Council unable to lock down lockbox ordinance

By Dave Fidlin

Correspondent

The long and winding road toward an official lockbox ordinance within Whitewater has taken a new turn and will not be reviewed again until early next month.

For months, the Common Council has been wrangling over language within the proposed ordinance. A task force, led by council member Lynn Binnie, was eventually formed to dig deeper into the document, and recommendations have been coming to the council.

The council was slated to adopt a revised ordinance, based last week’s agenda, but elected officials instead decided to hold off on any firm decisions until at least Nov. 1. At last week’s meeting, the council continued to hear from property owners who suggested the ordinance simply was not needed.

If implemented, the lock box ordinance would require a number of multi-tenant residential and commercial facilities provide accommodations for police, firefighters and emergency medical professionals to access a building in the event of an emergency.

Property owners would bear the responsibility of funding the secure boxes and matching keys, based on provisions outlined within the ordinance.

At last week’s meeting, speakers included Fire Chief Don Gregoire and Assistant Fire Chief Mike Higgins. Gregoire said about 300 lockboxes already exist on city structures because of a program implemented within the community nearly three decades ago.

Gregoire and Higgins also noted they have authority to require multi-tenant buildings install lockboxes, based on provisions within state statutes.

“Why now do we need an ordinance?” Council President Patrick Singer said in response. “If we repealed the ordinance, the fire chief still has the authority to require one.”

The council had an official lockbox ordinance on its books at the beginning of the year. After receiving an earful of complaints, however, city officials held off on enforcing the lockbox ordinance indefinitely.

Some property owners complained of inadequate notice, while others simply asserted their own private insurance provided similar or, in some cases, better protection.

 

Comments are closed.