Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Today's Letters: Lawn police a symptom of abusive government

By LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Published June 5, 2007

City: Your lawn is dead. Residents: We know June 1, story  

Can anyone actually believe the gall of our own city management team in St. Petersburg - to be spending their time issuing citations and fines to residents for having dead lawns?

My belief is that we the residents own the city, the land we call our own, the water resources we choose to use as we see fit, and the folks we employ to manage the various functions of our government. For these government entities to abuse the authority we have granted them is just unbelievable.

Every once in a while, I have received citations that were issued by an abusive and overreaching arm of my government. I merely sent the citation along with a sternly worded message to the mayor, and that was the end of any issue. The citizens in this case should do exactly the same!

Sometimes our government pushes us around with their powers, and sometimes we have to push them back.

Jason LaCroix, St. Petersburg

Code cuts unevenly

Thank you for this article by Michael Kruse. It showed how far St. Petersburg city government has deviated from the norm for code enforcement found in other Tampa Bay area communities.

Although I fear reprisals from the St. Petersburg Code Compliance Assistance Department, which routinely orders families to perform thousands of dollars in superficial improvements on short notice, I felt I must express my opposition to the city's arbitrary and irregular enforcement of regulations regarding property owners.

I know of situations in which the city has arbitrarily ordered citizens to plant and irrigate - with potable water - in drought conditions grass in neighborhoods excluded from recycled water service. The time and expense of such policing could be better spent in enforcing watering restrictions in neighborhoods such as Snell Isle and Allendale, where wealthy supporters of Mayor Rick Baker have the benefit of recycled water but flagrantly irrigate their lawns in the hottest hours of restricted days.

The city needs to be far more evenhanded in its code enforcement and also to back off its draconian codes requiring struggling Florida families to maintain lawns more appropriate to English estates.

Jerome Fuqua, St. Petersburg

Time to call off the lawn police June 2, editorial

Enforcement should penalize lush lawns

From an environmental perspective, the city of St. Petersburg and its code enforcers have it backward. If the code were written with environmental friendliness and sustainability in mind, the code enforcers would be writing tickets for lush manicured lawns as evidence of high water, fertilizer and pesticide use, all of which extensively damage the natural environment.

Bill Bilodeau, St. Petersburg

Set new landscape rules

How in heaven's name did St. Petersburg earn a "green cities" designation when the city administration promotes foolishness like requiring people to install plants in the midst of a severe drought? Sure, sod or plants would look better than bare dirt, but now is a particularly inopportune time to start enforcing the city's antiquated landscape codes. Water is scarce, and will continue to be so even after our seasonal rains begin, thanks to intensive development throughout our community.

St. Petersburg - and other Florida cities and counties - would be wise to adopt a form of the model landscape ordinance proposed by the Florida Native Plant Society. The society has published a handbook for this ordinance designed to be used by local governments. It offers legal and policy tools, as well as a sample ordinance section with language that can assist local governments in promoting sustainable landscapes.

The society subcontracted University of Florida's Levin School of Law to research relevant law and develop the framework for the model ordinance guidebook. Pinellas County, St. Petersburg and other municipalities should take advantage of the groundwork that has been laid for them by the Florida Native Plant Society and adopt rules that truly make them "green cities."

Jan Allyn, Largo

Two roads to tax relief June 2, commentary by Rick Kriseman

Keep it affordable

State Rep. Rick Kriseman and many other local government officials say one thing but emphasize the other. They say property taxes are hurting citizens but emphasize we must continue to pay or our quality of living will suffer. Between 2001 and 2006 local government property tax collections grew 83 percent (see Basics of tax relief get nod, June 2). Show us this whopping figure.

Where did all this money go? Did our quality of living improve 83 percent over this time? We still read articles like the citizen questioning government savings because officials don't install energy- saving bulbs in government buildings, or the code person driving around Lakewood Estates wasting gas and time on finding brown yards.

I am sick and tired of the scare tactics used by government officials. I realize that they are protecting their jobs and enjoyed having the extra money to spend. We taxpayers cannot exist and keep paying high taxes, high insurance, high gas. Without us there will be nobody here in Florida to pay the high property taxes and their salaries.

Which has priority, the quality of life we have now while paying and paying or a quality of life that we can afford to pay? If we cannot afford to live in Florida, and it's at that point, who gives a damn about the quality of life in Florida.

James R. Luck, St. Petersburg

Homeowners insurance

Insurance excesses

I am getting ready to send in my third of four installments on my homeowners insurance of $851, on a house I pay $750 a year in taxes. In 2004, I paid $850 for homeowners insurance. I was told that the cost to replace my house had caused the increase.

My questions are: Did building product costs increase by 300 percent and did their cost of labor increase 300 percent? Where is the insurance relief promised by the governor? The cost of my non-hurricane insurance is $450. The rest of the $3, 300 is for hurricane-related cost. Plus a $3, 500 deductible.

Edward White, St. Petersburg

Visa dispute keeps couple on opposite sides of world June 2, story

Deportation madness

I didn't really read that, did I? The lady who married her husband in Japan and came to this country, only to find out years later that she was illegal and was being deported?

We have millions of illegals in this country who are not being deported because "they have come here for a better life, " and we deport one lady who thought she was coming legally.

Something is wrong with that. My idea is simple. Let her stay and deport the other millions who sneaked across the border .

Of course if we did that some of our eminent politicians would lose out on the Hispanic vote. Can't have that, can we? Their excuse is that "our economy needs these illegals because no one else wants those jobs." Let's give the Americans try. Only hire Americans and raise their salaries. Maybe that will work. I am sure that the Mexican government would not allow me to come to their country and demand the things they are demanding.

James Bardsley, Madeira Beach

Cleaning lady revives an ancient custom June 3, story

No sanctuary

It's time that churches distance themselves from the nonsensical tradition of sanctuary. This custom that guarantees safety in religious sites has no legal standing and should not be endorsed by the church. By granting an illegal alien sanctuary, churches are harboring a fugitive. Churches that agree to harbor illegal immigrants enable people to avoid prosecution for their crimes. The church must respect the rule of law in this country. Giving sanctuary to illegal immigrants is circumventing the law.

Andrew Szarejko, Palm Harbor

[Last modified June 4, 2007, 23:13:08]