The LawnPolice Strike Backwards

Get them while they´re out-of-bounds

Date: Sunday, May 21, 2000 12:01 PM

Well, for whatever it´s worth, we have another "opportunity" to undermine the oppressive ordinances that hold homeowners hostage to the sterile suburban lawn aesthetic... this time the lawn-cop has gone over the edge and I can´t imagine her abuses can be defensible before a group of sane, unbiased citizens... So here´s the details and the plan...

We are currently filing an appeal against one of her citations through the zoning board of appeals... after the incidents in ´98 we applied for and received certification for what we were doing from the National Wildlife Federation as a backyard habitat...

We´re not into latin names and our approach to wildlife is not in the species we can *attract*... we take an approach more like Masanobu Fukuoka´s simplicity, an approach some call naturescaping... we want to support the wildlife we have here and we have adopted the practice of allowing the birds and animals already here do part of our planting and only modify their choices when those choices will not have a chance of thriving where planted (such as they would compete with existing trees or our house)...

Our linden, sycamore, maples, poplars, sweetgum and fruit orchard were our choices (ours and my parents before us) for the energy considerations (shade, windbreak and micro-climate moderation) or food (pears and cherries) or scent (the linden)... the result is so lush and green now it seems magical... when you pick your way through the leafy areas you expect elves or hobbits, maybe a dragon or unicorn to be around the next clearing... and the middle of the yard is a small glade...

We enjoy violets and dandelion greens in our spring salads... we´ve attended workshops on medicinal herbs and wildcrafting at Grailville, have experimented in making ointments and herbal teas from our own wild treasures...

We adopted our practices after reading _Behaving as if the God in All Life Mattered_ back in ´94 and have found support in science and history from books such as _The Lawn_ from the Smithsonian, from groups like the EPA and the Alternate Energy Assn (where I´m currently their publicity director)...

We are BWH #21162 and we encourage people to naturescape as a sustainable way of life, but we tell them up front that they should be careful of the real nemesis of habitats in the form of coercive, invasive humans empowered by vague, irrational ordinances... but unless we can make habitats possible for many people, with limited time and money, these little islands in the scalped-earth, over-chem'd world will not be enough, (like the studies they've done of the impact of isolated patches of rainforest saved from the ashes of the rest showing they were not sufficient to support the rainforest wildlife)...

Picture it... 30 million acres of American lawn converted to nature-saving instead of wasting what precious little non-renewable fuels we have left for an agenda that harms us... all this plus giving each of the millions of us a couple hours of priceless time back every month... what project could have a better bottomline with so little risk, just a little patience while we get in synch with nature.

In addition to certification, we set out to do things formally... we did the list of suggestions proposed in _American Gardener_ magazine as the way to reduce the likelihood of problems with neighbors and thought we were making progress:

For one, we posted the insignia of the NWF on our mailbox so passersby could see that the natural landscape was *intended*...

We sent fliers around the neighborhood inviting neighbors to visit for an afternoon tour... (the only visitors were a few of the younger neighborhood boys but they thought it was really great that they could walk off the sterile suburban street into a woods in our backyard)...

And we mowed the perimeter of the lawn, and sometimes sculpted curves to define the safer havens in the lawn for our usual wildlife, again to make the landscape look like it was artfully-framed by this manicured edge..

But the neighbors may be only a small part of the problem.. The real source of the action seems to be the lawn-official, since she was back last fall with her citations, demanding that we remove the sign (she said it was illegal) and that we cut everything down again. She insisted that habitats were not permitted in a residential zone.

In the meantime the city parks dept had initiated a citizens´ forest commission and I met with the woman who heads it up. She toured our yard and brought us a special post for the sign. The commission was in the process of rewriting the tree ordinances in the city and she said they were hoping to complete that sometime later in the fall. I described the ordinances we were cited under and she said her habitat had some of our features but she was zoned agricultural though she felt sure there were some among the local habitat owners who were residential. She suggested filing complaints against everyone around who had a hedge as tall as ours and any other examples of selective enforcement and stir up a bee hive of citizen attention. But that just doesn't seem right either. She also gave me a list of the other habitat owners in the city of Fairfield that she was aware of since the parks dept was promoting habitat formation.

I called the various habitat owners and got the zoning information for their lots. Some were zoned exactly like mine and they were officially recognized and not being harassed. When I confronted the lawn-policewoman over the fact that her agenda was in conflict with the stated aims of another department of the city and that she needed to resolve the disparity in agendas with them, she refused to listen so I demanded to speak to her boss. He originally didn´t believe that the city had promoted habitats through the parks dept but after I cited the issue and page of the city´s newsletter to him he said we were the responsibility of the parks dept and hung up. We thought we were through with this mess.

Not so. The lawn-cop was back this spring and she must have been thoroughly over the edge. She has cited us with ordinances that apply only to corner lots, which we are not, and with ordinances that we as members of NWF (a civic and educational org) are exempt from, as well as making outrageous demands to cut everything down unrelated to any ordinance cited at all. It took a couple tries and a couple days to get through to her boss, while we worked to comply with the few ordinances that would apply to a residential zone, but shouldn´t be applied to a habitat (like the one on having a brushpile, though a woodpile of kindling must be OK because another neighbor has one... burning is fine, habitat no?)

