|
FAMILY RULE DISPUTED
Controversial Stafford ordinance gets its first legal challenge
Date published: 8/1/2008
BY KEITH EPPS
A Stafford woman is challenging a new county ordinance that limits the number of unrelated people living in a single-family home.
Nailah S.C. Jaha, who lives on Greenridge Drive, has filed suit in Stafford Circuit Court claiming the ordinance is discriminatory and too narrow in its definition of "family."
Greenridge Drive is in the Greenridge subdivision of North Stafford, south of Aquia Harbour.
The suit claims the ordinance is, among other things, unfairly hindering Jaha's plans to have her brother, his girlfriend and her two children move into her home.
"The county has overstepped its bounds," said Jaha's attorney, H. Clark Leming. "You don't try to define family through the zoning ordinance."
The Stafford Board of Supervisors on June 17 amended the zoning ordinance to allow for only four people not related by "blood, marriage, adoption or guardianship" to live in a residential dwelling.
The ordinance, approved by a 5-2 vote, lists five acceptable categories and does not apply to group homes, such as those for the handicapped or those licensed by the Department of Social Services. Jaha is the first to file a legal challenge.
According to the lawsuit, Jaha has lived in a three-bedroom home on Greenridge Drive since 1982.
She currently lives with Kara Johnson and Johnson's three young children.
Jaha refers to Johnson as her goddaughter and considers Johnson's children to be her grandchildren, according to the suit.
The current arrangement does not violate the new ordinance, Leming said. But Jaha's plans to have her brother and three other people move into the home would.
The brother, his girlfriend and her two children are planning to move to Stafford from Minnesota, the suit says. Jaha said she needs assistance with chronic health problems and needs financial help to maintain the home.
The suit claims that all of the people involved consider themselves to be family.
Leming's filing also claims the ordinance is discriminatory in part because "African Americans have historically defined family to include a number of broader relationships that need not be formalized by marriage, blood or adoption."
Leming said the county's efforts not to overburden single-family homes would be better served by placing simple limits on the number of residents allowed in a home instead of trying to define a family.
Jaha is seeking an injunction prohibiting the county from enforcing the ordinance and a declaration that it violates her rights under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
She is also seeking to recover her legal fees and "further relief as the nature of the cause may require."
No trial date has been set.
Keith Epps: 540/374-5404
Email: kepps@freelancestar.com
Read more stories about Stafford
Date published: 8/1/2008
Most recent reader comments:
lets use race ..... *shocker*
(posted by
testexam
, Aug. 2, 2008 12:35 am)
"filing also claims the ordinance is discriminatory in part because "African Americans have historically defined family to include a number of broader relationships " ........ ... WOW, i'm totally shocked that a black person would play the race card... so how can Obama run a country if black people are just going to use any situations to further benefit their own agenda while blaming the "white america" for their own failures ? ... not trying to be racist, but people need to examine closer at race-cards
Sleeping Arrangements
(posted by
TheMason
, Aug. 1, 2008 10:45 pm)
Are all five of these children sleeping in the same room? From the way the article is written, it sounds as if the children biologically belong to the brother's girlfriend and not the brother. Are the children sleeping in the same room with them? Does social servcices become involved in situations like these?
I still say...Terri says it correctly...even if you add Grandma to the mix
(posted by
hellokitty79
, Aug. 1, 2008 8:15 pm)
the rooms are all filled.....come on, seriously...
I like running other peoples lives
(posted by
mikester
, Aug. 1, 2008 6:37 pm)
nine people sounds like too much in that place. Why is it the counties business? Why is it any of our business what they do????
This is the perfect case
(posted by
twoxtreme2001
, Aug. 1, 2008 6:33 pm)
9 People in a 3 bedroom house. This is the exact reason the county passed this ordinace and the exact reason they need to uphold it. Overcrowding the county infrastructure without the county being able to collect any taxes from the brother and girlfriend. If you dont like the laws her in the commonwealth then by all means move to one of the 49 other states that suit you better.
|
Star Directory
