The Green Bay City Council decided to delay a proposal, which would have charged property owners a fee for owning a vacant property in the City. The proposal must now go back to committee before council can vote on it again. Ald ers Joey Prestley and Jon Shelton proposed an ordinance that would charge property owners a fee for owning a vacant building. City Council voted to push the proposal back to committee for review, rather than advance the ordinance to a second reading. Developers and realtors say the ordinance would discourage development, while those in favor say it will improve public health and safety.After a nearly two-hour long, back and forth discussion Tuesday night, council is delaying the proposal.I dont want it to die, I want it to get better," Alder Jim Hutchison says.The ordinance will go back to the Protection and Policy Committee on Nov. 9 after a narrow vote declined to advance the ordinance to the next city council meeting.The proposed ordinance would have required property owners who own a vacant property in Green Bay to register the building with the city annually.The first year, registration would be free, but every following year in which the property remains vacant, the owner must pay a fee. The fees would increase each year as follows: Initial Regisrtation: $0 First annual renewal fee: $500 Second Annual Renewal Fee: $1,000 Third Annual Renewal Fee: $2,000 Fourth Annual Renewal Fee: $4,000The fees would not apply to property owners who were actively repairing, renovating, looking for a new buyer or trying to rent out the space.To be considered vacant, the property must be 100% vacant for at least 60 days.Its such a narrowly targeted ordinance," Alder Prestley says. I think the people we want to come to Green Bay are developers who are going to develop.There were multiple people who spoke against the ordinance during public comment; all of whom were either realtors or developers.Council members who were against the ordinance say it's too much government overreach."I don't think this ordinance is bringing anything positive forward except for strong arming people into their own personal choices of their property," Alder Jennifer Grant says.Watch the broadcast story here: Green Bay City Council hesitates to charge fees for vacant buildingsJenelle Bruno, president elect of the Realtors Association of Northeast Wisconsin, says the ordinance would negatively impact development."Our concern is that it would dissuade future investment in the business community in Green Bay because developers pay very close attention to that," she says. "To have a community that is so focused on creating penalties rather than incentives, is going to change the behavior in an unattended way I believe.Bruno says the City is creating a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. She argues that owners of vacant properties pay property taxes to the City.She also argues that if a vacant building is being neglected, the city already has ordinances to address that."I don't know if the city understands how much commercial vacancy they actually have, or what are the causes of that commercial vacancy," she says. "They need to look at it under a microscope and understand how to address the underlying cause as opposed to just creating a reactionary ordinance."The Green Bay Metro Fire Department says it maintains a list of properties they know to be vacant in order to make fire prevention checks.Alder Prestley says he has received frequent complaints about properties in his district being empty and neglected. He says each time the city responds to the complaints, they're wasting tax payer dollars.It just keeps happening and happening and happening," he says. "We can have these little bandaids that we put on all of the issues, but as a class, vacant properties are continuing to pop up with new nuisance problems that we dont have any wholesale measure against.Prestley and co author Jon Shelton say the fees would encourage developers to move quickly and prevent them from sitting on a vacant property for years. They argue the pressure could in turn bring more housing to the community.Its a little bit of a nudge saying we dont want this- we do not want vacant properties in the city," Prestley says. "We want to spur development, we want good, thriving, industrious businesses. ...read more read less