Mayor and Council Say Madison Should have Local Control! Don’t ruin our communities!

They are better Republicans than the Republicans in the Assembly . . . could the City be headed to court to challenge Local Control and Uniformity? I wish. I really don’t know, but the mayor raises a really, really good issue (read why I love this mayor even tho we don’t always agree!). Best quote: Ald. Lauren Cnare “this is about more than being mean to renters, its about ruining neighborhoods”!

Again, even if you don’t care about renters or landlords, this is an issue that impacts everyone. I testified before the council Tuesday about AB183 and in support of a resolution in opposition to that bill. I expected to sit down, have them vote and move on, but instead, they had something to say!

KONKEL TESTIMONY
Hello, welcome to all the new faces out there. 600 ft cul de sacs, something I do not miss/ (I sat there for an hour waiting to testify while they discussed an issue we discussed ad nauseum years ago, but nobody there remembered it so they had the discussion again with new staff and it was quite the different conversation.) Thank you for all the hard work that you do. I actually did just come here to say thank you for this resolution. And to thank Alder Ellingson and the Mayor for their comments on the earlier resolution (regarding the effects of sequestration on the poor) that passed because the CDA is really important to the City of Madison and it is unfortunate it can’t do more but it is really a critical piece of the solutions for so many of the issues we are facing now. This issue is by title only and I am one of the people who railed against “by title only” items and I wanted to thank you for rushing this through because what is happening right now is last week Monday we found out about a piece of legislation that is going to gut another 25 provisions out of the Madison General Ordinances as well as make 20 changes at the State-wide level for tenant-landlord law, and this is on top of the two bills that just passed last year which was Act 108 and Act 143 which also gutted a whole bunch of Madison laws and changed a whole bunch of tenant landlord laws and this is really having a devastating effect on tenants and even landlords, which is why they need to fix some of the things that they did. We found out about this on Monday, on Tuesday they said there was a hearing on Thursday at 10:00 and today we found out it is going to the Assembly floor next Tuesday. And after that we found out the exeutive session will be on Thursday (today), they are really pushing this through, it is 21 pages and they just introduced another 6 page amendment with 23 more amendments and I haven’t really had a chance to read them all, but they don’t affect local pre-emption. So, I just wanted to thank you for trying to stand up for tenants and hopefully against a better democratic process, it crazy, its exhausting and for a tiny non-profit like the Tenant Resource Center that has to try to figure out what these bills mean, rewrite everything that we have, our website, our brochures, our books, retrain our volunteers, retrain our staff, do all that work it is having a devasting impact on us, so thank you for doing what you do. This is very confusing to people, I’ve been teaching seminars throughout the state the last few weeks and as we are telling landlords about these types of things they are so confused about the original changes that happened and now there are more changes on top of it and tenants are just basically thinking that “all of our rights have been taken away so it doesn’t matter” and it is making it extremely hard on us at work, we are 40 – 100 calls behind constantly which is at least three days and this is just going to make it harder, especially with the 1.88% vacancy rate here in the City of Madison, tenants are in dire straights. And “local control”, I don’t know what happened to that phrase up at the capital, but I want to thank Nick from the Mayor’s Office, Steve from the City Attorney’s Office and the alders who have sponsored this resolution and thanks for doing what you can do.

DISCUSSION
Sue Ellingson asks for all alders to be added to the resolution. No one objects.

Scott Resnick reads down the list of things that will be removed from our general ordinances passed by the Housing Commmittee.
– Landlord registration
– Landlords won’t have to tell new tenants that they have the right to rent abatement due to previous tenants calling a building inspector.
– Landlords won’t have to tell tenants about occupancy limits.
– Landlords won’t have to tell tenants that they can’t have off street parking permits, they will just have to find out for themselves.
– Landlords won’t have to disclose what kind of minimum standards they are applying or what tenants have to do to comply with the rules.
– Landlords won’t be required to tell you that you are being denied housing (I think that was supposed to be “why you are denied housing”)
– Landlords won’t be required to provide a phone number to be contacted at.
– May limit the building code violations landlords have to disclose, including heat.
– Landlords may not have to disclose conditions that create a reasonable risk of personal injury.
– Landlords will no longer have to have a written guest policy.
– Landlords will not have to give tenants the “Tenants’ Rights and Responsibilities Brochure”
– Landlords won’t have a 5% limit on late fees.
– Landlords will no longer have to provide receipts and estimates for things being deducted from security deposits.
– Landlords will no longer have to list the hours worked or amount paid for items deducted from security deposits.
And that does not include other items the city attorney is still searching for or other amendments introduced by House Republicans when it is on the floor.

Lisa Subeck wasn’t going to speak but I listened to that list and it just made me more and more angry. I just have to say that a lot of these are laws that were passed back when former Alder Konkel was on the council and I remember standing up there and testifying on many of them and just in case there is any doubt about it, these are basic consumer protections. When I said that at the hearing the other day, they argued with me, they didn’t think these were basic consumer protections, but these are basic consumer protections and I think it is insulting that the state doesn’t think we can govern ourselves. But I also am appalled after sitting through hours of testimony by the things that I was hearing from some law enforcement officials from other parts of the state, what I was hearing from some legislators talking about it and what I was hearing from some of the committee members about their true lack of understanding about the devastation that they are doing. I would urge my colleagues, I know we can’t always be at a hearing at the capital, but do contact members of the committee, do let them know how you as a local elected official feel about it, it might not change what they do, but at least they should know what kind of damage they are doing and they need to hear from people like us because they are hearing from a lot of people who think for some reasons that it is in the best interest of our citizens not to have a phone number for their own landlord.