When her boss answered he said he wasn´t supposed to talk to me because the lawn-cop had already filed charges based on pictures she´d taken the previous Friday... when I pointed out that, by the notices we were sent, we had until after Saturday to comply (and argued that this was a serious violation of due process which could impact his good name since she´d stamped his name on the notices) he said he´d look into the charges... we watched for him but never saw anyone stop...

We´ve been trying to get legal representation, contacted the ACLU (but they have very limited resources too and only take ground-breaking cases whereas this has been fought elsewhere -- and won-- these ordinances are unconstitutional) but even acknowledged rights may only be claimable by the rich unless we can get through without the impossibly expensive court scene...

So we have a plan to try to head off the court case by filing an appeal and using that to discredit the charges brought to the courtroom... and, if you´re interested in American rights or the environment or insisting on ethics in public officials, we can use all the help on this strategy that we can find... we were on the city´s habitat tour this weekend and hope that some of our visitors will write to their councilman (esp Sterling Uhler, Councilman-at-large, Municipal Bldg, 5350 Pleasant Ave, 45014-3597)...



The "legal references" that she cited were:


557.01(b) which outlaws "weeds" in such a twisted way... it names a few species (which we don´t have on our protperty) but then becomes vague (no definition of "noxious" which makes it possible for abusive officials to take out their spite on people whose religion or political views are unpopular)
Further, it´s irrational (it includes grass that goes to seed, which makes natural seed illegal but store-bought seed legal)...
Even the arbitrary 8" height requirement (which has no basis) is being misapplied (the lawn-cop makes assumptions about the length of the grass but not all grass stands up straight) which enabled us to get that charge dismissed last time since that was during the winter when everything is resting...

557.02.(a) and (b) which deal with "litter" which is how she classifies our brushpile for habitat... our brushpile is no more unsanitary than the neighbor´s kindling (and in fact was a smaller pile) but she *thinks* it´s a detriment to public health or safety (because it´s for critters and composting?) without reason or evidence... she is apparently stupid enough to believe that the critters don´t live in the kindling and the kindling doesn´t decompose over the months that it sits there!!
She also demands that we remove the trash-can from the backyard even though such a can is the city´s specified approved container for disposing of excess yardwaste...

1180.04(b)(1) deals with fences and hedges and limits them to 6´ in height... not only is this arbitrary and without basis, she is insisting that it applies to our foundation plantings, and conceivably to our bush orchard, though these have no function comparable to fences... and these hedges and fences are required to be in the side or rear yard, not the front like foundation plantings (how many people in Fairfield have foundation plantings around the front as well as alongside their house with the side ones exceeding 6' in height, more like 12')...

(and without citing anything else, she demanded that our driveway evergreens be cut to 3')

BOCA NPMC/1998 302.10(5) is cited claiming that our habitat is an "exterior blight area"... the text refers to: "reduces property values in the neighborhood" (which is demonstrably not true based on data from real estate agents, our bank appraiser and the county real estate tax dept),
"adversely alters the appearance and general character of the neighborhood" (which is subjective and open to capricious misuse), and on and on...
her *remedy* demands that I dispose of the leaves around my fenceline, mulching leaves that I use through the winter and spring for composting my offal (when the supply of other leafymass for composting is low)


Proceeding to the absurd and malicious...

1143.08 states clearly that it is written for corner properties... though we´re near the intersection, the street only passes one side of our lot... you can see that fairly clearly in some of the pictures from the last case .
And to illustrate her vicious nature she demanded removal of both "pines" (one is more than 100´ from the nearest intersection)...

1187.03(b) governs permanent signs and she states in her demands that "signage in a residential district is PROHIBITED" but when I got the full text of the ordinance it says, at the very opening definitions, that insignia of educational and civic organizations or movements are exempted... which should include NWF

Further, she makes up her own timetable for compliance, (she gets her kicks by writing "IMMEDIATELY" in caps everywhere) ignoring the text of the ordinances which give 15 days in some places, 20 in another.... she demands 5 days for compliance (but was back taking pictures on day 4)

If you want to see the legal precedent it´s presented at the EPA´s website you can read the text from the John Marshall Law Review...

We do not yet have any word on the date of our appeal before the zoning board of appeals, but I would assume the hearings are open to the public and the usual date for the next board of appeals meeting is supposed to be June 7th (Wednesday evening around 7PM). The lawn-policewoman is usually the adviser to the citizen board so it will not be without contest.

We have been trying to get media attention too but have no response to date. Still working on many angles. If you can fit it into your schedule and you're still interested in pushing for this type of law to be discredited, we´d really be glad to see supporters in the room... and for those who will be unable to attend in person, may prefer to call (513-867-5300) or to write a protest to the city council, or to parks insisting on strong support.

This is your chance to really help catch them in the act of aggression. Put them in the spotlight.

Anyway, that´s the scoop from here and I know you´re busy but you´ve read this far so you either care about environmental issues, wildlife, or violations of constitutional rights or maybe just the ethics of public service, so you will simply do what you can. We appreciate your efforts. Hope things are going smoothely for you these days. Take care. Hope your life is simple and your habitat is healthy.

And if you got here late... the saga continues...

Ideas should be sent to

Penelope Press
by email.

With Boots and Yardstick in Orchard