N0 Good Deed goes Unpunished, Part Zillion

[Boxlicker101]

This may or may not be true. However, since the good deeds are being done by individuals, instead of the local politicians and bureaucrats, I can see why the liberal government is going apeshit.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trendin...g-children-free-lunches-192644564.html?_esi=1

 

[Handley_Page]

Bloody 'jobsworths'. She should be supported, not condemned.

 

[sun_sea_sky]

The important thing to remember about the News is, things that are reported there are unusual, by definition.

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

She's violating municipal code.

Codes typically don't define food distribution as distribution for profit--just overall distribution, or the number of people you are serving, or how you are serving them (seating v. take-out), etc. (There are a number of good reasons for not including profits or food charges, by the way, and I can get into them if you'd like.) And she is distributing food--she's not inviting people in for dinner.

Municipal codes--like the one she is violating--exist because the population at large wants them to exist. Time and time again, when suburban populations are given the option of rewriting codes to loosen zoning regulations in a way that would, say, allow restaurants (i.e. food distribution) or beauty parlors or who knows what else into their residential neighborhoods, they reject them. In general, people in suburban residential neighborhood like to keep their land uses separate, which is why suburban zoning code exists.

So this doesn't have anything to do with "the liberal government . . . going apeshit." Rather, it has everything to do with the very conservative notion of upholding the laws that are on the books, and then further suggesting that if an individual wishes to act outside the existing codes, that she apply for a zoning variance.

And going before a Board of Adjustment for a variance is really no big deal--situations like this are why BoAs exist!

The alternative to telling her to ask for a variance, and simply ignoring her activities? That would essentially be letting a town's planning staff make case-by-case calls about what exceptions to written, town-approved municipal code they want to make. They don't want that responsibility (since most see that as overreach), and in most cases, that's not how we, as populations, like our cities and towns to be run.

If you are really so incensed, do what I did when I got annoyed about my town's zoning ordinances: walk down to your local planning department and volunteer for a town board. That way, you'll understand how local government works, and you'll have a say in these very issues when they arise in your town.

 

[3113]

This may or may not be true. However, since the good deeds are being done by individuals, instead of the local politicians and bureaucrats, I can see why the liberal government is going apeshit.

What Tatyana said, Box, and what's this shit you're spouting about "liberal government"? Do you KNOW if those in office are liberal? Actually, they must be as they're letting the woman continue till the end of summer rather than sending her to jail!

FYI, if the ones in charge were really liberal (and/or had the power to allot the taxes of that town as they wished)--then YES, the kids would be getting free lunches on the taxpayers dime and this woman wouldn't have to give them out! Conservatives in government today want to kill free lunch programs--saving us taxpayers money--thus forcing women like this to hand out lunches and find themselves breaking zoning laws that the lawmakers have to legally uphold.

You know, one day, you will take off your blinders that keep you blaming all the wrongs in the world on strawmen Liberals and then, well, I suppose hell will freeze over or pigs will fly

 

[Handley_Page]

She's violating municipal code.


And going before a Board of Adjustment for a variance is really no big deal--situations like this are why BoAs exist!

The alternative to telling her to ask for a variance, and simply ignoring her activities? That would essentially be letting a town's planning staff make case-by-case calls about what exceptions to written, town-approved municipal code they want to make. They don't want that responsibility (since most see that as overreach), and in most cases, that's not how we, as populations, like our cities and towns to be run.

This sort of thing does not happen over here (as far as I know). But the idea of a charitable endeavour being stomped on for legalistic reasons strikes me as a bit bizarre.
Wouldn't it be better to GIVE her the necessary BoApaperwork as a contribution towards her endeavours ? (as opposed to charging her the fees).
And it is not a permanent event !

 

[CeasarBoobage]

She's violating municipal code.
<snip>
So this doesn't have anything to do with "the liberal government . . . going apeshit." Rather, it has everything to do with the very conservative notion of upholding the laws that are on the books, and then further suggesting that if an individual wishes to act outside the existing codes, that she apply for a zoning variance.
<snip>

I honestly think this story is a bit over-sensationalized. The whole article essentially screams "woman facing fines for doing good", but if you pay more attention it actually sounds like everyone is working together to make sure she does her charity work legally.

Without getting too deep into the politics of whether or not she should be doing this charity work in the first place, she really is doing a good thing by helping her neighbors. But she is also breaking the law. When advised of what that law was, she started taking steps to comply.

The local government does not sound like it's trying to be a jerk, just doing their part to follow their own rules. For what it's worth, they sound like they are actually going above&beyond to HELP her, not punish her. The article said that the lady was given a free pass for the rest of the summer and everyone will work on getting the red tape set up right for next year.

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

This sort of thing does not happen over here (as far as I know). But the idea of a charitable endeavour being stomped on for legalistic reasons strikes me as a bit bizarre.
Wouldn't it be better to GIVE her the necessary BoApaperwork as a contribution towards her endeavours ? (as opposed to charging her the fees).
And it is not a permanent event !

