When most of us think about crime, we think about an action that hurts another person- theft, murder, rape.
What we probably do not see are front gardens with vegetables growing in them, and the vegetable gardeners themselves.
When Julie Bass decided to replant her front yard with vegetables - in neat, raised beds- after replacing a sewer line, she didn’t know that she was breaking the city of Oak Park’s code for front yard planting. What she did think was that she was doing something to mitigate her grocery bill, to teach her children about food, and to ensure her family had ready access to organically grown produce. A very American notion, yes?
Not according to Oak Park city planner Kevin Rulkowski, who has insisted that the word ‘suitable’ in the code means ‘common’, according to Webster’s dictionary. (Feel free to look up the definition
here, and make sure to read the comments on the bottom of the page.) In one interview, Mr. Rulkowski insists that most people do not want to “see that” in their neighbor’s front yards, leading one to believe that Mr. Rulkowski is offended in some way by vegetables.
So, Julie Bass was charged with a misdemeanor, and faced three months in jail as a result. Rather than complying with the city in order to have charges dropped, she decided to fight, and an aggressive public campaign has ensued, putting Oak Park on the map, and driving the town council underground. To add insult to injury, two misdemeanors were added for failure to license the families dogs. In compliance with this, Julie and her husband tried to license the animals (again, the law was vague, and Julie did not know she was outside this ordinance), only to find that the offices were closed on Friday, due to budget cuts. She licensed the dogs the following Monday, and was told to “bring the documents to court, and they will probably be dismissed”, according to Bass.
When she brought the documents to court, the prosecutor verbally dismissed them before going forward on the garden charges. Later on, a judge from another district dismissed without prejudice the garden charges, and the prosecutor’s office reinstated the charges for the dogs, and Bass will have to appear in court on the 26th of this month. To dismiss without prejudice on the garden charge means that those charges can still be reinstated at a later date. The case has effectively not been dropped.
Bass also attempted to obtain a copy of the town ordinances, but was told that hard copies were not available to the public. She could look up the ordinances at the library- but it is closed for renovation at this time.
In trying to reach a city council member, I have only had contact with Gerald Naftaly, the city mayor, who sent me this message; “There’s nothing obvious to you. you’re not hearing the facts, just one side. ‘you’re entitled to your own opinion, You’re not entitled to your own facts’. -- moynihan I have no obligation to anyone but our oak park residents. Thanks.”[sic] In other interviews, Mayor Naftaly said that Bass would not be put behind bars, and that the ordinance would be reconsidered if residents and local organizations object to the ordinance as is.
Now, there are people out there that believe that front yard gardens are an eyesore, but has this always been a prevalent attitude in our history? No, it has not. In fact, Americans have often gardened during times of economic stress, war, and for basic survival. Not until the peaceful post-war era of the 1950s, when people flocked to suburbia and the “American Dream” did vegetable gardening fall out of vogue- and out of necessity for many Americans. This was also a time of high taxation, and healthy employment. There is a pattern, here, folks.
But there is also a pattern of creeping control. Compliance, or “forcing compliance” have become frequently heard words that find most of us automatically nodding our heads in agreement, without any practical or critical thought on the individual issue. Today, with our food system in decline, our private property rights under scrutiny, and our jobs disappearing into other lands, it becomes apparent that critical thought is a must if we want to ensure any sort of valuable legacy to our children and their children. Compliance is hardly ever a “must”- it is more often the way in which the Bill of Rights is ignored in favor of a patriarchal government, whether at the village level, or at the federal level. It is more often something to be fought, and it is rarely “for our own good”.
At best, the folks running Oak Park at present are, perhaps, stuck in a bygone era. A time of cookie-cutter front yards and houses and families. It is an impractical mindset, and one that needs reevaluation, perhaps from the confines of forced retirement by the voters of Oak Park. At worst, they came into government with a plan to ensure their own happiness above the rights of the residents of Oak Park.
As it happens, election time is almost here, and there is a challenger to Mayor Naftaly, who has released this statement: “Oak Park is going through a very difficult time with record numbers of foreclosures, property values sinking, and crime an all too often occurrence and threat. Devoting scarce public safety resources to prosecuting a vegetable gardener does not reflect our needs. Sadly, when oak Park residents hear crime, they think of theft, arson, hate crimes and burglary- not vegetable gardens. We need city leadership to focus on jobs, fighting crime, and building safe neighborhoods.” - Marian Meisner McClellan.
