[media-credit name=’Ben Smidt’ align=’alignnone’ width=’648′][/media-credit]After a round of council volleying, the Landlord and Tenant Issues Subcommittee met for the second time to discuss an exterior locks proposal Thursday. After public comment and discussion, members of the subcommittee unanimously voted to pass a recommendation on to the Housing Committee. A final vote will still be required from the City Council.

Under the proposal, landlords will have 180 days to install a positive-locking guarded-latch lock with an approved self-closing device, as well as a lock to all common area interior doors, shared basement laundry and storage areas. It would also require housing to be equipped with doorbells, intercoms or effective buzzer systems.

Ald. Judy Olson, District 6, spoke to the committee regarding the lock ordinance, which she and Ald. Mike Verveer, District 4, have been spearheading since summer.

“Delaying this [proposal] is delaying what I believe is a common-safety ordinance that has been well crafted to not be expensive to owners and not cumbersome to accommodate,” Olson said to the committee.

Verveer said landlords would have half a year after the ordinance is published to comply with the new regulations. Olson added the six-month compliance period is “very generous” to apartment owners and landlords.

“I really feel that we’ve extended an olive branch to landlords and owners with this ordinance,” Verveer said.

Olson reminded the committee that if there are discrepancies between which doors must have the new security features, owners could go through a variance process to determine if the features are required, which would be overseen by the Building Board.

Linda Grubb, Madison building inspection unit director, said the building inspection unit does not promote “blanket exemptions” exempting certain groups or locations from a city ordinance. She added that it may go through the variance process.

“I think it’s a safety issue that’s important,” David Sparer, committee member, said. “[B]ut we need flexibility to deal with unique building constructions.”

Sparer added if the variance applications are insufficient in handling different building constructions and lock accommodations, there would be serious problems with the new ordinance. Sparer said he believes the committee’s new and improved ordinance will be able to address building construction and unique lock placements.

Becky Anderson, a local landlord and a founding member of the Madison Landlord Legislative Council, said the unique construction of some of her buildings proves problematic. The locks for exterior doors, basement doors or laundry rooms that are often propped open anyway are sometimes expensive, according to Anderson.

“My main objection is not necessarily the cost,” Anderson said. “I just don’t think it’s necessary to have an intercom system to every apartment.”

Anderson said the addition of an intercom system at one of her Carroll Street residences cost $5,300. She added there are cheaper systems, but that $5,300 is “not small change.”

Nancy Jensen, executive director for the Apartment Association of South Central Wisconsin, a group representing many landlords in the area, said its board of directors is supporting the newly refined ordinance.

“Safety does come first, and we’re pleased with all of this work,” Jensen told the committee.