopefully, that information can be brought before the City Council before the vote happens there. He feels the Committee should recommend the lights be changed on the interiors as well. He votes against totally removing it from the Ordinance.
Judge asked for a point of information. If the Committee separates it, would it become a separate Ordinance? Konkel said it could, if that was what the Committee wanted, but it would take work by staff to do this.
Hirsch called for a vote on the amendment, to delete the application of the requirement for CFL’s to the insides of rental units (Section 3). The motion for the amendment failed by the following vote:
Yes - Day, Villacrez, Brink, LeTourneau
No - Ejercito, Judge, Konkel, Porterfield, Rutten, Sparer, Wilcox
Abstain - Hirsch
Absent - Hassel & Mandeville
Excused - Munson
A motion was made by Judge, seconded by LeTourneau, to separate the Ordinance into two pieces, one dealing with the insides of the units and the other dealing with the common and exterior areas.
Wilcox is concerned that by separating the Ordinance, it would have to go through all of the same process as the original Ordinance and it would essentially be starting over, which is very time consuming. Konkel said the Council does not do this very often so she is not sure on the process. Her understanding is that if you separate something, you can recommend only moving forward with the issue that the Committee agrees on, and holding the piece in question back in Committee, but technically the Council can move forward however they want. Hirsch clarified that the Committee does not have the power to separate, and only have the power to make a recommendation to the Council that they consider these things separately. Konkel said a Committee could keep a piece in Committee because the Council can go forward regardless of what the Committee recommends.
Hirsch said that without objection, the Committee would separate the Ordinance and move on to consideration of piece number one, which addresses the insides of the units.
Point of clarification from Sparer. The Ordinance has Sections 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5. Section 4 is a report, so would the Committee have Sections 1, 2, 4 & 5 as one part, and then the other piece would be Sections 3 & 4 again? That was Judge’s intention.
A motion was made by Judge, seconded by Villacrez, to refer/table Sections 3 & 4 (insides of units) until questions are answered. The motion passed by voice vote/other with Chair Hirsch abstaining.
Judge thinks this is a very good idea. Seeing as the date is as of right now 2009, Judge feels referring it one month to discover this very important information, will not change the bottom line because it is still 16 months away.
Konkel indicated that the issue of the March 31, 2008 due date for a report from George Hank does not make sense and recommends that they move this date to June. Wilcox thinks it would be a good idea to provide information on disposal of light bulbs to tenants at the time a lease is signed.
|
| 3/11/2008 | PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE | This would provide for more efficient, effective and safe lighting in: Common areas (exterior), outside areas and inside rental units. The Sierra Club has attended most other committee meetings - demonstrated the lights and they were very bright. Tenants and landlords agreed on the common and outside areas. It was unknown what the fiscal impact would be on the inside of rental units. There is a service where these costs can be subsidized. Sixty percent of our builidngs are rental units. The mercury component of the flourescent bulbs was a concern of some members - however all businesses that sell these bulbs must also recycle old ones by Ordinance. Police offered no view on the matter, but did feel that more light is always good. The ordinance will be referred to the April meeting with the request that the Sierra Club and/or the ordinance sponsor come to the meeting to give their input. | Pass |
| Notes: |
| 4/2/2008 | HOUSING COMMITTEE | A motion was made by Sparer, seconded by Ejercito, to Return to Lead with the Following Recommendation(s) to the BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD. The motion passed by the following vote: | Pass
(11:1) |
| Notes: A motion was made by Sparer, seconded by Konkel, to approve with the following change: amend Section 3 of Ordinance 07734. Instead of saying, “with 3 or more dwelling units” to say “with more than 3 dwelling units”.
Yes - Brink, Day, Ejercito, Hassel, Konkel, Mandeville, Munson, Porterfield, Rutten, Sparer, Villacrez, Wilcox
Abstain - Hirsch
Excused - Judge & LeTourneau
|
| 4/16/2008 | PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE | This Ordinance was rerefered to the PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW BOARD meeting of May 13, 2008.
A motion was made by Judge, seconded by Pasha, to move this referral to the next meeting, as the people who were to speak on the subject were unable to make it tonight. Chair Moen mentioned that next month’s meeting is very full already. The motion was passed unanimously by voice vote. | |
| Notes: |
| 5/13/2008 | Unpublished Meeting Data Pending* |
| 6/10/2008 | PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE | Moen spoke with George Dreckman in the city's recycling program, who felt there was a greater good in the overall use of these bulbs than the concern about the occasional bulb breaking and there being some small mercury leak. Moen felt that if LED could match the current energy efficient bulbs in two years, it would be preferable. Judge commended that he has seen the Sierra Club presentation 8-9 times and feels this is a good ordinance.
Staff wondered what the effects of broken bulbs and mercury from them would be. Moen would like to know the status of LED technology. If an alternative that has no harmful (mercury) problems could be found, it would be preferable. As a crime prevention ordinance, where is the 30 lumens mentioned? Many say it is too little for people to read/see by. These don't have to be flourescent bulbs. Housing Committee minutes have much detail and PSRB members were encouraged to read them.
A motion was made by Skidmore, seconded by Scott, to Refer to the PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW BOARD, due back on 7/8/2008. The motion passed by the following vote: | Pass
(7:0) |
| Notes: |
| 7/8/2008 | PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE | As the Sierra Club was not in attendance to give input on this measure, the following action was taken:
A motion was made by Judge, seconded by Skidmore, to Rerefer to the PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW BOARD, due back on 8/12/2008. The motion passed by voice vote/other. | Pass |
| Notes: |
| 8/12/2008 | PUBLIC SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE | A motion was made by Judge, seconded by Bell, to Return to Lead with the Recommendation to Place on File to the BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS BOARD. The motion passed by voice vote/other. | Pass |
| Notes: |
| 9/16/2008 | COMMON COUNCIL | A motion was made by Ald. Bruer, seconded by Ald. Webber, to Refer to the Attorney's Office. The motion passed by voice vote/other. | Pass |
| Notes: 1 Registrant(s) in support wishing to speak.
1 Registrant(s) neither in support nor opposition wishing to speak. |
| 9/26/2008 | Attorney's Office | This Ordinance was RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS - REPORT OF OFFICER | |
| Notes: See attached report of the City Attorney |
| 10/7/2008 | COMMON COUNCIL | A motion was made by Ald. Bruer, seconded by Ald. Clear, to Place On File. The motion passed by voice vote/other. | Pass |
| Notes: 1 Registrant(s) in opposition not wishing to speak. |