A city committee rejected a controversial proposal to allow police more flexibility in policing nuisance house parties throughout the city on Wednesday.
The city’s Housing Committee voted not to support the ordinance in a 6-3 vote. The ordinance would impose stricter consequences on both tenants and landlords if it gains the City Council’s final approval.
“I do see house parties as being an issue downtown,” Ald. Scott Resnick, District 8, said. “I can support immediate dispersal of a house party if these various things were present. I would not support any new penalties. I would not support the idea of eviction.”
The commission focused on how the nuisance party ordinance would get landlords more involved with tenants and develop relations between the police, tenants and landlords.
According to Ald. Paul Skidmore, District 9, the Madison Police Department and Mayor Paul Soglin’s office are in agreement over the need for an ordinance that would address egregious and life-threatening behavior.
“I know it’s my intention and desire, and the desire of the police department and the mayor’s office, to have something in place by Mifflin Street Block Party,” Skidmore said. “It’s not the only area that could have nuisance parties, but that certainly is one of the driving forces.”
This ordinance differs from current Madison ordinances, like the chronic nuisance ordinance and other underage drinking laws, in that it would give MPD greater flexibility to determine whether a disturbance is a nuisance party, Alcohol Policy Coordinator Mark Woulf said.
This ordinance would be broader as it looks at behavior, overcrowding and other issues that are not in the current ordinance, Woulf said.
The nuisance party ordinance would give the police the ability to end a threat immediately by ordering dispersion, something the other ordinances cannot do, Skidmore said.
“The mayor wants to make the city safe, and this is one way of doing this,” Skidmore said. “This is about protecting health, safety and welfare. It’s not about going after students.”
In addition to immediate dispersal, the ordinance would include a series of consequences for each offense a tenant may have for a nuisance party, Woulf said.
The goal is to have the ordinance implemented before Mifflin Street Block Party on May 5.
“Saying, ‘This isn’t about Mifflin, but we have to get this done before Mifflin,’ that really bothers me,” Ald. Bridget Maniaci, District 2, said.
MPD will hold a meeting Feb. 8 to discuss changes to the ordinance, Skidmore said.
Skidmore said he was not surprised at the outcome of the meeting.
“I’m not dismayed or concerned really,” Skidmore said. “We need to make some changes.”
Skidmore said he has noticed a misconception that the ordinance will be used as a tool for police to enter properties illegally or improperly. He said this will not be the case.
Maniaci said bringing landlords into the conversation will continue to be a main focus for the nuisance party ordinance.
“I think the ordinance is going to have a lot of changes,” Maniaci said. “If the goal is really to address problem landlords, I think that it’s important to work within some of the tools we already have with the chronic nuisance ordinance that really will bring the property owner to the table.”
