This story is starting to reek of harassment if you ask me.
http://www.infowars.com/front-yard-g...s-new-charges/
Printable View
This story is starting to reek of harassment if you ask me.
http://www.infowars.com/front-yard-g...s-new-charges/
And the citizens of Oak Park are letting their tax dollars be wasted on this why?
This story has been really odd from the very start.
Ms. Bass obviously has somebody gunning for her and it has never really been clear who that might be.
I keep following this story because it is just plain weird.
I'm not saying this isn't true but I'd trust it more if it were coming from some other site. Alex Jones has an agenda to push so I can't help but wonder if he's really given us all the facts.
http://kitchengardeners.org/blogs/ro...ontyard-garden
Huffpo has a link too, and google turns up a lot of hits, getting lots of traction with "agitator sites" but the story is real.
The city seems to be digging up whatever it can find to discredit her as a good citizen now.
Odd part is...I read where it was the city that destroyed her yard while doing some maintenance...instead of replanting the grass they tore up, she plants a garden.
Between neighborhood ASSociations, and local ordinances we could all be selectively enforced for something. Dayton, Ohiya has an ordinance forbidding working on your own car on your own property, even in a garage with the doors closed. There are silly association rules that have the force of law when broken such as a green grass lawn. What is so stupid, is that grass is not an indigenous plant everywhere. There are places grass will just not grow.Here is a story that hit the news a few years back. A man did jail time because he could not get grass to grow.
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=22758
aj is alot closer on things then you think. its actually a good place to readQuote:
Originally Posted by KJ6BSO
I don;t see why there is an issue here. If there is an ordinance against front yard gardens then she has 4 simple choices
1) Don't grow vegetables in the front yard.
2) Grow them in the back yard.
3) Get support and a petition and change the law.
4) Move.
Ditto for the dog license issue. if the local area requires a dog license then she has four finite choices.
1) Get the proper dog license.
2) Don't keep dogs
3) Work towards getting the law changed so licenses are not required.
4) Move to an area that doesn't require dog licenses
Very simple. No need for this woman to play the role of anarchist/victim.
True. Still, with that in mind...Quote:
Originally Posted by n2ize
If she is being singled out, ie, they are applying selective enforcement, then she has a case. She may not win, mind you, but she has a case.
If.
Now, if she's not being singled out (and they can prove it if they need to) then she needs to shut up and quit moaning.
Infowars dot com, because there's a war on in your mind. Talk about a slow news day, but it's a change from the usual New World Order conspiracy stuff.
"No need for this woman to play the role of anarchist/victim."
Oh but there IS for an attention whore with poor little me syndrome. Here's how it works, the city damaged the lawn doing some maintenance work so instead of fixing it she plants an illegal garden as a show of defiance. Then when the city says "Up yours, up mine, up everybody's it takes time, but we're working on it." (Worst Band In The World, 10cc) she complains the big bad city is singling her out... boo hoo hoo, poor little me.
Here's the rub, her lawyer thinks "singling out" is a trump card when it's really obfuscating the true case of legal retaliation which isn't a trump card either. Truth be known the woman is flouting the law and the city has just cause for enforcement. Hey lady, you'll not set a precedent so keep thumbing and you'll get a bloody nose!