Keon Wants The City To Stop Using Nitrogen Fertilizers With Exceptions.

The fertilizer ban ordinance passed on first reading unanimously at the December 2019 meeting, however several commissioners expressed that without more scientific data and other municipality experience on enforcement they may not vote for it on second reading. The ban would prevent all homeowners from using fertilizer containing nitrogen from June 1 to September 30th.  Use of fertilizer containing nitrogen during that time would be subject to a code violation and fine. City owned property as well as all golf courses and athletic fields were carved out. Read more about that here.

Keon is bringing forth a resolution at the January 28th meeting, this time, directing the city manager to put the city and city contractors under the same restrictions— but not without significant carve outs.

The resolution will allow for the occasional use of nitrogen and phosphorus based fertilizers by city employees and city contractors during the prohibited application period when resodding or caring for the city’s larger facilities.

City Administration has confirmed that the resolution will not apply to golf courses and athletic fields.There are separate standards that apply and will not be subject to the nitrogen and phosphorus ban.

Click Here to View the Proposed Resolution.



Share:

5 thoughts on “Keon Wants The City To Stop Using Nitrogen Fertilizers With Exceptions.

  1. I suggest we start with a massive education campaign, even some workshops, telling home owners what to use on lawns and shrubs instead of nitrogen. After that think about a law, which probably won’t be enforceable.

  2. Who can argue against steps to protect our drinking water and our environment?

    What should be considered with this proposal is a targeting of the high risk areas that can cause the greatest threat to us. Start with limiting or changing the chemicals used to fertilize the “public” grasses owned by, yes, the residents.

    I suggest that the ordinance, if one were considered necessary, should focus on the largest tracts of land within our City. I propose any action to protect our drinking water begin with the four golf courses (yes, Granada, Biltmore, Riviera…and can you name the fourth? Hint: deep south Gables) and NOT exempt them from this proposal. Granada Golf Course alone is over 60 acres!

    Next are the large recreation facilities like the Youth Center and Phillips Park. Add to those all the mini parks being purchased and you are talking serious square footage of grass.

    Then, perhaps the next most important areas in the context of square feet of grass and also owned by us the residents, are the medians (think Segovia, Ponce de Leon Blvd., and Country Club Prado) as well as the swale in front of each house.

    I support a plan where City implements these conservation efforts to those large grass areas which will produce the biggest bang for the buck rather than add one more law that is aimed only at the residents.

  3. I agree! “I do feel strongly that laws passed should apply to everyone. It is very concerning that the proposed law seems to apply to law abiding homeowners but not to the government or its special interests.”

  4. I could care less about fertilizer one way or another. I do feel strongly that laws passed should apply to everyone. It is very concerning that the proposed law seems to apply to law abiding homeowners but not to the government or it’s special interests. I remember a story I read as a kid about a farm of animals where the pigs in charge used to say “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.