Friday, March 28, 2003

A story published today in the BYU NewsNet reports that a controversial housing ordinance limiting the number of single renters in Provo's family neighborhoods was vetoed by Mayor Lewis Billings late last week - his first veto since elected as mayor. The ordinance, which narrowly passed the Provo City Council only two weeks ago, will return to the council Tuesday night, where it will take five votes to override Billings' veto.

In his veto message to the council, Billings called the ordinance "too broad and overreaching," calling on council members to implement the ordinance "neighborhood by neighborhood" rather than citywide.

"A policy that is effective in one neighborhood may not be as effective in another," Billings stated.

Billings also cited recent implementation of a parking restriction ordinance and a loan program to encourage homeownership in the city's central neighborhoods as reasons not to invoke the ordinance. Both were intended to encourage owner occupancy within the city, also a goal of the vetoed ordinance. The mayor said it was too soon to tell if the new programs were working and if additional legislation was needed.

The ordinance would reduce the number of unrelated singles who could share the rent from three to two in the city's Residential-1 zones, reserved for single family residences, unless one was the owner occupant. It would have only affected future developments.

Mayor's Office Spokesman Michael Mower said much of the controversy has stemmed from one clause in the ordinance, but its remainder is widely accepted.

"The main part of contention came from when they wanted to take the number of singles who could rent from three to two," Mower said. "Ninety percent of the ordinance everybody agreed on."

Councilwoman Cindy Richards said if the Council fails to muster enough votes to override the veto, she hopes at least some version of the ordinance will be presented at Tuesday's meeting.

"I would hope that a new proposal comes before us that night that we can vote on," Richards said. "I would hope that that proposal includes the single family zones within the neighborhoods who have been advocating for the needs of the long term residents of Provo."

Mower said he believes the Council will present and vote on an adjusted ordinance, based on comments made by the three councilmen who voted against the ordinance that they were concerned with citywide implementation of the ordinance.

"The council will go back in and try to find a way so that each neighborhood can decide for themselves whether to impose this restriction," Mower said. "I think all the Council members said they would support that."

Billings said he would support an ordinance with the neighborhood provision.

People for and against the ordinance bombarded the mayor's office with phone calls, emails and letters, trying to sway Billings' decision. Billings had the options to sign or veto the ordinance, or let it pass into law without his signature.

Jeremiah Maughan, 22, from Washington, D.C., majoring in information systems, is the BYU liaison for Citizens for Zoning Restraint, a grassroots Provo group battling the ordinance's limits on single renters. Maughan, who owns a condominium in one of Provo's family neighborhoods, joined other CZR members in urging Billings to veto the ordinance.

Maughan said CZR's efforts, which included picketing outside Council Chambers and distributing flyers and e-mails encouraging concerned residents to contact Billings and members of the City Council, brought the community's views before the mayor.

"The veto shows that the population of the city, including singles, does have an influence in city affairs," Maughan said. "But I don't think he (Billings) was at all bowing to pressure from lobbyists. He was standing up for the wishes of the majority of the people."

Maughan said he hopes Billings' veto will influence the Council.

"I think that it sends a very clear message to the City Council that it's kind of a one-sided proposal," Maughan said. "The only wise course of action would be for the City Council would be for the City Council to redraft it."

Maughan said he doesn't think the Council will be able to muster a five-vote majority.

"It's pretty much dead in the water, until they take out the (provision from) three to two," Maughan said. "The three (Council members) that are against it are really against it."

Supporters of the ordinance's limits on single renters have taken over working the phones, trying to persuade Council members to limit the number of singles in their neighborhoods.

"My phone's been ringing constantly from concerned long-term home owners," Richards said.