Weed problem in Ohio town, but not the smoking kind

A proposed amendment by the Canton City Council in Ohio could put homeowners who let their weeds and grass grow too high in jail.

As the law stands now, according to The Repository in Canton, more than 8 inches constitutes high grass or weeds and first-time violators face a minor misdemeanor, which carries up to a $150 fine and no jail time.

The new law would make a second offense a fourth-degree misdemeanor, which is punishable by a fine of up to $250 and up to 30 days in jail. Ouch!

But here's the rub: With an increasing number of homes in foreclosure, and owned by the bank, there's no one to throw into the pokey.

I mean, you can't jail a bank. Can you?

What do you think about this proposed law? Do you have a few neighbors who could use a wake-up call on their weed issues?

(Photo: Kathy Price-Robinson)

Comments

[Sean]

I'm sorry, but isn't this just a little extreme of a punishment for lack of controlling weeds. I believe our bill of rights protects us from such actions

[Joe]

This is obviously an absurd law, but...

Why not try to put the banks in jail? It's the law, and corporations have to obey the law just as citizens do (don't they?). It's silly how there are now two sets of rules -- the first set of rules makes life harder and harder for the average citizen. The second set allows big business to do whatever it wants. Sad.

[larry stewart]

Why shouldn't banks be held accountable for the properties they foreclosed on? The people that lived there were held accountable by the banks. If they could afford to foreclose to take the property instead of working out a payment plan then they should be able to afford to cut the grass. Why should the people that own the bank be treated any differently? The banks can take some of the money generated by unfair eletronic transfer fees and use that to cut the grass.