After a dueling set of late-hour entreaties, City Council decided to put off a vote on the Healthy Buildings Ordinance — which would prohibit certain emissions for some Evanston buildings — in a lengthy and fractious meeting Monday evening.
With the vote pushed to the next meeting, the stakes remain high. The ordinance would require buildings with more than 20,000 square feet to eliminate on-site emissions and use only renewable energy by 2050. It would also apply to city-owned buildings with more than 10,000 square feet.
The council had introduced the measure unanimously on Jan. 13. It seemed poised for a brisk approval until rifts emerged among the city’s power players on Monday.
At a press conference earlier before the meeting, Mayor Daniel Biss framed the ordinance as a crucial step for sustainability in Evanston.
“It’s the right thing to do to make sure that we are acting with the courtesy that this crisis demands to achieve Evanston’s values and our goals — and to be a model for communities across the world,” Biss said at the press conference.
Yet a Monday missive from another group of Evanston bigwigs warned against approving the measure so quickly.
Northwestern President Michael Schill, Evanston Township High School District 202 Superintendent Marcus Campbell, former Mayor Steve Hagerty, Focus Development CEO Tim Anderson and others signed a letter urging City Council to delay a vote on the ordinance, citing practicality and feasibility.
In the letter, opponents argued that complying with the ordinance would require expensive building retrofits to eliminate gas-fueled equipment, which could be financially prohibitive for landlords, schools, businesses and hospitals.
And when the ordinance arrived at City Council on Monday evening, the rifts extended to the dais.
Ahead of the vote, Ald. Devon Reid (8th) floated the idea of postponing the decision until the next meeting on Feb. 10 or possibly tabling it until April. After some confusion over how many votes were needed to reach a two-thirds majority among the eight voting members, the council ultimately decided to revisit the motion in February, maintaining the hold with a 5-3 vote.
“When we come back … I think it should be with the goal of achieving the desired outcome of zero emissions and the desired outcome of real stakeholder engagement,” Biss said during the meeting.
Reid initially tried to delay the vote to allow city staff to determine the city’s price tag for bringing its buildings up to compliance and to allow Ald. Jonathan Nieuwsma (4th) to propose amendments.
Then, Ald. Thomas Suffredin (6th) noted the uncertainty of key stakeholders’ positions on the ordinance, and Reid reversed course, encouraging the council to overturn his motion to delay the vote — so he could attempt to delay it even further.
“We’re not opposed to climate action,” Dave Davis, NU’s senior executive director for neighborhood and community relations, said during public comment. “We’re just opposed to the current draft.”
Ald. Krissie Harris (2nd) agreed. She said she worried that the costs required could bankrupt Evanston/Skokie School District 65, which already faces fiscal ruin.
Local landlords, including North Shore Apartments & Condos’ Eric Paset and Schermerhorn & Co.’s Daniel Schermerhorn, said during public comment that the expensive retrofitting would require them to raise rent prices in their buildings substantially.
“If passed, affordable housing would be a myth,” Schermerhorn said.
In response to concerns, Nieuwsma said the ordinance requires city staff to create implementation plans with local stakeholders such as large property owners.
The lengthy meeting was punctuated by chaos. Councilmembers disagreed on whether stakeholders should provide input before or after passage, among other debates. At one point, Sustainability and Resilience Manager Cara Pratt apologized to Reid for an emotional response to his question, which preceded a five-minute recess.
City Manager Luke Stowe said it was unclear whether all the institutions named in the opposition letter had agreed to sign it, prompting calls for a delay from several councilmembers.
Deputy City Manager Stephen Ruger also revealed that the city did not know how much it would need to spend to bring its buildings into compliance.
Despite an initial setback, Nieuwsma said the ordinance would provide the framework for achievable compliance standards for property owners, with significant implementation support from the city.
“Once this ordinance is passed, that’s when the real work begins,” Nieuwsma said.
Email: [email protected]
X: @IsaiahStei27
Related Stories:
— After residents dissent, City Council divides, delays Envision Evanston zoning plan
— Amid furor by foes, Mayor Biss’ ‘bold’ Evanston vision dealt a delay
— Evanston approves penalty for parking near NU arena during events