On January 8 the City of Mississauga’s nuisance weed and Tall Grass Bylaw was ruled unconstitutional. This past Wednesday, the City voted to replace the unconstitutional nuisance weed bylaw with less restrictive legislation. Unlike the previous bylaw, which banned 25 plant species, this proposal prohibits ony five plants that the City says present clear health and safety risks.
photo credit: Ray Hennesey
This should be a wake-up call for Stratford, as we have a bylaw similar to the unconstitutional Mississauga one. And in an election year, this looks like an opportunity.
Like its Missisauga counterpart, our bylaw here in Stratford relies on a fixed 20 cm height limit for “turf grass or weeds” and uses a broad reference to “noxious and local weeds” via the Weed Control Act, rather than a short, clearly defined hazardous-plant list. Also, our bylaws do not clearly distinguish between conventional turf grass and naturalized or native-plant gardens, and the requirement that landscaped areas be “maintained in good repair” is potentially subjective and aesthetics-based
See the Maintenance and Occupancy Bylaw, here
Our bylaws are out of step with a modern understanding of biodiversity and climate resilience, and may also be on shaky constitutional ground if they punish residents for expressive landscaping choices that support pollinators and reduce emissions. The City now has a clear opportunity and an obligation to modernize our property standards so they target genuine health and safety risks, not the wildflowers in our front gardens.