Also on this page: Murphy warns of potential scandal.

Action delayed

Jan. 19 -- The Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee delayed action on amending the city's 2,500-foot rule so negotiators in a federal court lawsuit can try to find a compromise more acceptable to city residents.

City reconsiders group home rule
Could have major impact on neighborhoods

Jan. 16 -- Aldermen are debating whether to rewrite an ordinance that has been key in efforts to prevent the city from being swamped by group homes.

The ordinance, which requires all group homes to be 2,500 feet apart from one another, is finding little support in federal courts, Assistant City Attorney Jan Smokowicz said.

The proposed change would eliminate the 2,500-foot requirement for group homes that serve the disabled, but would maintain it for other types of group homes, such as those for drug abusers or convicted criminals.

The topic is a hot one for constituents, Ald. Willie Wade said.

"These are the types of issues that can have each one of us out of office," he said.

The ordinance, as written, can at best be enforced only in rare circumstances, Smokowicz told the Common Council's Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee last week. A lawsuit now pending in federal court seeks to have the 2500-foot rule struck down entirely, he said.

Committee members expressed deep skepticism about the proposed change.

If adopted, Ald. Robert Bauman said, "We are powerless to regulate the location of this facility."

Operators who pledge to operate a facility for the disabled could easily change the tenant mix, he said.

Smokowicz said group home operators would be required to come back to the city if they changed the use of the homes. The state also has enforcement powers, he said.

Bauman was unconvinced. "You could have eight duplexes in a row, with eight unrelated adults, all of whom may have automobiles -- eight times eight -- 64 potential automobiles brought into that neighborhood, creating parking issues, creating congestion issues, and basically driving the rest of the neighborhood out of business," he said.

"That would be true," Smokowicz said.

Ald. Michael D'Amato said the ordinance change was not proposed because the city thought it was a good thing, but to settle a lawsuit and to preserve the 2,500-foot rule for group homes for the non-disabled.

"We're pretty much throwing the towel in on this one," Ald. Michael Murphy told Smokowicz. "You're telling us, 'We have no chance to win on this case' - that's why you think we need to settle it by passing this ordinance.'"

Murphy

Murphy, who represents Story Hill on the Common Council, said he thought the proposed change would have "a detrimental impact on our city...I don't have any confidence in the state of Wisconsin in regulating these facilities -- just none."

There will be many more such group homes as baby boomers age, he said.

"With the potential of having three on every block, you destroy the character of a neighborhood," he said.

"It's a not a great solution," D'Amato said. "The argument ultimately is, do you want to protect the neighborhoods from some of these group homes or do you want to take the risk and protect them from none?"

Wade focused on the politics of the situation. "It may even be more beneficial for me if the courts come and jam it down my throat, so I can clearly wash my hands of the situation," he said.

The committee will consider the issue again at a special meeting Tuesday, Jan. 17.

---

Murphy warns of potential group home scandal
Applicant quality poor, he says

Nov. 21, 2005-- Lax state oversight of group homes for the elderly has created a situation ripe for abuse, according to Ald. Michael Murphy.

"What we're seeing in the quality of the applicants is very poor," he said in an interview.

One or two applications each week are submitted each week seeking to operate such group homes in the 10th Aldermanic District, he said.

"There's a lot of money to be made on this, quite honestly," he said.

Murphy

The Common Council last week to a step toward imposing some control over the homes when it adopted an ordinance requiring that group home applicants to show proof that they have applied for state licensure before the city grants an occupancy permit or special use permit.

That will help prevent applicants from misrepresenting their intentions to the council.

"I think the state is doing not an adequate job in reviewing these applications," Murphy told the Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development Committee earlier this month.

Some planning to run group homes for the elderly have "little to no experience in health care," he said.

"The problem is, the quality level of care that I've seen coming from these applicants is subpar and, unfortunately, you'll have individuals who are generally poor, don't have a lot of family members, may have mental capacities that are not what they used to be, and they're being shunted to these homes.

'"I'm telling you, I see this thing is going to be blowing up in people's faces," he said. "The quality of applicants I've seen, there's no way I would send my mom there -- there's not a chance -- and we're going to see a real problem."