GROW-OP BYLAW LACKS CLARITY

Saanich Mayor Frank Leonard is either trying to pull a fast one over on
Saanich landlords, or he's being sloppy over legal details. Leonard
reassured landlords that Saanich does not intend to bill landlords for
internal police costs associated with investigating grow operations.

The problem is, the language of the Controlled Substance Property bylaw
says the exact opposite, belying any reassurances.

If Saanich does not plan to recoup fire and policing costs from grow-op
investigations on the backs of landlords, the bylaw should be more clear.

The problem line in the bylaw reads: "every owner whose property is used as
a Controlled Substance Property must pay the Municipality all Service Costs
incurred by or on behalf of the Municipality."

The question is: what are "service costs." The mayor said they're
definitely not police salaries, noting that would be wrong.

To Police Inspector John Charlton, it wasn't so clear. He noted that
grow-ops take a lot of Saanich Police time and resources and,
theoretically, the police could track those hours and charge landowners.

He wasn't sure if the bylaw allowed that.

The bylaw itself defines a service cost as "all direct and indirect costs
incurred by the Municipality associated with the inspection and removal of
illegal activities," including "salaries and related personnel."

According to Saanich's Municipal Solicitor Chris Pease, the bylaw's
language legally encompasses both fire and police services, which are,
after all, Saanich personnel.

The definition of Service Costs also involves the "analysis of the
materials found at the property."

That sounds a lot like forensic lab tests.

The fine print matters, changing the potential cost to landowners by
thousands of dollars.

The Saanich bylaw was inspired by Lower Mainland municipalities where there
are several precedents of charging fire and police investigation costs.

In a single case involving a very large grow op and fire in 2003 in Surrey,
Surrey added firefighting and police costs of more than $30,000 to the
property taxes.

If this is what Saanich councillors and the mayor intend, they should say
so rather than hiding behind vague language and good intentions.

Saanich citizens might prefer smaller property taxes in hopes of making one
of the victims of the crime pay policing costs. But we doubt it. Landlords
already get burned if their house is used by dope growers, who leave a mess
of unsafe wiring and molding walls behind.

The bylaw is expected to receive council's official stamp on Jan. 24. If
Saanich council means what they say, that the bylaw is meant to force
landlords to make their homes livable following illegal activity, they
better go back to the drawing board.

Even if council has the best of intentions right now, future councils will
be perfectly within their rights to start billing property owners.