Woman Sues City of Tulsa For Cutting Down Her Edible Garden

This is an outrage. My gradnfather in Italy used to be farmer and he made an ugly patch turf just opposite his house into an edible garden, where there would be scrap metal next to it. There very many different vegetables and we would collect buckets of snails for eatery. It wasnt even on his property, but nobody would have thought of undoing it.

As long as she does not sell it, which she should not if she does not subject herself to the standards and controls involved with food, she should be left alone on her private property.

Those codes exist so Americans dont get the idea to plant their own food in their vast gardens and cut out retailers.

I got cited two years ago for having too much brush in my back yard. Yet the orientation of my house is such that the back yard can't be seen from the road from any angle. Also, the "brush" was bamboo. That I planted as a natural fence.

Government is good for us, though (just in case some jack-booted...I mean nice...feds are reading this).

/TOA

You guys are over-looking a key piece of information.

She says she had problems with code enforcement at another property she lived at and, this time, she was sure to plant edible plants as that, according to code, would be excluded from the one foot rule.

So - sure it seems the city is over-reaching and that likely someone powerful or a fellow citizen has a grudge against her - but there also seems to be a bit more tho the story than we know. It's possible that she notoriously doesn't maintain her property, to the point of it being an eyesore or affecting other property values, and the city was tired of it.

First, I suspect these code enforcers don't have a clue what an edible plant is. Secondly, they are you typical mindless beaurcrats that follow the "rule" of law without looking at the details.

In Roanoke, VAan Asian family planted a garden plot between I-581 and the N&W railroad tracks a few years ago and the garden was beautiful but the city cut it down..

I don't agree with the gov in Tulsa. I see city, county and state goverments today as a mindless steam roller that plows over everything and doesn't act asif they are en elected gov but a dictorial administration that has grown so large that it can not effectively govern.

I knew tulsa was ugly but do they really not have trees there? Wtf?

As far as I am concerned, you don't really own your property. In the state I come from, just don't pay your taxes for three years and you will find out who really owns your property. The state will take it, you only rent it from them.

Also, my state is an open land state. Which means anyone can come onto your property, hike, hunt whatever and unless you post it ( according to state rules ) you can't stop them. But if you do post it, you find folks will tear down your signs and unless you catch them in the act, nothing will be done about it.

You are only allowed one unregistered motor vehicle, start collecting stuff and the towns or cities will fine you.

So, I don't see that one actually owns their property, they only rent it from the state.

Originally posted by herenow
As far as I am concerned, you don't really own your property. In the state I come from, just don't pay your taxes for three years and you will find out who really owns your property. The state will take it, you only rent it from them.

Also, my state is an open land state. Which means anyone can come onto your property, hike, hunt whatever and unless you post it ( according to state rules ) you can't stop them. But if you do post it, you find folks will tear down your signs and unless you catch them in the act, nothing will be done about it.

You are only allowed one unregistered motor vehicle, start collecting stuff and the towns or cities will fine you.

So, I don't see that one actually owns their property, they only rent it from the state.

And you think thats all ok? By the way what state is it?

Here i can register car more than 26 years old for 40 bucks for a 10 year plate...that really helps out the unregistered bit hahaha. We just have to not have obvious crap missin off then and be registered.

reply to post by phroziac


No, absolutely not! I do not think that is OK. One should be able to do what they want with the property and land they buy. No one has the right to tell them what color to paint their house or what they may be allowed to have in their yard.

I am from New Hampshire, the so called Live Free or Die state, what a joke that is!

Reason why my garden is inside

2nd

reply to post by jude11


I will say this once for all you people that have no faith in God , the new world order has an agenda and that is to make every person on earth to rely on them for everything and food is at the top of the list , every nation is run by the new world order and those that are not are being conquered . The bible predicted all the countries that had uprisings last year and the bible says Syria and Iran are next to go.

The bottom line is they will be assaulting every ones gardens and the Christians first , senetae bill S510 makes it illegal to grow your own food . When they do have total c trol they will make you bow to their system / false Gd to get whatever you need if you refuse then you starve until you are locked away in a camp or killed.

These small stories are just the beginning of the bigger picture , you guys should really look more on depth to what the bible says and events around the world . It is coming to a head.

During the 80s and 90s, I owned and ran a design service. One of my specialties was custom home plans.

I cannot count the hours I spent pouring over community ordinances, city zoning laws, community development restrictions, etc. I can say that I was almost always amazed when I did so. It seemed someone had stayed awake at night thinking of ways they could restrict people from living on their own property:

• No satellite dishes or antennas for TV reception
  
• No clothes lines; use a dryer.
  
