Officials Sue Couple Who Removed Their Lawn

Hugh Pickens writes "The LA Times reports that Orange County officials are locked in a legal battle with a couple accused of violating city ordinances for replacing the grass on their lawn with wood chips and drought-tolerant plants, reducing their water usage from 299,221 gallons in 2007 to 58,348 gallons in 2009. The dispute began two years ago, when Quan and Angelina Ha tore out the grass in their front yard. In drought-plagued Southern California, the couple said, the lush grass had been soaking up tens of thousands of gallons of water — and hundreds of dollars — each year. 'We've got a newborn, so we want to start worrying about her future,' said Quan Ha, an information technology manager for Kelley Blue Book. But city officials told the Has they were violating several city laws that require that 40% of residential yards to be landscaped predominantly with live plants. Last summer, the couple tried to appease the city by building a fence around the yard and planting drought-tolerant greenery — lavender, rosemary, horsetail, and pittosporum, among others. But according to the city, their landscaping still did not comply with city standards. At the end of January, the Has received a letter saying they had been charged with a misdemeanor violation and must appear in court. The couple could face a maximum penalty of six months in jail and a $1,000 fine for their grass-free, eco-friendly landscaping scheme. 'It's just funny that we pay our taxes to the city and the city is now prosecuting us with our own money,' says Quan Ha."

Comments

Dumb Government Abuse of Power

[pubwvj]

Why government should have no powers.

Re:Dumb Government Abuse of Power

[shoehornjob]

Dumb ass. With no government the corporations would run everything and those without money would be shit outa....doh. Ok so we're not that far away from that now but at least your congress critter has to win a popularity contest to get elected.

Re:Dumb Government Abuse of Power

[Rakshasa Taisab]

What makes you think the price you paid for the property included those rights?

If you wanted a clown house you would have no problem buying some remote property or pay extra for a place that allows such so that no one would complain. Until then what you are buying is property sold with the conditions as stated by city ordinances.

Re:It's their lawn

[Anonymous Coward]

So If I want to decorate my dead lawn with old refrigerators and non-working cars your okay with that?

Re:It's their lawn

[AuMatar]

And if you actually lived next to someone like that, your resale value would go down 10-15%. While I agree in theory with that for most property, this is a case where their actions effect others.

Re:It's their lawn

[Eunuchswear]

i've never figured why anyone would pay money to a private organisation chaired by their neigbours, just to have the pleasure of them policing your front yard for you

To keep the niggers out of course.

Re:It's their lawn

[MrHanky]

That may be true for a geek who never leaves his basement, but for normal people who actually use their garden (at least in the summer), an eyesore in the neighborhood will in fact harm the garden's use value. And that's actually the reason why it will impact the resale value as well.

Of course, the very idea that one's actions actually have consequences for other people runs contrary to Libertarian idiocy^H^H^H^H^H^H thinking, so you might be better off to discount that little nugget of reality to uphold your illusion of consistent thought.

Re:No one is wrong here...

[Brandybuck]

... the law requires 40% live ground cover, so they should be given a citation.

All hail the Supreme Wisdom of the local lawmakers! They are wiser than us! They are better able to live our lives than we are ourselves! Whatever they say we must do without question! Do not question authority, worship it!