I agree with those who think that she should be allowed to grow her garden in the front yard. However, I think that if I were this lady I would take a different tack and not run the risk of going to jail. My advice would be to have the garden in the back yard, plant grass out front, and then sue the city. She could still make her point, try to change things but make the city the entity that is at risk.

From what I could tell from the interviews, the neighbors are fine with it. One of the neighbors that was interviewed even said it was an inspiration to her children.

Only one neighbor didn't care for it.

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/in...k_woman_p.html

Another article.

I follow this so closely for a few reasons.
1) I live just over an hour away. It is like this in many places in MI, including my community.

2) DH and I have dealt with the city. Dealt with cops welcoming themselves into our back yard, which is fenced in, or they'd sneak in the neighbors driveway and peep through the fence, finding reasons to cite. This went on through our entire neighborhood for a bit, surely a revenue raiser. We refused to pay the fine. Took it to court, the magistrate tossed it, and the cop was back 2 days later saying his boss told him to reopen it. Ummm? The last was a scare tactic, he knew it, we knew it. Haven't heard from them since. I have also witnessed a cop driving around at 10 at night, in the dark, using his spotlight to find overgrown lawns. I wish I was making this stuff up.

3) The eroding of our rights and liberties terrifies me. These politicians do not have our best interests in mind. They merely see us as cash cows for their agendas.

I heard about this. It took the guy calling the media in and embarrassing the city to get them to back off. When the city bore (substitute a wh for the b) why it took the media to get them to back off, he had no explanation.

We don't have a lawn either. We re-landscaped and put in edibles in the front and back. Instead of 2 x 4s, we used rocks to border our raised beds. We have tanbark and mulch between the beds as well. We NEVER experience muddy run off.

A lawn is one of the most wasteful uses of water out there. Lawns are fine in areas with a lot of rain. The northwest for example. Even Clark Howard says that about lawns.

As far as HOAs are concerned, I don't want to live in one. My friend lives in one and pays $500/mo to be told that he can't have a car parked in his driveway. He can't repaint the outside of his house the same color without paying a $200 assessment fee. The same color! Ugly white! He had to get written permission, again after an assessment fee, to plant a Japanese Maple in the BACKYARD! NO THANKS. My choice. I won't buy in those areas.

Seems some of the complaints are also about how her grass, if that is grass in the very front, is taking a while to grow. She can't make it grow any faster.

I think the city is being stupid. I hope she wins. "What's common. My backside"! Maybe when she starts sharing some of the fruits of her labor with the neighbors, they'll put in some raised beds as well. The city can't cite the entire block can they?

Its not right that she just decides she doesn't have to obey the law. Terrible example for the kids. Regardless of whether the law makes sense, is outdated, shouldn't apply, ridiculous in its aplication to her raised beds, it should still be followed until it is changed. Go to the zoning board meetings, the city counsel meetings and get it changed. Maybe thats just a little too much effort for her??? Maybe thats just a little too much like the right thing to do. It is so much easier to just do what she wants.

What if we all decide which laws we will obey and which we will not? Chaos.

How did she disobey the law? The law states "suitable plant material" (or something to that effect, don't remember the exact wording). She believes, as do many others across the nation (and now world!), that her plantings are suitable. The wording is vague; she can not be blamed for that, nor should she be fined or jailed.

Now, if the law specifically stated "no raised beds in the front yard" she'd be breaking the law. This is clearly not the case, and the onus falls on the municipality to be very clear in what is or is not acceptable material. They, the public servants, work for us- not the other way around!

I am curious....

how can you see that the "law" means no veggie plants from what the city code says....

copied from story ~ Why? The city is pointing to a code that says a front yard has to have suitable, live, plant material. The big question is what's "suitable?"

How can anyone get no veggies allowed out of suitable plant material?

Is a veggie live plant material?

answer....:yes:

Thank you :judge:

I rest my case :)

We posted at the same time BECK....

love your answer!

Sorry, i can' help but wonder if you bothered reading any of the articles before tossing your two cents...