• No cars parked overnight in a driveway; they must be in a garage.
  
• No gardens.
  
• Lawn must be maintained to within a certain height (3" is common)
  
• Any fencing must be chain-link and maintained.
  
• No bare areas in lawn.
  
• Driveways must be concrete or asphalt.
  
• Restrictions on lawn furniture.
  
• Restrictions on porch furniture.

That's a partial list... and the crazy thing (to me) is that the more restrictions an area had, the more expensive it was to buy into the community. But, 'tis not my job to wonder why, and I did my job very well. I appeared before quite a few boards to get variances for my customers.

Maybe that's why this happened:

I owned an older Colonial home with a two-story front porch. The house actually predated the city. Sometime before I bought it, someone apparently thought a nice coat of paint would stop the rot inside the porch roof and I never climbed all the way up there to check it. When the paint peeled off, I realized my mistake.

Long story short: I was given an order by the City Building Department to repair the porch. I could not do the work to replace it like it was originally in the time allotted, so I tore the old roof off, topped the columns, and installed a weatherproof deck on the second floor. While I was working on the deck, I was issued a summons to appear in City Court for violations. Silly me had forgotten to get a permit; no problem, I drove down to get the permit to do what I had been ordered to do by the people issuing the permit. But that wasn't enough. I was served another summons, this time for failure to have handrails around a second-floor deck that was still under construction.

I won that case, embarrassing the head Inspector in the process, but that was only the beginnings of my problems. Eventually I simply let them condemn the building, sold it for a song, and moved back home. Then came the funniest part: I had been buying a city business license for several years, and after moving away I received a phone call from the city. They were upset about me not buying a city license that year. I explained that I no longer ran the business in their city and did not own property in the city. They didn't care... apparently they expected me to continue paying for a city business license after driving me out of the city!

Of course, I didn't.

The real problem is this: people have given up their rights to own their property in return for making sure everything always looks perfect. Local governments have decided that they deserve the power to enforce this (even when no restrictions are specified in the deed). As a result, people inside cities now believe they have not only a right but a duty to control what others do on property they purchased. Welcome to the city.

Out here, no one, and I mean no one, tells me what I do on my land. I have evicted the game warden several times. The police, when they do come up, come up because someone who lives here called them. When I built my shop, I didn't fill out any paperwork; I swiped my debit card at the lumber company. I plant what I want to plant (within certain laws) and eat whatever I grow. My water comes from a well; I water my garden or wash my car whenever I want to; water use restrictions do not apply to me. I burn brush in an open brush pit when I decide it is time to burn it.

I live my life and leave my neighbors alone. They live their lives and leave me alone. Welcome to the country.


All of these communities use home'owner' annual payments to subsidize their operation. These are paid through the mortgage escrow. Now, when these houses become foreclosures, and the banks refuse to pay, what will happen to these community overseers? They will cease to exist. And all that will be left of this manicured vision of perfection will be empty houses in disrepair with yards grown head-high. It reminds me of an old saying:

"When man disposes of waste, we call it a landfill and it is uninhabitable for hundreds of years. When nature disposes of waste, we call it a beach and flock there in droves."

This story is indicative of homes once regulated to be perfect losing their ability to do so. Those that are truly hurt are those who are the poorest and need hurt the least. They do not own the property any more; they own the privilege of living there as long as they follow the rules someone once implemented. Thank God above, I am out of this type of life.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by kosmicjack
You guys are over-looking a key piece of information.

She says she had problems with code enforcement at another property she lived at and, this time, she was sure to plant edible plants as that, according to code, would be excluded from the one foot rule.

So - sure it seems the city is over-reaching and that likely someone powerful or a fellow citizen has a grudge against her - but there also seems to be a bit more tho the story than we know. It's possible that she notoriously doesn't maintain her property, to the point of it being an eyesore or affecting other property values, and the city was tired of it.

I stand to be corrected, but I think this probably has more to do with agenda 21 than anything. The A-21 plan was/is to create groups of local busybodies, including the Chambers of Commerce and homeowners associations to put pressure on city councils to keep everyone dependent on local businesses. Growing your own food is anathema to them because it makes you independent. Big no no.

Originally posted by frazzle
The A-21 plan was/is to create groups of local busybodies, including the Chambers of Commerce and homeowners associations to put pressure on city councils to keep everyone dependent on local businesses. Growing your own food is anathema to them because it makes you independent. Big no no.

Citation very much needed.

reply to post by kosmicjack


Yep, sounds like a neighbor to neighbor conflict. Some people want mowed and edged lawns for everyone.

