Select Page

Reason… OK, more likely public pressure… prevails:

Sacramento won’t fine couple who let lawn die
By Matt Weiser – mweiser@sacbee.com
Published 12:00 am PDT Thursday, July 3, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1

Sacramento couple who let lawn die to save water face $746 fine
By Matt Weiser – mweiser@sacbee.com

Published 12:00 am PDT Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1

Their small brick home was declared a “public nuisance” in violation of city code section 17.68.010, which states that front yards “shall be irrigated, landscaped and maintained.”

Irrigated? Check; she waters her ferns and hydrangeas.
Landscaped? Check; plants, trees and mulch.
Maintained? Check; plants alive… mulch behaving in an appropriately mulch-like manner. I see no violation here. Move along.

Love the hand-watered lawn next door. Kudos to the photographer.

I think she should install a chocolate garden… nothing but brown-colored flowers and foliage. No law against that. Or is there?

If it’s watered and maintained and irrigated, then it’s legal, correct? Seems to me the perceived offense is the lack of green. If so, then her neighbors with bermudagrass-infused lawns (a common sight in East Sacramento) are breaking the Green Law every winter unless they reseed with annual ryegrass in time to cover up… the brown. Ooh, maybe she should plant a combination of bermudagrass, oxalis and nutsedge. What a green lawn that would be. Ridiculousness.

%d bloggers like this: