Submitted photo
HANCOCK COUNTY – An allocation of $5,000 was given to the Weed Board to help cover the costs of maintaining overgrown grass and weeds in the areas – some of which aren’t the county’s initial responsibility.
Dean Folkening, who works for the county and is appointed as the county’s weed specialist, went before the county council on May 1 to have the extra funds transferred to help cover the costs of maintaining the overgrown areas in the county.
Folkening said that in his time working for the Weed Control Board – more than 10 years – his budget remains close to the same, but after speaking to Bill Spalding, president of the county commissioners, they decided it would be best to ask for the allocation early in the season to cover any extras costs if necessary.
Folkening originally asked the council for $3,000 but was given an extra $2,000.
For the destruction of detrimental plants, according to Indiana Code 15-16-8, the law states that “a person owning or possessing real estate in Indiana shall destroy detrimental plants by: cutting or mowing and, if necessary, by plowing, cultivating, smothering; or using chemicals in the bud state of growth or earlier, to prevent detrimental plants from maturing.”
Folkening said while they operate based off complaints that come into the office about overgrown areas. If they are in violation – weeds being 12 inches or higher – then a certified letter is sent to the property owner notifying them that they are in violation and have eight days to have the property mowed and within compliance.
If after eight days the property is still not taken care of, then Folkening will send a mowing contractor out, billing the property owner the invoice and fines associated. If they do not pay within 13 days of the invoice along with a second notice, a lien is filed on the property.
Folkening said that common areas of complaints come from heavier populated areas in the county, and they are also seeing many complaints about properties that are owned by out-of-state individuals or companies who “don’t have a local interest here.”
Folkening said these property owners are a lot of the times harder to track down, even when utilizing the geographic information system (GIS).
While he can’t give out specific names due to privacy reasons, Folkening said that complaints and the areas around the warehouse developments are being addressed – not only by him but other departments as well.
“That was one of the reasons I requested extra funds because of some of that area up there … I can’t go in and mow two or three acres. I just didn’t have the funds for that,” Folkening said. “So that was one of the reasons I asked for an additional appropriation, was to be able to enforce some of that up there. But at the same time, I made council aware of the issues that are there.”
Sandra Hudson, who lives in the Mt. Comfort area, said that properties with overgrown grass can be seen throughout the area.
At a meeting in 2022, she objected to developers buying a specific property; however, the property was sold and since then Hudson said the house has remained vacant and grass not mowed. Hudson said she has been in contact with Folkening about the property and that he has contacted developers about the violation.
“It’s just really a shame, and as a longtime resident of Hancock County I take pride in where I live. I take pride in my house and my neighborhood, and I am just appalled to see what has happened,” Hudson said.
Also, in response to the extra funds allocated to cover mowing expenses, Hudson said that the burden to maintain the property should fall on the corporate owner, not on taxpayers.
Hudson also said that she hopes the county can figure out how to solve the problem, because she believes there appears to be a loophole that allows developers to be able to get by without any repercussions.
Folkening said he understands the frustration expressed by those who live out in the area and is doing everything he can do to get the situation taken care of.
Across the county, Folkening said there hasn’t been any liens filed on properties this year because they are just getting started in the season. Folkening also added that as complaints come in, those who call can’t expect to see the property taken care of the next day due to the notification of violation process they go through – typically an approximately three-week process.
Despite where in the county the complaints come from, Folkening said that as a longtime resident of Hancock County himself, people need to just take care of their property.
“Just treat your neighbors like how you would expect to be treated and you know, just take care of what you have,” Folkening said. “As long as that happens, I don’t think anybody’s going to complain about anything. People in this county are wonderful people, you know, you don’t get that many that don’t comply, but there are a few.”