Lauren Cnare says she has had a couple conversations with Mr. Zavos (City lobbyist in Mayor’s Office), you know we are a city that has begun to use some different zoning regulations and as a result we have lots of single family neighborhoods that are now welcoming new apartments and homes. I want people to, even if you haven’t rented for a really long time, nor do you intend to in the future, because you own a piece of property right now, we need to look at this, that this just ask landlords and property owners of multi-family units to provide common courtesies and generally behave yourself well in the community. So, if renting isn’t even on your radar screen, I think this helps our multi-family homes be better citizens and be better neighbors. When there are happier tenants in your neighborhoods that means you have a happier neighborhood. And to destroy people’s access to – I think our colleagues just said it really well, basic consumer protections or rights – if someone did this to you in your work place or took all these things away from you anyplace else you would object vociferously. And I really want people to understand, this is not just about renters, its about our neighborhoods and it is about our city, so I would encourage people that – even our legislators who I am sure are watching us tonight – that this is really more than just being mean to renters, its about ruining communities.

Ledell Zellers says that she agrees with her colleagues Subeck and Cnare and she observed that we have some reporters here from our student newspapers and she would encourage them to publicize this and encourage the students that will be going home after finals to contact their home legislators and let them know that this is really unacceptable, that might be one way to get the word out, our good student newspapers.

Steve King asks if they will have to vote on the changes that the state is forcing us to make in our ordinances.

City Attorney Michael May says that he would probably come here and ask that they move it to the 77Square Ordinance which is where they move things that have been pre-empted but they keep them on the books so they could bring them back later.

King says that what he is asking is . . .

May says that if you vote for it or not, we can’t enforce them if this is approved.

Mayor Soglin says . . . unless, we should decide to challenge the state law. And get it overturned.

Chris Schmidt says he wanted to point out that when you look at the list of MGO sections, its kind of sequential and that’s because Attorney Brist organized it that way for us, and thank you to him for doing that in a very short notice, he has no doubt that somewhere in the capital there is a copy of our MGO that some legislative aide has gone through and basically marked up on what they are going to hit. I don’t think its the last time they are going to do it. It may not be landlord-tenant stuff next time, but we have to watch out, they are going to keep doing this to us, as long as those guys are in control.

Mayor asks if there is any objection to him saying a few things – there is none.

Mayor Soglin says that he wants to go on to the point about state pre-emption and local control. The concept is real simple, if it is a matter of local concern it should be left to the locals, if it is a matter of statewide concern, then the state can enter the area and introduce legislation. In most instances where this happens it is because the state has an interest in adopting uniform statutes that are applied throughout the state, we saw this in terms of certain construction regulations. In this instance, it is designed to eliminate any legislation at the local level or state level. And the response that we are getting that this is a matter of statewide concern, first is contradictory to the philosophy that elected many of the legislators that are supporting this bill, legislators the entered this office thinking that more decisions should be left to locals, legislators that get terribly offended if the federal government, for example, should pre-empt the state. But more importantly, is this the correct application of state pre-emption and clearly it is not. It is intended to become a matter of statewide concern because there are certain out of state corporations who own and/or manage apartment complexes who want a minimal uniform set of standards throughout Wisconsin and this will accommodate their needs, in regards to lowering the bar, not just in Madison, but principally in Madison. What is interesting about this, in the desire to mark up a bill which is to itemize Madison’s ordinances, and you are correct in your presumption Alder Schmidt, will result in, for most landlords, a considerable discomfort because many of things that they would like to see, not just for themselves, but for the industry, to increase performance and increase standards in the industry. The other point, which Alderwoman Cnare addressed, is that this has an impact on the quality of life in all neighborhoods, and in a City like Madison, where we make an effort to get economic integration and integration of housing types, where we don’t have extensive areas that are only single-family, that are only multi-family, this will undermine those efforts and will certainly reduce the quality of life. On the question of uniformity, there is one other point that should be noted – the needs in a community of 500 with very few rental units and the needs of a community like LaCrosse or Madison, Oshkosh or Milwaukee where well over half the population could be renters are very different. And that is why the uniformity argument doesn’t hold and that is why in the many instances where the state has acted this way they have done the responsible thing, which is to set different standards based on the size of the community – a notion that is completely alien to those who have drafted and are pushing for the adoption of this bill.

NOTE: This is why I freaking love this mayor! He has principles that matter to him and he doesn’t play personality politics. This issue may be one he cares about (I think so), but even if he didn’t care so much, he understands the broader picture and what is at stake and is able to articulate his concerns and stand up for them. Instead of just opposing something based on who is in support or opposition. Principles, integrity, honor. Sure, he does some stupid things I hate, but always with a reason that is based on the issue – not the persons involved or even some triangulation about re-election. You can count on him to stand up for his core principles and always for the City of Madison. End rant.

Welcome to the twilight zone . . . The place is a madhouse, feels like being cloned, My beacon’s been moved under moon and star . . . ooops, sorry, a little Golden Earring there . . .

Motion passes unanimously . . . and sorry if that song is stuck in your head for the rest of the day . . .

Thank you Common Council and Mayor . . . for doing the right thing here and for standing up for Madison.