Clayton Klunder crammed in homework Monday afternoon while waiting for the bus on an ’80s-style couch on the porch of a North Bottoms rental house he shares with five roommates.

On the other end of the porch was a burnt orange rocking chair — a double whammy of porch upholstery — at the house nicknamed “The Lodge.”

The 22-year-old civil engineering student had heard “some lady” wants to ban such pieces of upholstery from such porches, but hadn’t heard the news yet: The City Council went along with the idea, and voted less than an hour earlier to ban the very kind of furniture Klunder sat on.

He couldn’t figure out why it would matter to city leaders.

“I don’t know why it would make a difference,” he said.

But the majority of the council thought banning indoor furniture from the great outdoors would make a difference, and help improve the look of older neighborhoods.

And so by a 5-2 vote, the council approved the ordinance, joining at least 10 other cities nationwide, many of them college towns, that have enacted such bans.

While porch-sitting has long been a tradition in college towns, some have passed ordinances to try to clean up neighborhoods permeated by college kids, including Ames, Iowa, Boulder, Colo., and East Lansing, Mich. In Boulder, college students had a habit of lighting couches on fire before the ban helped douse annual couch fires.

The idea of banning couches from Lincoln porches has been talked about for nearly a decade, but until now, no council member was brave enough to introduce such an ordinance.

And despite loud critics of the ban in online forums such as the Journal Star’s Web site, not one person testified against the proposal during the council’s public hearing last week, while about a dozen people and several neighborhood associations supported the ordinance.

Council members Jon Camp and Ken Svoboda voted against the ordinance, saying it was “government overreach.” Camp questioned whether the ordinance would even be effective, considering other housing violations persist all over Lincoln, in defiance of existing housing codes.

“Why would the addition of upholstered furniture be any different?” he asked. Instead, he suggested a private effort to try to get outdoor furniture donations to give to people who have outdoor couches. Svoboda agreed, saying he’d prefer “a more proactive” approach, such as grants for people to replace their couches.

But supporters of the ban said that approach would be problematic, since the population most inclined to put recliners on their porches — such as college students — turns over quickly.

They said a couch ban is just one way to help revitalize older neighborhoods, by laying ground rules similar to housing codes that require people to mow their lawn or paint their house.

Councilman Doug Emery said civil liberties are important, but so is taking care of older neighborhoods.

Councilman John Spatz said he disagreed with those who lambasted the council for wasting time on the issue.

“This is worth our time to discuss,” he said. “I think this is a piece of a bigger puzzle.”

But being a bit of a libertarian, he said he voted “yes” a little reluctantly.

Councilwoman Robin Eschliman introduced the ordinance, and said those who accused the council of “dictating taste” or “regulating tackiness” need only look at the recently passed Antelope Valley design standards to see “pages of (standards dictating) taste and tackiness.”

“What this is in comparison to that is nothing,” she said. “I have no compunction voting for this.”

Joining Eschilman, Emery and Spatz in voting for the ordinance were Jonathan Cook and Dan Marvin.

The ordinance bans upholstered chairs or couches or mattresses from being used or left on porches, balconies, decks, patios, roofs, yards, driveways or walkways. The ban would not apply to porches completely covered by a roof, attached to a building and completely enclosed by glass or screens.

The ordinance would be enforced on a complaint-based system, and most violations bring three warning letters — with time to fix the violation — before being considered for prosecution.

Only about 1 percent of housing code violations ever get prosecuted, but convictions bring a minimum fine of $200 for the first offense, $250 for the second and $300 for the third, with a maximum penalty of $500 and six months’ in jail.

Mayor Chris Beutler was on vacation Monday, but his aide, Rick Hoppe, said Beutler doesn’t intend to veto the ordinance. It will go into effect on Oct. 7.

Reach Deena Winter at 473-2642 or dwinter@journalstar.com.