Florida Homeowner Says Neighbor Reported 8-Inch Grass 'Because It Looks Bad' — Now She's Facing A $5,000 Fine Despite No Rule On Height
Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below.
A Florida homeowner says she's been slapped with a potential $5,000 fine after a neighbor reported her for having grass that was "too tall"—specifically 8 inches. The catch? There's no actual law about grass height in her area.
"It's just dirt and sand," she wrote in a Reddit post. "The grass my builder put in is bad, so it only grows in certain areas."
The homeowner, who lives outside an homeowners association, said this was her second violation, and city code enforcement warned that a third could escalate to the Code Enforcement Board and result in a fine of up to $5,000.
Don't Miss:
Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing —
Peter Thiel turned $1,700 into $5 billion—now accredited investors are eyeing this software company with similar breakout potential. Learn how you can
And while the code enforcement officer left a violation notice, the city couldn't point to any clear rule she broke. According to her, there's no defined maximum height for grass—just vague wording about how it looks compared to neighboring properties.
"It's based on the officer's judgment," she said. "They told me they base violations on comparisons to my neighbor's lawn."
One Redditor replied with what many were thinking:
"Wow, they reported you just because it looked bad? I have neighbors who let their weeds overtake their lawn and mine and still wouldn't call."
The first violation happened during a stretch when her lawnmower had been recalled, and the second came during a period of declining health. She said she figured as long as it stayed under "a ruler length," she'd be fine.
Trending: Invest early in CancerVax's breakthrough tech aiming to disrupt a $231B market.
Now, she's exploring a legal workaround: converting her yard into a certified Florida native habitat, which is protected under Florida's SB 82 (2019) and other landscaping laws. These protect edible gardens, wildflowers, and native plant restoration efforts from local government restrictions.
"One user recommended I convert my front lawn into a wildlife habitat," she wrote. "I want to get written confirmation from the city and put up a sign citing the law."
She's also planning to speak with the zoning supervisor after being transferred by a confused staff member who had never heard of native habitat certification.
In a follow-up, she thanked commenters for their support:
"I didn't think anyone would care, but I'm so glad I reached out to this sub. You restore more of my faith in humanity."
,
In Florida, cities can legally fine homeowners for overgrown grass—if their local code defines a clear violation. But when no height is specified, enforcement becomes subjective.
In one case reported by the Tampa Bay Times, a federal court upheld $30,000 in fines against a Dunedin homeowner for tall grass, though he planned to appeal. While fines like these can hold up legally, vague ordinances—like the one this homeowner describes—leave room for challenge, especially when violations are based on appearance rather than measurable rules.
It's one thing to get fined by the city. It's another when the call is coming from just down the block. Whether it's lawn height, flowerbeds, or the wrong shade of yellow paint, the real challenge isn't just code enforcement—it's waking up each day next to someone who weaponizes it.
Read Next:
With Point, you can
This Jeff Bezos-backed startup will allow you to .
Image: Shutterstock
This article Florida Homeowner Says Neighbor Reported 8-Inch Grass 'Because It Looks Bad' — Now She's Facing A $5,000 Fine Despite No Rule On Height originally appeared on Benzinga.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Buss Family to See Astonishing Profit After Record-Setting Sale of Lakers
The Los Angeles Lakers set yet another record on Wednesday, June 18, in what's become a lengthy line of making a variety of notable sports history, with the Buss family somewhat stunningly selling the storied franchise that the late Dr. Jerry Buss originally purchased for $67.5 million in 1979. Now, 46 years later after what proved to be a franchise-altering moment that saw the Lakers go on numerous NBA Championship runs, hoisting the Larry O'Brien trophy a whopping 11 times under Buss ownership, the legendary family is about to see a patently ridiculous profit after selling the team to Mark Walter, the current owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers. Advertisement With ESPN's Shams Charania dropping the news bomb late Wednesday afternoon, the Buss family sold its 66 percent majority stake in the Lakers for "a valuation of approximately $10 billion," Just as Charania did in his followup post on X, it certainly feels like a number worth repeating: Ten. Billion. And as Sportsnaut quite specifically noted, this record-setting Lakers sale "represents a staggering return on investment for the [Buss] family at 14,714.81%." Considering the Buss family will also maintain a minority share of the team at "just over 15% for a period of time," in addition to Jeanie Buss reportedly staying on as