SPAR Tries to Pass Law to Ban Non Family Members from Living Together.

[stephendare]

Apparently SPAR has finally lost it.

We have evidence that SPAR is trying to pass legislation that will make it illegal for people to live in the same household unless they are related by blood or marriage.

In the pursuit of a fairly insane bit of legal stalking and harrassment, it appears that the troubled organization is prepared to make unmarried couples, college roommates, gay people and foster children hit the street.

The Organization has suggested legislation that would define "Family" for the first time, and open the City of Jacksonville to rampant litigation by a broad spectrum of public interest groups.

The Family, as defined by SPAR would consist of no more than five people living in a house who are related by blood or marriage.

The definition would apparently apply to any area of the city zoned for single family residential.

It would obviously include boyfriends and girlfriends, students sharing a place with separate bedrooms, and naturally gay couples.

If true, the organization has gone to far, and has finally become a menace to the resident's of this city/

[Dark Knight]

Didnt Adolph Hitler try the same crap quite a few years back, if you are not worthy,look out for the hidden gas chambers !!!!!!!!

[stjr]

Maybe SPAR figures if the City can define a "tasteful and appropriate" sign, it can take on an issue like this with aplomb! 

[Dark Knight]

I cant wait to see how this shakes out!!!

[cindi]

what evidence? this is just way tooooooo crazy to think that someone could even, as a joke, think this could be done.

[cindi]

ok, am i the only one that thinks someone is cooking meth in the spar office if they think this stands a snowballs chance in haiti of being considered anything other than a sick joke.

[fsu813]

1) Stephen, if you don't know for certain.....why does your 'headline' state it as fact?

2) I'm betting there's some misinterpretation. Perhaps not, but i'd bet there is.

3) Let's see the email. Simply don't include any info you deem sensative (email address, etc).

[02roadking]

"if true"
Is there ANY evidence of this, or is this BS. C'mon people...

[fsu813]

just b/c Fox News praises you doesn't mean that their reporting 'style' should be emulated..... =)

[brainstormer]

^that's hilarious fsu!

[strider]

So, do you think the fact that three expensive cars pulled up in front of the two new houses we built on Liberty Street at about 12:30 today and seven well dressed people jumped out has anything to do with this?  These seven people, five men and two women I believe, introduced themselves to one of the renters of one of the houses who happened to be out on the front porch as being from SPAR.  One of these people asked the home’s resident if he lived there and  said that they just wanted to ask him some questions.  The resident told them thanks but no thanks and that they were not welcome on the property. They milled about a bit then left.

As we know that these houses are often talked about and one has been the subject of an e-mail or two, we are thinking that if this resident hadn’t been home, pictures would have been taken through the windows as that does seem to be how these people operate.  Not that it would have mattered much, this house is nothing but a rental and has been “inspected” by the city at SPAR Council’s request more than a few times. 

Of course, rather than roll up all governmental and all, they could have made a phone call.  We would be happy to talk to them.  But at least it now sounds like they are accepting the truth and renting out your house is indeed legal.  Of course, this does mean that they have to try to change the laws to get us.  Sad really.

PS, the e-mails Stephen is referring to are all public access and  readily available to all by either request or on line.  I have seen a few of these e-mails and they do indicate that this is the direction things seem to be going.   Stephen most likely has better info that I do.

[cindi]

If that is the email in question - this is nothing new.  Where does it say that they are going to change the definition of family, etc?

[cindi]

sorry stephen, i don't know what is funnier, them thinking that they have enough lead in their pants to pull something that crazy off or the visual i have from a "Men in Black" scene regarding the dark suit visitors driving expensive cars (please tell me they didn't have a dog named Frank with them).

[02roadking]

"Topic of discussion" is a whole different animal than "passing legislation". Geesus, get a grip.
"we are thinking"   If your legal, why worry about it.
 You know, I don't give a rats ass about the kind of house that is next to me as long as they are decent neighbors. That's just me.
So far, this thread is crap, in my humble opinion.

[Joe]

I'm not a huge fan of these types of zoning codes - but they are VERY common. Liberal Progressive cities like Providence RI limit housing units to 3 non-family members. This is 5.

Stephen is using grossly misleading language in his post. He's implying that 2 non-family members can't live in the same house. This kind of law would only prevent 5 non-family members from living in the same unit. Big difference. The only way this could prevent a gay couple from living together was if they were already living with their 3 other roommates in an un-divided unit.

Anyway, like I said, I think these types of zoning are stupid. But damn. Stephens characterization of the issue is so off-base it's probably libel.