Town won't let unmarried parents live together

[K C Muffin]

Sorry - I have to waste everybody's space. My 'puter won't show me the address line, so I couldn't just copy that. Anyway. here's a story from the Star (I can't figure out why they were so quiet about it), cuz Lone Jack is a little bump in the road on I-70 very near KC. It's a little different from what I first thought, but it's still assanine............

An unmarried couple said Wednesday that they planned to challenge a Missouri town’s decision to enforce a decades-old ordinance that defines what constitutes a family. On Tuesday the City Council of Black Jack, near St. Louis, rejected a measure that would have changed the definition of a family to include unmarried couples with two or more children.

“I don’t believe there should be a definition behind the word ‘family,’ ” said Olivia Shelltrack, who along with her boyfriend, Fondrey Loving, was denied an occupancy permit in Black Jack because the two have three children and are not married. “I thought everyone had a right to live where they wanted to live,” Shelltrack, 31, said Wednesday.

The measure was rejected on a 5-3 vote. As a result, Mayor Norman McCourt said in a statement, those who do not meet the town’s definition of family could soon face eviction. “The purpose of these occupancy permit laws generally is to avoid overcrowding by nonrelated parties, assure the lifelong maintenance of the city’s housing stock, prevent new buyers from being obligated to repair residences that were not kept up to code, preserve the character of the neighborhoods and the city, and to protect the general safety and welfare of the city’s residents,” the mayor’s statement read.

The town’s planning and zoning commission had earlier sought to change the law. Its proposal would have allowed “two unrelated individuals having a child or children related by blood, adoption or foster care relationship to both such individuals” to live together in a single-family dwelling. The current ordinance prohibits more than three persons from living together unless they are related by “blood, marriage or adoption.” It had been used to prevent unwed people from living together with their children.

Black Jack’s special counsel, Sheldon Stock, said the city intended to enforce the law but had no immediate plans to evict Shelltrack and Loving. The city could fine the couple up to $500 each time they are cited for violating the ordinance. Several municipalities have similar ordinances but rarely enforce them, Stock said. The restriction has been upheld by the Missouri Court of Appeals, he said.

Because the issue could land in court, Stock said, he had advised city officials not to comment on the matter. The city has not sought to charge the couple or send them a notice about the violation, Stock said. The couple said the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is looking into the matter and then they will determine whether they need to file a lawsuit against the city to get the ordinance overturned.

The couple’s attorney, Tony Rothert, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri, said that before Tuesday’s meeting they were under the impression the council would vote to change the ordinance. He said several couples faced similar violations in Black Jack but chose to get married or leave the area rather than fight the measure. “There is no grand reason why they have not gotten married,” Rothert said. “They do not want to be told by the city they have to be married. It cheapens the institution.”

Shelltrack said she and Loving have been together for 13 years. They moved to Black Jack from Minnesota because they were able to find an affordable 2,400-square-foot house in an area with good schools.

The couple had closed on the home and sought an occupancy permit. City officials asked to see their marriage license and the children’s birth certificates. That is when they were told they were in violation of the city ordinance.

Shelltrack said they were surprised by the decision and plan to challenge the measure. “For a City Council and mayor to judge you and then have you justify whom you share your house with is crazy,” she said.

[K C Muffin]

The computer's goin'. I can't stay on it all day like this.......

I couldn't get into the last post to edit it - but the town is Black Jack, not Lone Jack. Lone Jack's by KC and Black Jack's on the other side of the state! I still have some lucid moments, but for the most part, the brain's gone!

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by K C Muffin

Olivia Shelltrack and Fondrey Loving were denied an occupancy permit after moving into a home in this St. Louis suburb because they have three children and are not married......

I still say it can't fly whether they are renters buyers or anything else.....

Here is their ordinance-The current ordinance prohibits more than three people from living together unless they are related by "blood, marriage or adoption.

There are only two people living together that are not related by blood, marriage or adoption. Their three children are related to both parents "by Blood" so that portion meets the requirement of the ordinance. Also since the ordinance says "more than three" and there are only two that aren't related it stands to reason that they are complying with that portion of the ordinance also.

Since they fall in compliance with the ordinance they should be allowed a permit.

[TexKan]

Well I went and looked at the city of Black Jack............. it may have been named for 3 black jack oak trees......... but based on the town't pictures, the santa in the pictures, the name "fondrey", and the city council minutes I read - my guess is this 8000 population town otta be damn lucky anyone lives there........... or wants to. I hate to say it but it wouldn't surprise me none if Olivia isn't the same race as fondrey. I think they will get quite a good "cha ching" off of this thing. I read the "permit" and it clearly states what Bubba says and what Dutchie wrote. (can't let the fellas think I'm too slow to go look for myself!!).................... Wierd little town - they sure are proud of thier streets and channel 20................... but it does clearly state what ya need to do BEFORE moving into any residence. That permit is $50 bucks for renters........... $20 for owners............. It seems to just be a way for a little punk town to suck money from folks............ kinda like what DC does to me everymonth that I pay for garbage bins I don't use. But can't have water service with out the garbage bins............ I use NO (yes - NO) water and pay bout $30 just to have the water ON............... arghhhhhh

[Bubba]

Why don't you just turn the water off? If you don't use any water, why do you need it on?

[TexKan]

To keep my water heater flushed out and my house ready for guests. Don't laugh Bubba....... I keep the lights and gas on too. It's my climate controled storage house........ LOL LOL People are there on occasion and there is someone there at least once a week to flush the potty.........

I know, I know, - but when my mom died it was really nice to be able to just walk in with a bag of groceries and spread out with a washer / dryer, bed, dishes...... ets........... I am a spoiled princess!!!

Drives the X crazy...... but he doesn't say a word. Wouldn't do anygood anyway. Ya know I always keep a light on and I haven't had any trouble. I keep the lawn mowed and like I said there are folks that come and go. It just irks me that I have to pay for services I don't use JUST to have water......... but hey when did DC ever make it easy???? I don't use enough water to show on the bill........... bout every 3 months I'll show a gallon usage. I don't think they bill till it's bout 100 gallons.

[Flying Dutchman]

If the children are not from both parents then it might fall in the ordinance guidelines is my guess Bubba.

According to their guidelines, let's say my girlfriend lives with me then my two children come to live with me also, I would have to kick my girlfriend out or not let my kids live there. I do not see how this could stand in court.