RE: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle

[Hideyo Yamamoto]

Thanks, Michelle – I started looking into the zoning ordinance and started getting a headache.. Greg also told me to stop digging into more information – he said I probably have 30 mins to present my case and I have about 4 hours worth of information I need to present – he told me to make each point short and clear to the point so that my point is not being diluted… I guess I will ask him to edit my arguments – but I will make sure that I will include all the arguments.   Hideyo   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 2:04 PM To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Subject: Re: Hideyo's court case 19th?? - to Michelle   Hideyo,    This is getting a little beyond me, as I do not have any experience with zoning, but if they told you they were giving you a sanctuary permit (as opposed to a permit to just have 18 cats), I think you have an even stronger case.  The government can not approve a status like that one year and then just take it away the next, just like they could not approve someone to open a business in their home one year and then, after the business is up and running, say the next year that they can not have the business.  An example like that makes it very obvious-- the government cannot cause reliance on an approval like that and then take it away with no change in circumstance. If they approved sanctuary status to you then I think your situation is comparable to the business situation-- based on being told this, you spent money, made plans, etc.  Can you imagine the newspaper story if a town government said to someone they could open a child care business in their home, and then after they spent money readying their home and getting clients and quitting their day job and opening up the center, the city the next year said "oh, we shouldn't have done that and you actually have to close your business now"?  That would be outrageous and everyone would think so, and the reason is the reliance that the business owner would have placed on getting the go-ahead.  Now in reality you probably already had all the cats and had already spent money, or would have anyway, regardless of what the city told you in 2004. But if you did spend any money on the cats since that time, especially any part of the $45,000 you said you spent making the space good for them, and can show that, I think that is enough to prove reliance.  Michelle   In a message dated 12/13/2005 3:53:54 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I also live in a residential zone – and sanctuary status is only given only to the commercial zone – and that’s why they did not give to me this time (though that what the office gave to me also in 2004).  When I talked to the lady with the status and asked her about sanctuary status is only given to the residential zone, and she told me that, the told her that it’s ok, as she is self-funded only, but not getting any donation – which sort of makes sense to me,, as the main reason why they only give the sanctuary/non-profit status to the commercial zone is to avoid bothering residents in the residential area as they expect more traffic – but if they are self-funded and not expecting any traffic, why shouldn’t it give to the residential zone?  I guess it’s a zoning issue now?? Right?  I think zoning restriction comes before the animal service ordinance, right?