Recent crime in Madison has sparked a growing concern for tenant security and safety among city council members. The council approved Tuesday a citywide ordinance requiring landlords to provide exterior locks, a security box and a buzzer or a doorbell system on buildings with two or more apartments.

Under the ordinance, landlords will have 60 days to comply with the new regulations. If the features are missing after the given time, the landlords will be eligible for citations from city-housing inspectors.

During the Wednesday night’s Housing Committee meeting, members expressed concern over the 60-day requirement for landlords to install the new features.

Steve Beckmann of J & K Lock and Security spoke at the meeting and proposed an extension on the 60-day requirement, saying a year would be an appropriate timeline for lock businesses to finish all buildings requiring new locks.

“One thing that was of concern from the proposed amendment is the timeline with all of the companies that would do this kind of work,” Beckmann said. “The security-locking portion is a fairly quick deal but installing doorbells and intercoms is complicated.”

Installation of intercom or doorbell services requires more manual labor, such as wiring, which can be time-consuming, he added.

With approximately a dozen lock companies in Madison, the ability to install such features in a limited three-month period is problematic.

“Other businesses like ours can get flooded with these [requests] when we already may be booked and busy,” Beckmann said. “Sixty days is definitely pushing it.”

The requirement does not come at an appropriate time for the entire housing industry to comply with the new regulations, he added.

The motion to extend the 60-day requirement was unanimously referred to the Landlord Tenant Issues Subcommittee.

Ald. Mike Verveer, District 4, said he has scheduled meetings with the Apartment Association and landlords in his district to discuss increasing the 60-day requirement of exterior locks.

The number of buildings requiring the new lock features might not exceed 100 because most of the buildings constructed in the last 10 years are already equipped with security features, according to Beckmann. If newer buildings do not have the city ordinance features, they have been designed for easy installation.

This will help make the process more efficient for lock businesses, but a large portion of older buildings not set up for adding features remains, Beckmann said.

The committee said that even with exterior locks, tenants will still prop open doors for various reasons.

With this in mind, several members questioned the effectiveness of adding locks.

“Someone will let you in, even if they don’t know who you are,” Linda Grubb, Building Inspection Unit director, said.

If intruders wish to enter a residence, they either walk in with someone who has a key, or get a tenant to buzz them in anyway, Grubb said.

Approximately half of tenant buildings with exterior locks are not properly locked, according to Beckmann.

Exterior doors are oftentimes propped open for parents with children and also by students, Grubb added.

Other members see the addition of tighter security measures as a vital necessity for tenant safety.

“This is a work in progress that [Ald. Olson, District 6] and I committed to having law changed,” Verveer said. “Frankly, I’m embarrassed that our minimal housing code did not require locks on multiple-family buildings.”

Verveer and Olson first proposed the ordinance after a UW female resident was sexually assaulted in the unsecured basement of her Randall Avenue residence June 30. The woman had tried to get her landlord to install exterior locks on her building before the incident because of past intrusions.