MOULD WARNING DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE UNREASONABLE

Several marijuana growing operations have been busted in Niagara Falls
and other parts of the region during the past few months. It's not a
new problem, but one that is fraught with danger.

Often located in residential neighbourhoods, people who organize these
illegal setups short-circuit the legal and safe electrical supply,
creating fire hazards to provide a warm, humid environment needed for
these plants to thrive.

That, in turn, creates danger for the authorities who are called once
the operation is inevitably busted. Firefighters, police and others
are put at risk.

It's also not uncommon for the huge lamps used in these operations to
spark fires that again put emergency responders at risk. It also puts
neighbouring buildings in danger of catching fire.

But more than marijuana grows in these operations. Dangerous mould
also forms in the homes used to house these operations.

It often remains long after authorities have cleared the plants away
and the utilities have been disconnected and reconnected.

That's why a private member's bill being introduced in the Ontario
legislature by York West Liberal Mario Sergio has some merit.

His concern is that it costs up to $40,000 to restore a home that has
been used to grow marijuana. Often, the mould is simply painted over
rather than removed, creating a health hazard for an unwitting buyer
of the property.

He'd like to see it become mandatory for sellers to tell potential
buyers that a home has been used as a marijuana growing operation.

Considering the potential health effects, it's not a bad idea. Years
ago, over potential health considerations, the government made it a
condition to declare to potential buyers whether or not a home
contained urea formaldahyde insulation.

All things considered, it's also wise to get a home
inspection.

But given the health concerns associated with mould in homes, it
doesn't appear to be unreasonable for such declarations to extend from
former marijuana growing operations.