This is absurd. She doesn't live in a HOA, if you want everything pretty and perfect go live in one of those communities. Her property, her rights. It poses no health or safety issue. If Oak Park really cared about how "pretty" the yards are maybe they should start going after the big banks that allow the properties they foreclosed on to sit vacant, overgrown, with maintenance ignored. Those are the real eyesores.

People in this world are honestly just pathetic.

She bought the house,
She's paying the morgage,
There for SHE should be able to plant what she wants where ever she wants.

Now if she had bushes in her front yard to cover this would it have still been a problem? Also as for the person who said it was ugly. So? It's not your yard, and your opinion shouldn't matter because it isn't your yard.

Stupid bylaws...People need to get a life and certain states with ridiculous bylaws should really find something better to do then arresting people because they decided to grow a veggie garden.

I would do both. By the wording of their own laws she is not breaking them. I would let this play out and then after I won, I would sue the city for harassing me and wasting my time.

Is it exactly what I would do? No, I would probably use stone or brick rather than the wood and I would probably put grass or clover between rather than wood chips. Is it her right to do what she wants with her own property? Yes, so long as she is not breaking laws or endangering the neighborhood. I see no example of her breaking any laws or endangering anyone. The city is apparently run by lunatics.

My neighbors at my last house had a small vegetable garden in their front yard. The couldn't have it in the back, because they used that space for their piles of trash that they thought might be useful, old transmissions, etc. But the best part is that not all of the, um, weeds amongst his tomatoes where accidental. His neighbor on the other side was a sheriffs deputy. Quite the arrangement.

BTW, this was a nice neighborhood, not a dump. Just that one yard that was a mess. And even they were good neighbors. We never called to complain about their yard, although when it came time for us to sell that house, my husband had to help them clean up the yard, as that was the sole complaint we were hearing from the showings. They cleaned the yard on Thursday, showed the house on Friday, got an offer on Saturday, and by Wednesday there was a transmission in the backyard again.

Tell that to the people of the civil rights movement... Seriously if people listened to this we would still be drinking from separate water fountains and the majority of posters on this site wouldn't have the right to vote. We have to challenge authority when it oversteps its bounds and is encroaching on our rights.

[QUOTE]I am curious....

how can you see that the "law" means no veggie plants from what the city code says....

I never said that the law means no veggie plants. How can you see that you are not quoting the right person!!?!! Misquoting and playing dumb gets you nowhere in my book. It doesn't say no veggies, it says suitable plant material. Your own quote from the story highlights the word suitable.

copied from story ~ Why? The city is pointing to a code that says a front yard has to have suitable, live, plant material. The big question is what's "suitable?"
Yes, this is the issue.

The city official gave the definition of suitable and apparently your opinion and hers is different.

Is a veggie live plant material?

Of course it is plant material, don't be obtuse. But in this woman's neighborhood in this woman's city, the use of raised beds containing veggies and flowers are not perceived to meet the definition of "suitable".

After the warning and/or the ticket, she should have pleaded her case to the proper authorities and through the proper channels. After exhausting those sources of remedy, then go to the media and/or file suit. But at least go the route of a civic minded citizen and give the city an opportunity to include raised veggie beds in the definition of suitable. [QUOTE]

julie99 - Yes I read every word of every article I could find. I am not opposed to raised bed gardening and I personally think its a great idea to grow organically for her family. I just don't think she handled the situation with anything close to mature adult behavior.

anonymously - Your post is mostly hyperbole. This situation is not even close to a civil rights violation of the 50's and 60's which by the way was to outlaw the behavior of racial discrimination and bring freedom, respect, dignity, and economic and social equality to African Americans and restoring voting rights in southern states. Civil disobience was used only after other avenues of resolution were explored, attempted and failed (lawsuits, organizations, political redress, and labor organizing, economic boycotts).

There are different ways of challenging authority depending on the severity of encroachment on rights. Why hit a fly with a hammer when a rolled newspaper will do a better job of killing the fly and not damaging your wall??

This woman never even tried to challenge the authority of the city ordinance that was overstepping it bounds. She just ignored it(the warning and ticket) hoping it would go away.