IN THE WEEDS? Tuesday's City Council meeting could produce the lawn police

Building and Licensing Director Jim Grant told the codes and ordinances committee this picture he took recently shows the need for a weed ordinance (City of Rochester image)

ROCHESTER - Big Brother is on the prowl in Rochester looking to impose tighter restrictions on RVs, chickens and yes, even the length of your lawn's grass.

The weed ordinance that will be up for passage at Tuesday's City Council meeting would force homeowners in Residential 1 and 2 zones to maintain their lawns at a maximum height of 10 inches. The legislation is based on a globalist-inspired set of requirements called the International Property Maintenance Code, which seeks conformity in how property should be maintained along an array of fronts.

During a codes and ordinance committee meeting last month, it was proffered that weeds are unsightly to a neighborhood and provide cover for rodents that can be a health hazard.

Codes and ordinance chair Alexander De Geofroy noted that while the proposed ordinance may be unpopular with some residents, he wanted it to go to the City Council for a vote and made a motion to do so.

The motion was seconded and passed by a majority vote with only City Councilor David Walker voting against it.

Tuesday's vote comes fast on the heels of a heated public hearing during last month's workshop where residents lambasted Building and Licensing Director Jim Grant's proposed rule tightening on occupancy of RVs on private property.

Grant said he lives in a R1 district and shouldn't have to have a neighbor who has one or two occupied RVs in his driveway that can affect his his quality of life due to noise and traffic.

He said he wanted an ordinance that sets a limit of 15 days occupancy per year.

About 10 or 15 residents spoke in opposition to the proposed ordinance, saying a person should be able to have whatever and whomever they want on property they own and pay taxes on.

"Don't charge me taxes, and you can tell me what to do, but if I'm paying taxes, I can do what I want. It's my land," said one irate resident.

"I'm sure the city manager can't wait to have this passed," said Chris Rice, a former city councilor and frequent critic of city government. "She probably can't wait to hire four or five more government employees to ensure compliance and oversight."

Many in he audience invoked the "castle doctrine" that enshrines a property owner's right to do what he wants on land he owns.

It should be noted that no citizens spoke in favor of either the RV or grass length ordinances.

Former state rep Cliff Newton said he remembers the fight in the Statehouse when they were trying to pass the International Property Maintenance Code at the state level.

"There were like 67 countries that had approved it," he said. "It covered not only grass length, but also peeling paint, broken windows. The Republicans voted it down, but later the Democrats got in and passed it."

Even codes and ordinances chair de Geofroy said he feared there might be backlash from residents.

"We don't want to be seen as the lawn police," he quipped.

And if lawn length and RV occupancy isn't intrusive enough, the City Council will soon be considering more restrictions on those raising chickens in the city, including a prohibition of selling even a single egg to a neighbor or friend.

That public hearing will likely be scheduled for Jan. 14 in City Council chambers at City Hall.

Meanwhile for now, the RV ordinance is going to the planning board for an unspecified amendment.