“Sustainable Growth”? The Government Is Ripping Up Food Gardens

image source

Victor Garr
Activist Post

The government is ripping out gardens. To stop this, people have to go to the root of the problem which is the enforcement codes themselves. They are new, they’re international, and they’re grossly unconstitutional. And why not? They are part of Agenda 21 which is intended to end property rights.

The Fourth amendment is quite clear:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It doesn’t say, “except if the city comes up with a regulation giving themselves (on paper) the authority to do anything at all to people’s property, based on something they don’t like about it. Or based on nothing at all.

San Antonio’s residential enforcement code is international, coming from the International Code Council (ICC). It was put in, in 2009. Why was it changed? How many other cities have sections from the ICC-developed code?

(Speaking of global rules/plans/dictates people are not aware of, 2009 is also the year when the Lisbon Treaty illegally abolished Britain.)

A legal scholar in food issues and familiar with local, state, federal and international law around it, commented:

The ICC code raises the issue regarding separation of powers, as the authority to enter into international treaty is solely held to the federal government and expressly prohibited to the states.


Here is the San Antonio property maintenance code, with comments in brackets after each part. Before reading it, look at the Fourth Amendment again.

Now, the ICC Code in San Antonio, Texas:

ANNUAL NOTICE: 107:1 Notice to person responsible – if another violation of the same subsection of this code occurs on or before the first anniversary of this notice, the City, without further notice, may proceed with the prosecution of the said violation. 

302.1 Exterior Maintenance. All exterior property and premises shall be maintained in a clean, safe and sanitary condition and free of outside placement, hazardous vegetation, or surface hazards. The occupant shall keep that part of the exterior property which such occupant occupies or controls in a clean and sanitary condition.

[All is entirely undefined. None of it requires evidence of anyone having been harmed, or inconvenienced, or even noticing. What is “free of outside placement”? Nothing may be outside? What is “hazardous vegetation” (especially in the context of DHS having defined “organic” as a biosecurity threat ? What are “surface hazards”? What surface? Grass? Who defines them? Would children’s bikes apply? A raised bed garden? An in-ground garden? A shovel? A pond? A swing set? Would this not cover any or all objects that might be anywhere on the property?]

302.4 Weeds: All improved premises and exterior property shall be maintained free from weeds or plant growth in excess of 12 inches in height. All noxious weeds shall be prohibited. Weeds shall be defined as all grasses, annual plants and vegetation, other than trees and shrubs provided; however, the term shall not include cultivated flowers and gardens of native grasses, perennials and annual plants installed as part of a landscaping design.

[If one looks carefully at this section on weeds (the other sections have serious problems as well, which also relate to gardening), a 13-inch food plant would not be allowed, and backyard gardens would easily fall under this. While it says “the term (weeds) shall not include cultivated flowers and gardens of native grasses, perennials and annual plants installed as part of a landscaping design,” notice that they previously said property shall be maintained free from “plant growth in excess of 12 inches in height,” and that they left in place something they have banned. And who are they? Who decided a single bit of this? By what right? By what law? By what hearings? Did people vote about weeds? Did they vote on the height of plants and how they may look? The answer is no, so who decided on this fascistic control over each family’s private life?]

302.7.1 Fences: All fences, facing the street frontage of the premises or adjacent to the public way, shall be maintained structurally sound and in good repair. Any of the following conditions shall be corrected. 1) Any fence, or portion thereof, out of vertical alignment by more than 15 degrees; 2) Rotted, fire damaged or broken wooden support posts or cross members shall be repaired or replaced; 3) Broken or fire damaged wooden slats shall also be repaired or replaced; 4) Broken or severely bent metal posts or tron, cut or ripped metal fencing materials shall be repaired or replaced; 5) Any fence, or any portion thereof, having loose bricks, stones, rocks, mortar, masonry, or similar materials shall be repaired or replaced. The above requirements shall not prohibit a fence, or any portion thereof, from being removed if the remaining portions are safe and in good condition and the erection and maintenance of a fence is not otherwise required by law.

[This section raises more the same questions. But if one considers issues of food, this section can effectively prevent the fencing of livestock and thus the keeping of any. And it has its own trickery to rival the banning weeds but slyly including plants – notice that even if a fence is “safe and in good condition,” it can still be removed.]

308.1 Accumulation of Rubbish and Garbage. All exterior property and premises, and the interior of every structure, shall be free from the accumulation of rubbish or garbage.

[Again, entirely undefined. This is easily applied to garden implements, pots, bags of soil or manure, rolls of wire fencing, compost piles, etc. Notice this applies to the inside of people’s homes as well (“the interior of every structure) and to everything in them.”]

To stop this, people must realize that they could be penalized for anything at all and constantly and lose not just their gardens but their homes.

To stop this, people have to expose and stop the entire code which has been put in place in cities and towns across the country, very recently and surreptitiously.

IT IS PROHIBITED TO THE STATES and yet that is precisely where it is being applied.

The ICC code is the end of the rule of law and the Fourth Amendment, simply by making up a rule or regulation. Or even, it seems a yard code.

It is all hidden in plain sight in what people ASSUME is a simple and fair city code based on actual safety issues.

But as people are seeing the impact, they are stunned and appalled and even frightened. As well they might be. It is literal fascism, operating under the guise of “tidiness” or safe property. What they don’t see is what has changed (a new international code was slipped in). That is what must be torn out, not gardens, and it must be ripped out by the roots across the country. Gardening and farming and anti-GMO groups could do this together.

The odds are very great that those doing the enforcement are being incentivized, as penalizing property owners over nothing and everything would bring in revenues without limit. Thus, we can be certain these attacks will increase, ensuring there will be no food growing in cities. It is particularly important to begin by eliminating the growing of food in the front yard where neighbors could stop and look and people could not only begin talking to each other again, but sharing food and knowledge and the undeniable joy and freedom of growing one’s own food.

Urban people are mostly unaware of what the FDA and USDA and EPA are already doing to ranchers and organic farmers in the countryside, in similarly absurd and unconstitutional ways. What the government of Michigan is doing to heritage pig farmers who are raising their animals humanely and environmentally soundly is but one example but it’s a doozy. The blatant cruelty and insanity of the ICC Code and of Michigan using nonsense-“logic” to kill off their farmers’ pigs, is the same. The perpetrators are elsewhere, making up rules that don’t fit law or life itself.

So, urbanites might want to know they are now in the same boat – this code is set to apply the same cruelty and insanity to their lives and dreams. It is in place to wipe out the growing organic food in the cities. The may come as a rude awakening but it is an essential one to groups coming together across the political spectrum to protect this country and people’s rights to have decent lives.

If the details of the ICC code are shared everywhere, the Code will implode.

Isn’t a grassroots way to stand with all those being attacked, to turn the tables and start exposing those who have put this into place?

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

Be the first to comment on "“Sustainable Growth”? The Government Is Ripping Up Food Gardens"

Leave a comment