Ordinance interpretation has been described as a two-step process. First, the zoning board determines whether the ordinance language is ambiguous. If it is ambiguous, then the board applies the following rules to determine its intent:

• Scope or jurisdiction – Determine whether the geographic area and activity in question are subject to regulation by the provision.
• Context – Determine whether general provisions that apply throughout the ordinance or those located nearby modify the ambiguous language.
• Subject matter – Determine whether the topic is clearly defined or limited. Based on a clear understanding of these issues, board members can proceed to examine the purpose and history of the language in question.

If meaning remains unclear, compare similar provisions or organizational structure in the same ordinance to determine intent. In most cases, ordinance meaning can be determined by reading its text literally, i.e. staying within its four corners. Use the following guidelines to interpret ordinance text:

• Plain meaning rule – If a word is defined in the ordinance, use that meaning. If a word is not defined in the ordinance, use the plain, dictionary meaning of the word. Technical words should be used in their technical sense.
• Harmonizing – When a provision is ambiguous, it must be interpreted to give effect to the primary legislative intent or purpose of the ordinance. Unreasonable and unconstitutional interpretations must be avoided.
• Conflicting provisions – When two provisions conflict, they should be interpreted to give effect to the primary legislative intent or purpose of the ordinance and to their respective requirements to the extent reasonable. ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­
• No surplus language – Ordinances must be interpreted to give effect to every provision. Interpretations that render part of an ordinance meaningless must be avoided whenever possible.
• Value of testimony – Members of the zoning board should carefully consider interpretations made by staff, legal counsel, and the parties to a proceeding but should remember that the zoning board is responsible for interpreting ordinances within their jurisdiction. The potential interests and motives of those presenting testimony in an appeal should be examined to establish the relative merit of their testimony.

Evidence in the record

When these guidelines do not provide sufficient guidance to interpret the ordinance, refer to evidence beyond the ordinance. The information must be objective and contained in a local government record. For example, a staff report produced at the time of an ordinance amendment explaining its rationale may be examined to determine ordinance intent, but the oral opinion of an elected official recalling the issue may not be relied upon by the zoning board in deciding an appeal.

Ordinance amendments and record keeping

If interpretation of an ordinance proves difficult, a clarifying ordinance amendment should be considered. If a satisfactory interpretation is reached, staff and other officials should record the interpretation and apply it consistently in future related administrative and quasi-judicial matters. Many jurisdictions adopt clean up amendments periodically to clarify ordinance language settled by appeals over a six or twelve-month period.