The South Carolina Supreme decided McMaster v. Columbia Board of Zoning Appeals, Opinion No. 27075 on this subject on Dec. 12, 2011. I think it was circulated on this listserve. I would start by looking at that decision which upholds the constitutionality of an ordinance establishing a limit of three unrelated persons per household. ________________________________ From: codeenforcement-bounces@lists.imla.org [mailto:codeenforcement-bounces@lists.imla.org] On Behalf Of Ernie Crofoot Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 1:40 PM To: Chuck Thompson; ATTY-LIST@LISTSERV.MUNICODE.COM; universitycities@lists.imla.org; codeenforcement@lists.imla.org Cc: Larry C. Porter Subject: Re: [Codeenforcement] How do you investigate violations of regulations defining "family" by numbers of unrelated people We do not have such a provision and the couple of towns that do are insufficiently equipped to do so. However, I will pass your inquiry along to County Commissioner Porter, whose manages a business having to make such determinations. I will pass along any info he may have. Ernest A. Crofoot, County Attorney 403 S. 7th Street, Suite 246 Denton, Maryland 21629 Office: 410-479-4136 Fax: 410-479-4137 Cell: 410-200-5409 Email: ecrofoot@carolinemd.org<mailto:ecrofoot@carolinemd.org> ________________________________ From: codeenforcement-bounces@lists.imla.org [mailto:codeenforcement-bounces@lists.imla.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Thompson Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 1:36 PM To: ATTY-LIST@LISTSERV.MUNICODE.COM; universitycities@lists.imla.org; codeenforcement@lists.imla.org Subject: [Codeenforcement] How do you investigate violations of regulations defining "family" by numbers of unrelated people A member asks, when you adopt a restriction on the number of unrelated people living in a household; for example where you define family to include 3 or more unrelated people, how do you investigate and document the violation effectively. Do you have any resource person you could direct me to regarding that point? Please respond to me and I will forward the responses along. Happy Friday! Chuck Charles W. Thompson, Jr. Executive Director, General Counsel International Municipal Lawyers Association (IMLA) 7910 Woodmont Ave., Suite 1440 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 direct: 202-742-1016 202.466.5424 x 7110 Cell: 240.876.6790 cthompson@imla.org<mailto:cthompson@imla.org> IMLA 2012 Seminar - Wash. DC April 22-24, 2012 IMLA 2012- Austin October 21-24, 2012 Alexander L. Palenzuela-Mauri Partner [Logo] 2525 Ponce de Leon Blvd., Suite 700 | Coral Gables, FL 33134 P: (305) 854-0800 F: (305) 854-2323 wsh-law.com<http://www.wsh-law.com> | vCard<http://www.wsh-law.com/attorneys-vcards.php> [http://www.wsh-law.com/images/email-twitter.jpg]<http://twitter.com/Wsh_Law> [http://www.wsh-law.com/images/email-linkedin.jpg] <http://www.linkedin.com/company/weiss-serota-helfman-pastoriza-cole-&-boniske-p.l.> [http://www.wsh-law.com/images/email-facebook.jpg] <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Weiss-Serota-Helfman-Pastoriza-Cole-Boniske-PL/259464460734365> THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the addressee. It may contain information which is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, use, or any action or reliance on this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone (305) 854-0800 or by return e-mail and delete the message, along with any attachments. Tax Advice Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS under Circular 230, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments), unless otherwise specifically stated, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein.