– Food freedom alert: Bureaucrats in Michigan threaten woman with jail time for planting vegetable garden in her own yard (Natural News, July 11, 2011):
(NaturalNews) The anti-food tyrants are at it again, this time threatening a Michigan woman with fines and jail time for her “crime” of daring to plant tomatoes and peppers in her front yard. Your help is needed to take action and fire off an avalanche of complaints against the local bureaucrats in Michigan who are threatening this woman (see action items below).
This story involves a woman named Julie Bass, whose front yard was dug up during sewer line construction. After the construction project was completed, instead of planting grass, she thought it would be far more practical to plant a vegetable garden. Watch the brief news reports on this at:
Vegetable gardens not only provide organic, high-nutrient live foods to those who grow them, studies have also linked gardening to enormous health benefits such as sharp reductions in the risk of breast cancer (http://www.naturalnews.com/025280_c…) and even lung cancer. They also create an environment of food security while promoting eco-friendly practices. There’s no food that’s more “local” than the food grown in your own front yard, right? It’s good for public health, great for the environment, and fantastic for teaching children useful skills that get them out of the house and away from the X-Box.
Thou shalt not grow food in Oak Park
None of this seems to matter to Kevin Rulkowski, the city planner for the city of Oak Park, Michigan. With a nasty arrogance that seems to be increasingly common among ignorant bureaucrats, he complains in a video news report that Julie Bass’s garden is in violation of city code and Julie has to dig up her entire garden or face punitive enforcement actions by the city (which could include jail time).
City code says, “All unpaved portions of the site shall be planted with grass, shrubbery or other suitable live plant material.”
But city planner Kevin Rulkowski, who really just comes off as an arrogant bully in his attacks on Julie Bass, proclaims, “If you look in Webster’s dictionary, suitable means common. And you can look all throughout the entire city and you’ll never find a vegetable garden that consumes the entire front yard.” (http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=1D577…).
Hold on a minute, Mr. Rulkowski. Suitable does not mean “common.” Suitable means appropriate within the context in which it is being used. Check any dictionary and you’ll see the definition of “suitable” being either “appropriate” or “proper.”