What legal restrictions are in place for the area property may have a bearing. And there is always the possibility a run-a-muck home owners association.

reply to post by stanguilles7


There's so much information out there about this that I'm surprised everyone didn't know of it since its already been in effect for many years, probably in your own town. But you can start here:

occupycorporatism.com...

Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the UN, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human beings impact the environment.

The Agenda 21 plan is to assist in social and economic issues by providing maintained healthcare and vaccinations, implement controls on how to govern the populous and make decisions for the people of the world through actions taken by the UN.

Their plans are to focus on the global impact of use of land, education and depopulation through control measures. Through the elimination of personal property rights, private education (including homeschooled children) and eugenics (forced sterility), the globalization of the planet can be achieved.

The UN plans to take over conservation and management of resources for their developmental purposes. By abolishing personal property rights, the demise of rural area living, removal of personal ownership of natural resources, they will take away the power away from individuals are place it firmly in the hands of governments who have agreed to these controls.

Originally posted by herenow
reply to post by phroziac

 

No, absolutely not! I do not think that is OK. One should be able to do what they want with the property and land they buy. No one has the right to tell them what color to paint their house or what they may be allowed to have in their yard.

I am from New Hampshire, the so called Live Free or Die state, what a joke that is!

edit on 17-6-2012 by herenow because: (no reason given)

Ah, the state without a seatbelt law! I once heard of a biker who was told he needed to paint his (concrete block garage). So he painted the blocks alternating shades of pink and purple.....then they told him it needed to be a respectable color. He said he liked those colors!...

Now i find the property use thing interesting. I used to have a neighbor that owned 30 acres of land. Most of it just in its natural setting. Mostly wooded, some of it was more like a prairie though. Even had 4 ponds.

Infact, I never realized just how big 30 acres was until I ended up seeing a map of our neighborhood when I had a meeting with the zoning and ordinance enforcement man at the city hall.... Anyway, he also had a large 4 acre or so lawn, and unless you knew him you wouldn't even realize he owned the woods. And I'm pretty sure he never had no tresspassing/hunting/fishing signs posted, so .....hmm?

But tearing down signs and being required to catch them in the act to do anything about it? WTF? that's stupid as hell.

I wonder if michigan is like that. People will post those signs to a ridiculous degree. Like they were trying to make it impossible to tear them down by the sheer volume of them. It's ugly if you ask me, and they shouldn't have to do that.

I much prefer the signs that say you *CAN* do those things..haha. But it is kind of weird to just be driving down a road hearing shotgun blasts..

Originally posted by mytheroy
Reason why my garden is inside

2nd

Someone noticed you're suddenly using three times the electricity you used before this. Suddenly the feds are doing a no knock raid at 4 in the morning to seize your...well, clearly they thought you had more growing than you do. Oh, and they shoot your dog too.

Crazy world we live in....

Quote from TheRedNeck,

"Out here, no one, and I mean no one, tells me what I do on my land. I have evicted the game warden several times. The police, when they do come up, come up because someone who lives here called them. When I built my shop, I didn't fill out any paperwork; I swiped my debit card at the lumber company. I plant what I want to plant (within certain laws) and eat whatever I grow. My water comes from a well; I water my garden or wash my car whenever I want to; water use restrictions do not apply to me. I burn brush in an open brush pit when I decide it is time to burn it.

I live my life and leave my neighbors alone. They live their lives and leave me alone. Welcome to the country."

Hey RedNeck, I gotta one-up you here.

I can get up in the morning (or night, whatever) walk out on my front porch naked with a shotgun and shoot some critter and no one cares. Closest neighbors are a 1/4 mile or more away.

Should have killed that raccoon near the chicken coop the other night but he was just after my garbage.

reply to post by frazzle


I know what 'agenda 21' is. What I asked you to prove was this statement of yours, which your subsequent post offers no substantiation for whatsoever:

The A-21 plan was/is to create groups of local busybodies, including the Chambers of Commerce and homeowners associations to put pressure on city councils to keep everyone dependent on local businesses. Growing your own food is anathema to them because it makes you independent

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by frazzle

 

I know what 'agenda 21' is. What I asked you to prove was this statement of yours, which your subsequent post offers no substantiation for whatsoever:

The A-21 plan was/is to create groups of local busybodies, including the Chambers of Commerce and homeowners associations to put pressure on city councils to keep everyone dependent on local businesses. Growing your own food is anathema to them because it makes you independent

Which specific part of my statement are you questioning? I'll just take a stab at one of them ....

www.crossroad.to...

reply to post by MichiganSwampBuck


Living in a rural area as has its advantages and disadvantages, but I love it.