Federal court rules against Salisbury in housing claim

A federal judge has ruled against the city of Salisbury on one aspect of the city’s housing ordinance and how it’s applied.

The ordinance currently states that no more than two unrelated people can live in the same house, but it’s the interpretation of that rule that the judge took issue with.

In September 2014, a complaint was filed against three men who lived together in a Salisbury house, two of them were brothers.

The complaint reportedly alleged that they were violating the city’s zoning ordinance’s definition of family, that is, that no more than two unrelated persons can live in the same dwelling.

The city agreed and asked the property owner Adams Housing to remove the tenants.

Adams Housing appealed to the city Housing Board, which stood by the interpretation of the ordinance.

Adams Housing, represented by attorney Luke Rommel, took their argument to court and Monday a federal judge ruled that the city’s interpretation of their own law was flawed.

“The application as (the judge) described it, borders on absurdity,” Rommel said.

The judge stated in his findings that regardless of how Salisbury defines “relatedness” that since two of the tenants are brothers, it’s “mathematically impossible” for the tenants to constitute more than two unrelated people.

“Basically what (the judge is) saying is that three people can’t live together under just about every foreseeable circumstance in the same house whether they’re related or not,” Rommel said.

Rommel said the case could set a precedent for other property owners in Salisbury who have been affected by similar interpretations of this code. For example, three or more unrelated college roommates.

47 ABC reached out to the city Monday and were told they could not comment at this time because they had not been notified of the court’s ruling.