England, Canada, and the US all have similar approaches to urban planning (I think it's called something else in England, but I can't remember--town and country planning?). Some of the earliest planners were English (like Ebenezer Howard), so I'm guessing things like this do happen. Your press probably just has better things to write about, like LIBOR, phone tapping, or what Pippa Middleton is wearing.

Like the zoning code, chances are the fees are in the books. Waiving the fees means waving yet another law, or asking the town to forego $1,000 (and pay for administrative work out of its own general budget)--neither of which is a good solution, especially given how dire most local budgets are right now.

But as CeasarBoobage point out, she's getting a free pass for the rest of the year. The fees wont' be an issue until next year. By that time, my guess is that the Archdiocese can and will step in with the $1,000, or others in town will contribute the money, or the town will reduce the fees by some amount after holding the public hearing needed for the variance request at the BofA hearing. But again, the town simply cannot go ahead and decide which rules to follow and which to ignore.

I honestly think this story is a bit over-sensationalized. The whole article essentially screams "woman facing fines for doing good", but if you pay more attention it actually sounds like everyone is working together to make sure she does her charity work legally.

Without getting too deep into the politics of whether or not she should be doing this charity work in the first place, she really is doing a good thing by helping her neighbors. But she is also breaking the law. When advised of what that law was, she started taking steps to comply.

The local government does not sound like it's trying to be a jerk, just doing their part to follow their own rules. For what it's worth, they sound like they are actually going above&beyond to HELP her, not punish her. The article said that the lady was given a free pass for the rest of the summer and everyone will work on getting the red tape set up right for next year.

I agree.

And really, these problems crop up all the time. A town government simply can't think of every possible land use--even when we spend hours sitting around thinking about all sorts of crazy shit, the fact remains that we're not omnipotent.

In our town, we passed new zoning and development ordinances last year. The old codes were close to fifteen years old. As tends to happen when you update ordinances, we found that we'd inadvertantly caused some problems for a very small number of individuals and businesses, primarily due to wording.

The solution? Some individuals and businesses went before the BofA and got variances; others came directly to the town and pointed out the problems. In all of those cases, we eventually ended up re-writing small portions of the ordinances and sending the new text to public hearing, where the public voiced their opinions about the changes. After listening to the public, the town's elected council voted on the changes, and voila! Problems solved.

Yes, I'm sure it was stressful for people to have to go through these steps, and it created a lot of headaches for all involved. But there really isn't a good alternative.

 

[TE999]

I used to be in the planning and zoning business and I can tell you that zoning codes exist for specific reasons. Being Liberal or Conservative has nothing to do with why these codes are adopted; rather they are adopted and enforced to insure one type of development does not encroach upon another to their mutual detriment.

As well meaning as this woman's intentions may be, she's still in violation of the existing codes. Quite possibly the church or a property owner could let her set up her operation where it is permitted or she could file for a Special Exemption Permit if her neighbors don't object at the hearing.

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

Thanks, TE999, for pointing out my poor (or unclear) wording in my earlier post!

When I said conservatism, I was thinking of the small-c conservative philosophy of governance, with its deference to established institutions (like the law) and commitment to gradual change. To me, this philosophy of conservatism is completely separate from political parties, so I wasn't thinking of the big C "conservative movement" within the Republican party (or big L liberals within the democratic party, which I see as totally separate from the philosophy of liberalism).

But I was totally unclear about that. This is what happens when you think everyone else is a mindreader.

 

[TE999]

Thanks, TE999, for pointing out my poor (or unclear) wording in my earlier post!

When I said conservatism, I was thinking of the small-c conservative philosophy of governance, with its deference to established institutions (like the law) and commitment to gradual change. To me, this philosophy of conservatism is completely separate from political parties, so I wasn't thinking of the big C "conservative movement" within the Republican party (or big L liberals within the democratic party, which I see as totally separate from the philosophy of liberalism).

But I was totally unclear about that. This is what happens when you think everyone else is a mindreader.

I was merely expounding upon your initial thoughts, Taty. Unfortunately, Box has a tendency to see all subjects through the prism of big C or big L, so I was responding in that vein.

Regardless, regulations are there for specific reasons. They don't always seem to make sense, but they are what separate order from chaos.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

Tatyana, TE999, thank you for your reasoned and informed contributions to this thread. I always appreciate reading fact-based responses to emotional pleas of misplaced outrage.

The only thing I would add is that it may not be so easy to get the variance she seeks. I say this because I have seen over and over the "not in my neighborhood" response by local residents to any attempt to place a non-profit charitable organization in a residential neighborhood, when that variance is requested for a point-of-service facility. I have seen that response to attempts to place a homeless shelter, a soup kitchen, and even a disabled living facility within various neighborhoods.

I applaud this woman and the people helping her. I hope that they are successful.

 

[Handley_Page]

England, Canada, and the US all have similar approaches to urban planning (I think it's called something else in England, but I can't remember--town and country planning?). Some of the earliest planners were English (like Ebenezer Howard), so I'm guessing things like this do happen. Your press probably just has better things to write about, like LIBOR, phone tapping, or what Pippa Middleton is wearing.

