|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:58 pm
"A woman is penalized for doing what the government, theoretically, should be doing but aren't."
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 8:17 am
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. neutral Unfortunately, a lot of that has legal complications because she's giving food, which could potentially get the kids sick or worse if something's wrong with it. Hell, one of the kids' parents could be an a*****e and sue her now if they were able to find something wrong. People are selfish and immature.
I wonder if the legalities would change if she advertised it as a party instead and did this at her own home?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 20, 2012 3:41 pm
You'd think they would try to get some funds or grants for her to pay for the fees. However, I understand why she has to get a variance. She's no longer using her home as just a home. She's really running a small charity. Any type of charity like that probably has to get one if they are working in a residential area, just like any other business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:39 am
Zoning Issue = Irrelevent. The only problem I can see legally with this is at the most a lack of a food handlers certificate but that is even water under the bridge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
