Moral Conundrum
Sometime in November I called the City of Winston-Salem to see about getting an extra trash can for my house since I have two separate tenants. When I was told I would have to pay extra for the trash can unless my house was zoned as a duplex I asked off-hand if it was possible to have it re-listed as a duplex. I have wanted, from the very beginning, to have tenants legitimately so I can cover all of my bases from a legal standpoint. The lady on the phone politely told me she would forward my information on to the zoning department to see about having it changed.
Having done my due-diligence, I forgot about it until just after Christmas when I received a phone call from my downstairs tenant informing me there was a notice from the city taped to the front door. He e-mailed me a picture of the notice which basically read that the city zoning inspections division had become aware that my house was not zoned as a duplex and to avoid a fine of $100 per day I must have my home returned to its original condition within 5 days.
So Brad (not me since I'm apparently honest to a fault) called the attached number for the zoning inspector to plead our case. He was informed that he would be given the opportunity to prove that the house had been a duplex since at least 1968 (despite having bought it as a duplex). If he could not prove it, we must return the home to a single family residence on our own dime.
I know. You're all like "What the *$%#&?!"
Me too. A LOT. It was an awful re-realization that the government is not on the side of honest hard-working people. Brad did a pretty good job pleading our case with the inspector. When he was done with her, she was pretty apologetic that she even opened the case. Apparently she can't UN-open it but hopefully her pity will mean she will be doing her own due-diligence about finding out when the home was converted. Because Brad and I have an awful suspicion that it was done in the 70's or early 80's based on the materials used.
So in the meantime, we are NOT being fined and have a little bit of breathing room before a possible remodel in our future. >:-( Either way, it made for a terrible day. I can't hardly think about it without getting physically ill over the money that has been poured into the place to make it a perfect rental and the money that it may cost to turn it back into a single family residence. I also get ill over thinking about what on EARTH these lawmakers were thinking when they passed a law that would most assuredly punish people who had nothing to do with the crime. So we're praying there's a loophole out there somewhere or a do-gooder zoning inspector that feels for us and can make it all go away.
So now, my facebook regulars, you can see where my post about honesty and the government came from.
What would you have done? Would you, like me, try to "follow the laws of the land" to a T the way I did despite the apparent consequences? How honest is "honest enough"? And what is our responsibility in following laws even when there is no one around to enforce them? Take my belief in the right to birth at home and the right to have a midwife there. In NC I am supporting illegal midwives who explicitly DO NOT follow the laws of the land. So by association I have chosen a dishonest path in that respect. Being honest is just not as cut and dry as I wish it was. I wish I could just be honest about everything ALL the time. It would be so much easier rather than having to second-guess what the government would think. And to me avoiding the government is about as dishonest as outright lying to them. I don't think you can say one is better than the other.
It's been a fabulous pre-cursor to a new year, don't you think?
Having done my due-diligence, I forgot about it until just after Christmas when I received a phone call from my downstairs tenant informing me there was a notice from the city taped to the front door. He e-mailed me a picture of the notice which basically read that the city zoning inspections division had become aware that my house was not zoned as a duplex and to avoid a fine of $100 per day I must have my home returned to its original condition within 5 days.
So Brad (not me since I'm apparently honest to a fault) called the attached number for the zoning inspector to plead our case. He was informed that he would be given the opportunity to prove that the house had been a duplex since at least 1968 (despite having bought it as a duplex). If he could not prove it, we must return the home to a single family residence on our own dime.
I know. You're all like "What the *$%#&?!"
Me too. A LOT. It was an awful re-realization that the government is not on the side of honest hard-working people. Brad did a pretty good job pleading our case with the inspector. When he was done with her, she was pretty apologetic that she even opened the case. Apparently she can't UN-open it but hopefully her pity will mean she will be doing her own due-diligence about finding out when the home was converted. Because Brad and I have an awful suspicion that it was done in the 70's or early 80's based on the materials used.
So in the meantime, we are NOT being fined and have a little bit of breathing room before a possible remodel in our future. >:-( Either way, it made for a terrible day. I can't hardly think about it without getting physically ill over the money that has been poured into the place to make it a perfect rental and the money that it may cost to turn it back into a single family residence. I also get ill over thinking about what on EARTH these lawmakers were thinking when they passed a law that would most assuredly punish people who had nothing to do with the crime. So we're praying there's a loophole out there somewhere or a do-gooder zoning inspector that feels for us and can make it all go away.
So now, my facebook regulars, you can see where my post about honesty and the government came from.
What would you have done? Would you, like me, try to "follow the laws of the land" to a T the way I did despite the apparent consequences? How honest is "honest enough"? And what is our responsibility in following laws even when there is no one around to enforce them? Take my belief in the right to birth at home and the right to have a midwife there. In NC I am supporting illegal midwives who explicitly DO NOT follow the laws of the land. So by association I have chosen a dishonest path in that respect. Being honest is just not as cut and dry as I wish it was. I wish I could just be honest about everything ALL the time. It would be so much easier rather than having to second-guess what the government would think. And to me avoiding the government is about as dishonest as outright lying to them. I don't think you can say one is better than the other.
It's been a fabulous pre-cursor to a new year, don't you think?
Comments
Post a Comment