Pubdate: Tue, 18 Sep 2007
Source: Richmond News (CN BC)
Copyright: 2007, Lower Mainland Publishing Group Inc.
Contact:  http://www.richmond-news.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1244
Author: Eve Edmonds
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada)

INSPECTIONS SHUT DOWN 19 GROW-OPS IN FIRST MONTH

Pilot program results show inspectors shutting down nearly five times 
more operations than police

Nineteen marijuana grow-ops were shut down in August, thanks to the 
new electrical and fire safety inspection program, said Geoff Lake, 
Richmond's Fire-Rescue's deputy chief.

"We did 33 inspections in August -- seven in multi-family units and 
26 in single-family residences. Out of the 33, 19 showed evidence of 
a grow-op," said Lake.

"These are the first month's statistic, but there's no reason to 
think they will change," Lake added.

While most are glad to see authorities smoke out grow-ops, defence 
lawyer David Baker questions whether the program compromises individual rights.

The pilot program, which began July 30, allows Richmond Fire-Rescue 
access to the hydro records of Richmond residences.

Those that show an unusually high consumption of electricity (often a 
tell-tale sign of a grow-op) are given a 48-hour notice of inspection.

A fire inspector, electrician and two police officers will then enter 
the premises. The police are only there to make sure there are no 
weapons or unruly people inside, and to let the fire inspector and 
electrician do their jobs, explained Cpl. Nycki Basra, spokeswoman 
for the Richmond RCMP.

If the electrical box has been tampered with or there is evidence of 
a grow-op, the inspectors will post a "Do not occupy" sign on the 
door, and the owner will be served a $3,500-inspection fee.

"This is definitely an effective way of finding these places 
(grow-ops) out," said Lake, "but we are doing it for the safety of 
the community; there are no criminal charges."

Baker doesn't buy it.

"To say they are only doing this for safety reasons I think is disingenuous."

Authorities are using the program to get around due process, he added.

"It's a back-door way of attacking grow-ops; they are circumventing 
property owners' rights."

Before police enter a residence, they are required to secure a search 
warrant, which in itself requires evidence to suggest a grow-op is in 
operation.

If a suspect is charged, a lengthy court process follows, which 
doesn't always result in a conviction.

According to Basra, police typically shut down about one grow-up a 
week, or four a month -- significantly fewer than what inspectors can 
shut down.

"You really can't compare them," said Basra. "A police investigation 
requires surveillance and an extensive gathering of evidence."

Although no criminal charges are laid in an inspection, the owner of 
the property is saddled with a bill upwards of $10,000, said Baker.

To make the home habitable again, owners not only have to pay the 
inspection fee, but they also have to wend their way through city 
hall bureaucracy to secure various building permits to prove the 
electrical system is safe and there is no mould or other health or 
safety concerns.

Even if mould isn't obvious, Baker said the inspectors can order the 
owner to rip out insulation and commission another inspection, then 
secure a permit.

It is reasonable to expect a property owner to prove safe wiring, 
"but the mould thing -- that's not about safety. That's just harassment."

Baker added that since most grow-ops are located in rental 
properties, it isn't fair that landlords carry the full weight of the 
offence when they may not be aware of what their tenants were up to.

Coun. Derek Dang admits the primary aim of the inspection program is 
to root out grow-ops.

"We have to raise our annoyance level to the bad guys," said Dang, 
adding that the current court system is too slow and punishments are 
too lenient for drug offences.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom