Committee declines to advance bird-friendly building ordinance; places item on file 4-3

The Wauwatosa Community Affairs Committee voted to place a proposed bird-friendly building ordinance on file, 4–3, after a lengthy public-comment period and debate between members who said the city should strengthen bird protections and members who said the mandate would raise construction costs and harm housing production.

The proposal, introduced by Alders Bridal and McPoo, would have required certain bird-friendly treatments on building glass and other design features; sponsors and supporters said the measure updates earlier local efforts and mirrors ordinances enacted in other municipalities.

Luann Washburn, a resident and volunteer conservationist, told the committee Wauwatosa earned “Bird City Wisconsin” designation and urged the city to adopt bird-friendly design elements such as reflective-glass treatments and “lights out” programs. She said voluntary work by local groups has helped habitat but collisions near the Innovation Campus remain a problem.

Multiple real-estate industry speakers warned the committee that mandating bird-friendly materials would add cost to construction and could chill development. Marnie Stuke, government affairs director for the Greater Milwaukee Association of Realtors, said the association views the proposal as an additional barrier to building more housing. Tracy Johnson of the Commercial Association of Realtors Wisconsin said the local development market faces high construction costs and low housing availability, and urged voluntary best practices and incentives instead of a mandate. Jim Villa, representing a commercial real-estate association, suggested tailored mitigation and investment approaches rather than a one-size-fits-all mandate.

Alan (city staff attorney) summarized the legal history for the committee: he said the city considered a similar draft earlier and paused when a Madison court case raised questions about state-law preemption; he told the committee that subsequent developments indicate the Madison ordinance was found legal in later proceedings.

Committee members debated economic impacts, legal risk and where any ordinance should apply. Supporters argued a local ordinance would protect birds and build on the city’s conservation record; opponents said Wauwatosa’s growth environment and tight financing margins make a costly mandate impractical and that a narrower approach limited to key corridors might be preferable.

A motion to refer the draft ordinance to the Plan Commission for introduction failed on a close roll call. Chairperson Lowe then moved to place the item on file; the motion was seconded and passed 4–3, which means the ordinance will not go forward to the Plan Commission at this time.

Several committee members said they would be open to revisiting a more narrowly tailored or better-documented proposal in the future. Supporters asked the city to consider incentives, targeted geographical application (for example, along migratory paths and near the Innovation Campus) and to provide clearer cost-impact data if the matter returns.