Lakers' governor—a role she's held since ownership was kept in the family following Jerry's passing in 2013—that is one hell of a win and a payday all while the 63-year-old will still hold a significant influence on the direction of the franchise. Advertisement If that $10 billion valuation number hasn't resonated just yet, keep in mind that the Boston Celtics, an equally iconic and deeply treasured NBA franchise, sold earlier this year for "only" $6.1 billion. It's also worth noting that Walter, the new majority owner of the Lakers, had already purchased a 26 percent stake of the team back in 2021 and held first right of refusal if the Buss family were to ever sell its majority stake in the franchise. On Wednesday afternoon, the man who's proven to be a fearless owner when it comes to spending and securing top MLB free-agents ever since taking a majority stake in the Dodgers in 2012, finished off the deal with the Lakers that began four years ago. It would be sincerely shocking if Walter and his ownership group didn't set out to do with the Lakers exactly what they've aggressively done with the Dodgers, which should serve as exceptionally great news for fans of the purple and gold. Advertisement Related: Jordan Spieth Chose an Extremely Relatable Outing After U.S. Open Struggles Buss Family to See Astonishing Profit After Record-Setting Sale of Lakers first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 19, 2025
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
MLB rumors: Cubs among 5 other teams Red Sox talked Rafael Devers trade with before Giants deal
The post MLB rumors: Cubs among 5 other teams Red Sox talked Rafael Devers trade with before Giants deal appeared first on ClutchPoints. The Boston Red Sox shocked the MLB world last week when they sent Rafael Devers to the San Francisco Giants in a blockbuster trade that materialized from seemingly out of nowhere. While the front office did a good job of keeping their trade negotiations under wraps, it sounds like the Giants weren't the only team they were negotiating with, as the Chicago Cubs were among several other teams in the running for Devers. Advertisement Tensions between Devers and the Red Sox had been boiling all season long, due in large part to his unhappiness with the team continually looking to change his position. Boston finally decided to cut bait with their superstar slugger, but not after discussing a deal with a couple other teams. San Francisco landed him, but the Cubs, Seattle Mariners, San Diego Padres, Toronto Blue Jays, and Atlanta Braves were also involved in discussions for Devers. 'The Red Sox say that they had conversations with the Mariners, Cubs, Padres, Blue Jays and Atlanta about Devers before dealing him to San Francisco,' Bob Nightengale of USA Today reported. How Giants landed Rafael Devers from Red Sox over Cubs, other teams D. Ross Cameron-Imagn Images The Red Sox could have prioritized bringing in top-tier prospects in exchange for Devers, but they had a different goal when it came to this deal. They wanted to get out of the remainder of Devers' 10-year, $313.5 million contract extension he signed back in 2023, and according to Giants owner Greg Johnson, his team's willingness to take on that deal is the main reason why the trade went down. Advertisement 'If the Giants had not agreed to assume the $254.5 million remaining in Devers' contract, Giants owner Greg Johnson says there would have been no trade,' Nightengale reported. Even then, Boston still got a decent return for Devers, as Kyle Harrison and James Tibbs III both have a lot of upside in the eyes of several talent evaluators. In the end, though, money talks, and that was how the Giants managed to outbid the rest of their competition and bring Devers to town as they look to make a World Series push in 2025. Related: MLB rumors: Yankees, Giants monitoring Pirates for trade Related: Dodgers, Padres get suspensions after scuffle
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas will require permits for self-driving cars starting in September
Starting September 1, fully autonomous cars will require a permit to operate in Texas. This new restriction comes after the state's governor, Greg Abbott, signed into law the SB 2807 bill that requires authorization from the state's Department of Motor Vehicles for self-driving cars on public streets without human interaction. The signing of the new law coincides with Tesla's launch of its robotaxi service in Austin today where invited guests got to ride in fully autonomous Model Ys. While the law doesn't go into effect until a few months later, Tesla's robotaxi launch could have skirted this new regulation since all rides are accompanied by a human "safety monitor" in the front passenger seat. In the coming months, Texas' new law may prove to be more than just a headache for Tesla. Besides the permits, the upcoming regulation allows state authorities the ability to revoke permits and requires companies to provide methods of dealing with self-driving cars in emergency situations to police and first responders. While this could become a serious hurdle for Tesla, it's also likely to affect Waymo, since it currently operates an autonomous ride-hailing service in Austin.
