[Mpls] overoccupancy rule

[Dave Carlson]

On Monday 14 March 2005 03:24 pm, flewn wrote:
> If the two couples had been two married couples, however, the exact same 
> occupancy rate would have been legal.  (My friends are all heterosexual, 
> which leaves them that option.  Had they been two gay couples, this option 
> would of course not be open to them.  This makes the current overoccupancy 
> code one of the most glaring cases of discrimination against the GLBT 
> community in current Mpls law.)

I am fairly certain that isn't true - couples (regardless of gender 
arrangements) should be considered a 'family unit' (thus, getting around that 
restriction) by filing a civil union with the city.  I've also heard of 
people using (abusing?) these to get out of U of M dorm contracts.

David Carlson
Windom