POT BYLAW SUSPENSION 'PRECEDENT SETTING'

Crowd Piles into Mission Chambers

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association is hoping the recent suspension
of a controversial Mission bylaw will set a major precedent in
British Columbia.

On Monday, Mission district council suspended its Controlled
Substance Property Bylaw for one month so it can undergo a review
amidst a wave of protest from citizens who say they have been
unfairly targeted by the bylaw and handed inspection fees upwards of $5,200.

The bylaw grants the district's Public Safety Inspection Team the
ability to inspect homes that are consuming more than 93 kilowatts of
electricity a day. The bylaw was instituted to help reduce the number
of marijuana grow operations in Mission.

A class-action lawsuit on behalf of several Mission residents who had
their properties inspected - without a trace of a marijuana grow
operation - is expected to be filed any day now.

Micheal Vonn, policy director of the BCCLA, said she expects this
case could set the standard for how municipalities and police forces
implement and enforce similar bylaws existing now and in the future.

"We're counting on it," she told the Abbotsford-Mission Times.

"Part of the reason we are very, very keen to see there will be legal
action undertaken, given that council has thus far proved quite
inadequate to the task of remedying this on their own, is essentially
to define a couple of areas that stand out as things that we need
clear guidance on."

"That's exactly what I voted for in the bylaw initially and that's
how I thought it worked," said Stevens.

Other municipalities with similar bylaws include Pitt Meadows and
Coquitlam. Paul Gipps, deputy chief administrative officer for the
District of Mission, said the district is aware a lawsuit is likely
to be filed and that the program will now undergo a "comprehensive review."

"Council has heard the community asking questions, wanting a review,
and that's exactly what we're going to do," said Gipps.

He said not only will the bylaw be open to review, but the whole
process of how it was implemented, as well.

"It is in its early stage, we're just writing up the framework and
trying to get all the questions people would like to know [so] we can
answer that as part of the review."

The bylaw was the focus of a massive group of people that packed
Mission's council chambers Monday. The public meeting got heated at
times, as folks voiced their displeasure with the bylaw and the
council for implementing it.

Vonn said her office has been inundated with phone calls, e-mails and
letters from angry Mission residents, some of them she said are
unable to pay their mortgages because of the inspection fees.

She added the bylaw accuses people of criminal wrongdoing.

"We understand . . . that they are recording on criminal records
checks people who have been found in violation of this bylaw," said Vonn.

"[This] means you have to explain why you've been accused of being a
criminal by the district of Mission to anyone who requires a criminal
records check - employer, volunteer or otherwise.

"They're there to accuse you of being a criminal and then claiming
that it has nothing to do with criminal law."

However, Mission RCMP spokeswoman Sgt. Miriam Dickson said that is not true.

"That's impossible," she said. "You can't have a criminal record
unless you go to criminal court and are found guilty."

Dickson said information goes on a person's criminal record if they
have had "adverse contact" with police, which means a complaint was
launched against that individual but no charges were laid. She said
this type of contact with police does not apply to municipal bylaws,
including the Controlled Substance Property Bylaw.

Mission implemented the bylaw in July 2009. For more on this story,
visit www.abbotsfordtimes.com.