CITY SUES HOLY SMOKE OVER BUSINESS LICENCE

Holy Smoke Culture Shop is the latest Heritage City business to land
in the city's financial bad books over licence fees. In December, 1997
city council introduced an amendment to the business licence structure
which hit many businesses with a hefty increase. Holy Smoke's annual
fee went from $100 in 1997 to $1,000 in 1998.

In April, the controversial Herridge Lane shop paid the city $120 - a
licence fee
they thought was fair and one that was in line with other small
downtown shops. Late last week the owners were served with a Notice
of Claim for small claims court for the remainder of the money they
owe the city. "I wasn't surprised, the ball was in their court so we
expected something to happen," said Paul DeFelice, one of the three
owners of Holy Smoke.

Under its justification to charge the 900 per cent increase to the
cannabis-based business, the city singled out shops which sell "water
pipes, hooka pipes or bong pipes." DeFelice
admits those items are for sale at Holy Smoke, but questions the
city's definition which has singled them out. "Our feeling is that
with no definition in the by-law, I looked it up in the dictionary and
the difference between hookas, bongs and water pipes and any other
pipe that stores sell, is water," DeFelice said. "None of our pipes
have water in them and we are taking the position that until they have
water in them they don't qualify as a water pipe."

As they have claimed all along, the Holy Smoke owners are convinced that
some local
politicians are trying to run them out of business. "The mayor (Gary
Exner) has said publicly that he finds us undesirable and that we are
an alleged enforcement problem," DeFelice said. "These are not valid
reasons for business licence fees to increase." To deal with what
DeFelice considers an injustice, Holy Smoke is planning to join a
small group of other local businesses who have refused to pay and are
willing to take the city to Supreme Court to sort the issue out.

Coldwell Banker's Grant Arcuri is one of those who has not paid the
annual fee. "We just want to see if what the city did was proper and
if it wasn't, then the by-law should be changed," Arcuri said. Lawyer
Blair Suffredine represents a few of the disgruntled business owners.
At the end of October there will be a small claims court settlement
conference between one of Suffredine's clients and the city. "The
essential argument is that the business licences are discriminatory
and that under the Charter of Rights they are entitled to equal
treatment," Suffredine said.

The Municipal Act, Suffredine said, provides for the city to vary the
business licence fee based on square
footage, but not on the type of merchandise that sits on their
shelves. "Other than the banks, Holy Smoke is the best example of the
discrimination," said Suffredine. "There are other examples, but they
are not quite as dramatic."

Suffredine figures with the steps which have to be taken to get the matter
heard before the Supreme Court, it will most likely take until the spring
of 1999. In the meantime,
DeFelice and his partners are hoping for a good Christmas season to
ensure that if the ruling goes against them they will have enough
resources to pay up. "It would hurt a lot for sure," said DeFelice. "We
are a young business and have a few debts already, this would cut into our
bottom line severely.

Checked-by: Patrick Henry