“Granny Units” a Trademark Violation They Claim
In what most legal experts are calling a landmark test-case, the National Association of Mothers-in-Law (NAMinL) has filed suit in Superior Court over the city’s claim that the newly approved accessory housing units are “granny units.”
Phyllis Whitcover, a disappointed mother-in-law and president of the west coast chapter of NAMinL argues, “These units were originally named after us and we have gone through tremendous emotional pain and sacrifice to get what we feel is our protected claim on them. More importantly though, we have earned the right to inhabit these units and haunt our good-for-nothing sons-in-law.”
They claim they have no dispute with the philosophy of the pilot program which allows these auxiliary buildings to be built in back yards – affordable housing, caring for elderly family members, potential rental income – it is just a question of giving credit where credit is due.
“Over the years, we have suffered the indignity of watching countless numbers of our precious daughters marry losers, moochers, and golfers,” says one MAMinL member. “It is our God-given right to live with them and question their every life decision: ‘Are you working hard enough to support my daughter in the way she has grown accustomed? When are you going to start having my grandchildren? Shouldn’t you be hanging some drapes?’ ...We deserve the naming rights like nobody’s business.”
San Jose Councilwoman Nora Campos, who knows she’ll be a mother-in-law before she is a granny, sided with the NAMinL by championing an amendment which would give the units naming rights back to mothers-in-law. “We must give these trailblazers their proper due. Can you imagine if they called Moses’ (sic) ark a boat?”
My mother in-law wants us to add one in our back yard…Thank God our property is smaller than the minimum lot size.
On my 5 mile, 90 minute lightrail journey I overheard 2 city hall types discussing a compromise that has been reached between the pro and anti granny unit factions.
Next week the city will propose that tents be allowed into the backyards of any lot greater than 6500 feet.
The city will even provide tent materials to those who qualify once the eBay convention is over.
The angry mothers-in-law are too late to the fight. Not only is this issue already settled, but private enterprise long ago provided San Jose with a facility perfectly suited for the average mother-in-law. It’s a spacious, pastoral property; one guaranteed to quiet the complaints of even the most disagreeable old crone. Conveniently located at the southwest corner of Curtner and Monterey, it’s called Oakhill.
What does Finfan and Mark T. feel about this one?
I ate some bad beef noodles last night and I can’t think straight but I finish my thoughts later on naming rights.
How about grandpa units. We feel left out of everything. It’s always grandma this grandma that what about us poor grandpa’s. I am going to form and organization that gives us the same rights and honors bestowed on those grannies.
OK Clarence, this is the best I can come up with today. . . regarding the comment about ark vs. boat, I’d like to twist that one around and ask, what if they called a boat an ark? That’s what they’re doing when they refer to it as “downtown” instead of “ghost town.”
And hey “Ouch” that remark wasn’t lost on me either—but considering Nora’s mean spirited attack on Cortese recently, she’s opened herself up to some well deserved jabs.
Interesting case of bated breath with just that one comment to yesterday’s posting, wouldn’t you all agree?
John, great blog.
The major issue with auxiliary units is to design them so they will not be independent units, kitchen, and other fixtures, that will allow them to exist in later years as rentals. Believe it or not, cities actually take aerial photos searching for auxiliary units, so if you build one without permits, it will be discovered. There is a formula for doing one in communities that will be acceptable and allow them to be approved.
The term “granny” is really inaccurate, because no permit can be issued to the homeowner, so it runs with the land, which is way some neigbhors object.
Wait a minute…does this apply to daughter’s- in- law also??? If construction is already started can the daughter-in-law step in & put a STOP to it, and dash the hopes & dreams of the mother-in-law to spend the rest of her days spying on the family,& criticizing the grandchildren, and their upbringing?
Finfan sizes it up pretty well. And if they’re taking aerial photos they are 1) spending tax dollars that could be put to better use and 2) doing a lousy job of enforcing anything because there are illegal units and converted garages all over the place already.
There’s an unsavory bunch bordering my parents’ place that couldn’t be breaking more rules between junk cars, people living in tacked-on garage additions and burning of rubbish, and code enforcement does nothing about it. Ground that plane and put the money into something that will actually pay off.
Leo, are you talking about an actual case??
Construction can be halted on any project done without permits, and generally code enforcement does not have to tell you who complained. Any project begun without a permit can receive a red tag order with a phone call.
Mark
A picture is worth a thousand words, the people should take photos of that shack and take it to the city council meeting.
Leo, if a permit was filed for the house you mentioned, the daughter in law, if she is a property owner, can order the construction stopped, as it needs her approval if she is a joint or community property owner.
How about looking at all the horrible granny units that are grandfathered in downtown SJ already. Many are complete dumps and there is insufficient parking to accomodate them. Why can’t they try to regulate those instead of trying to screw people who want to do a nice, small addition in their backyard because they need the space for their family and don’t want to leave downtown?