Like the zoning code, chances are the fees are in the books. Waiving the fees means waving yet another law, or asking the town to forego $1,000 (and pay for administrative work out of its own general budget)--neither of which is a good solution, especially given how dire most local budgets are right now.

Ya' know, I think I should have shut up, despite my views on charitable efforts.
"Zoning codes" ? that went well over my head.
and as for 'pay for administrative work'? I give up.
I apologise for the interruption.

 

[PayDay]

A sane, kind, and intelligent person does not wake up one day and say "I want to be a prison guard" or "I want to be a politician and make laws people have to follow" .

Government is all about telling you what to do if they see you doing it. It wasn't their idea, therefore it's bad.

Also, the Zoning and Urban Planning office is like the ninth level of bureaucratic hell, and twice as boring as a town council meeting.

They are probably just going after this woman because the church was involved.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Box looks at a barn and sees one big red wall. It doesn't occur to him that all the things that are inside the barn are part of what he's looking at.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Box looks at a barn and sees one big red wall. It doesn't occur to him that all the things that are inside the barn are part of what he's looking at.

Of course I'm looking at one big wall - or two if I'm looking at a corner. I would be aware there are things inside the barn, such as animals and tools and equipment and supplies but I wouldn't be able to see them. I can only look AT the wall, not THROUGH it.

 

[PayDay]

Box looks at a barn and sees one big red wall. It doesn't occur to him that all the things that are inside the barn are part of what he's looking at.

I do have to agree with boxlicker though his terms are crude. I looked it up: the city of Chester and the surrounding township, as well as Philadelphia, and Chester County (which I don't think it is?) are all Democrat controlled locations, some are entirely so.

 

[TxRad]

Box has more blind spots that an over sized load going down the LA freeway.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I do have to agree with boxlicker though his terms are crude. I looked it up: the city of Chester and the surrounding township, as well as Philadelphia, and Chester County (which I don't think it is?) are all Democrat controlled locations, some are entirely so.

Now see if you can find a Republican city that doesn't have similar laws.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I used to be in the planning and zoning business and I can tell you that zoning codes exist for specific reasons. Being Liberal or Conservative has nothing to do with why these codes are adopted; rather they are adopted and enforced to insure one type of development does not encroach upon another to their mutual detriment.

As well meaning as this woman's intentions may be, she's still in violation of the existing codes. Quite possibly the church or a property owner could let her set up her operation where it is permitted or she could file for a Special Exemption Permit if her neighbors don't object at the hearing.

No. Planning & Zoning is where all the assclowns roost. Its the FUCK YOUR BUDDY department.

I usta get in the arena with these asshats, to appeal their wacky interpretations of building and zoning ordinances. Like...what fucking difference does it make if the bath sink is left or right of the commode, the plans examiner insisted that the commode be next to a corner, the sink be in the middle, and the tub on the outside wall. Nearly everyone wants the commode in the middle. His reason? The commode will be by the door for better ventilation. I said, THE DOOR WILL BE CLOSED.

Another genius argued that a curve in the road is an intersection. He lost in court.

Another Einstein denied a zoning variance to expand a junk yard cuz the expansion required additional fencing, and he didnt like corrogated steel fences. I argued that there is no fence ordinance in the city. We erected the fence anyway. And got the zoning variance later.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I used to be in the planning and zoning business and I can tell you that zoning codes exist for specific reasons. Being Liberal or Conservative has nothing to do with why these codes are adopted; rather they are adopted and enforced to insure one type of development does not encroach upon another to their mutual detriment.

Ayup. I live near a restaurant and a supermarket and while the owners are lovely people and the restaurant gives us a discount, there are downsides to living next to a commercial establishment. Big skips of smelly food waste that get emptied at oh-god-o'clock by a very noisy truck, increased noise from patrons and deliveries, etc etc.

In my case, I knew about these places when I moved in and factored that into the decision, so I can live with it. But if I'd bought into a residential-zoned area and suddenly my neighbour started running a food business from their house, I might have good reason to be unhappy about it.

If this lady is doing it in a way that doesn't create a nuisance for her neighbours, well, sounds like that's what the 'variance' is for.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I recognize the need for zoning laws. However, in this case, I believe they are being overzealously enforced. I don't want somebody establishing a junkyard next to my house, nor do I want a soup kitchen there, with vagrants drinking wine and pissing on the sidewalk. (I have been to enough soup kitchens to know that is an accurate description.)

Somebody said something about the voters voting for the zoning ordinances. I doubt that ever happened, although there may have been town meetings where citizens stated opinions.

However, this nice lady is not doing anything like that. She is (horrors!) feeding hungry children, and with the blessing and support of the Catholic Church. As long as she is not causing anybody any problems, the local government should let her be. I realize laws should be enforced, but there are many that are not. You read about them all the time, mostly as odd quirks in the law.

I referred to the "liberal" government but maybe I should have said "Liberal." It is generally accepted that Liberals believe government is there to provide to all according to their needs from all according to their abilities. Conservatives believe governments should have little or nothing to do with such things, and that churches and other private organizations can do the job better. Personally, I agree with the latter viewpoint, but I also realize there are some things that are the proper functions of government.