Ordinance Clean-up - Words Matter

 One of my written correction comments at the recent hearing on fees (Ordinance Amendment 2025-1) brings out another example of the problem with unfinished Ordinance language cleanup.

Specifically, a “Housing Right Eligibility Permit” is named. The carefully vetted definition in Ordinance 240 does not use the term “permit”.

A Housing Right is a “prerequisite eligibility” to be able to apply for a Building Permit related to house construction.

A Housing Right is a feature created by Zoning rules, not by a permit out of thin air. The definition specifically avoids the term “permit” to also avoid confusion with “Building Permit” that is not Zoning authority. A Building Permit specifies a process controlled by State certified Building Inspectors to assure proper structural design to meet Minnesota Building Code safety standards.

The proper term for the referenced fee is “Housing Right Verification”. This is an important process to confirm whether a Housing Right does exist on property the owner desires to build a house upon, because possession is a prerequisite to then seeking a Building Permit.

A Housing Right may not be present because it may have been Transferred to another property, or may not have existed because the property was created by a Lot Split after April 12, 1982, when a cap on total Housing Rights was put in place in Eureka. An owner may also be aware of a possible Grandfathered Housing Right (pre-1982) and ask for official confirmation (verification) that the right does exist for future family planning, not necessarily for immediate use.

Now back to the cleanup issue.  The definition of Housing Right is correct in Ordinance 240, but there is language later in Ordinance 240 that still uses the incorrect term “Housing Right Eligibility Permit”. This is another example of unfinished cleanup because this reference should not supersede the definition.

 The 2022 Board cut off more cleanup in February 2023 and actually blocked me from continuing my lead role in revisions and seeing the latest draft before they rushed it out to the over-rated General Code LLC firm to merge into Eureka Ordinance.

By the way, the superficial General Code firm added its own error by moving formerly separate definitions into Ordinance 240 that actually duplicated 10 of the definitions already moved into 240.  Two of them contradicted corrected definitions in 240.  This happened because the updated Definitions chapter was not forwarded with the Chapter 240 and 216 updates. None of this was caught by Board, PC, or clerks.

I have pleaded in several detailed writings since March 2023 to finish the process of cleanup and synchronize key language in Ordinance 216 Subdivision not properly correlated with Ordinance 240 Zoning.

No action, no public meeting discussion. Plenty of lazy ignorance.

Yeah, I get it.  I’m no longer a paid official, so what could I possibly know to help….

                                                    by Jeff Otto