COUNCIL NEVER QUESTIONED EVIDENCE

Mission Hearings a 'Rubber-Stamp' Process: Councillor

Politicians in Mission may be blindly accepting controversial
evidence against citizens targeted in grow-op bylaw searches, one
councillor says.

In so-called "Section 57" hearings, councillors are presented
evidence reports from the Public Safety Inspection Team -- including
mildew, electrical safety faults and mould readings -- and tasked
with either tagging homes as unsafe under the grow-op bylaw or clearing them.

Coun. Jenny Stevens says despite a recent internal review of the
process, she still has "deep-felt questions" that councillors don't
understand evidence, making the hearings a "rubber-stamp" process.

"Council has to say where we are not competent," Stevens said.

Mission has raked in $1.43 million in revenue from the searches since
2008. The municipality claims the program is revenue neutral.

The Province accessed documents covering about 70 hearings in 2010,
under the freedom of information law.

An analysis shows many homeowners disputed evidence or bylaw
processes, but not one was successful in convincing council to
refrain from tagging their property as an unsafe grow-op home.

And title-tagging seemed to be a foregone conclusion, as council
never questioned the evidence put before them.

For example, on May 17 Mission resident Daniel Wiebe appeared at a
hearing and "denied ever having a marijuana grow operation on his
property [and] informed council that he has received legal advice
indicating, because there is no proof of a marijuana grow operation,
the Section 57 Notice should not be filed on the title."

Wiebe was quickly informed that as soon as he complied with repair
orders, the Section 57 Notice could be removed from his title, and
councillors voted to tag the property.

In Mission, and a number of cities across Metro Vancouver,
"controlled-substance property bylaws" mean municipal inspectors can
enter homes with abnormally high hydro usage -- about 93 kilowatts
per day or more -- and look for evidence of illegal marijuana
grow-ops for public safety reasons.

From 2008 through 2010, Mission's Public Safety Inspection Team
searched 362 homes for grow-op evidence and, in 177 cases, residents
were found in bylaw contravention.

If violations are found, inspectors can seek a fine of $10,000 in
provincial court, in addition to demanding expensive repair orders
and levying an inspection fee of $5,200. No Mission citizens have
been hit with the provincial fine.

"They are not interested in pursuing anything in court because they
don't have any evidence," said Stacy Gowanlock, who says he will lead
a class-action lawsuit against Mission.

Mayor James Atebe is on vacation and not available for comment, his office said.