From:   Samuel Trosow This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

To:       Mayor DeCicco-Best, Controllers and Council Members

Re:       Comments on Enforcement of Pesticide By-Law and Proposed Amendments

Date:    September 26, 2008-

On behalf of the London Coalition Against Pollution, I would request that this memo be included in the council materials pertaining to the item on the pesticide by-law from the ETC Report for your meeting on September 29, 2008. This follows the presentation that was made to the ETC at their public participation meeting held on September 22, 2008.

As an initial point, LCAP is appreciative of the work that has been done to date by city staff in the area of general education. Materials have been generated for distribution in the community, there have been entries in the waste calendar and some good progress has been made with area retailers. We are also supportive of the city’s desire to continue to implement and enforce this by-law despite some of the uncertainty that has been caused by the provincial measure which has yet to take effect.

We are concerned, however, that not enough attention had been given to crafting a viable enforcement strategy. Council is now dealing with the enforcement aspect of the by-law just hours before it is scheduled to take effect on September 30^th. We feel that these matters should have been settled during the long two plus year period since the by-law was enacted back in June of 2006. At this late date, we would like to offer the following specific comments on what is now before council.

First, while we understand that the enforcement of the by-law will be largely dependant on complaints from the community, we think there needs to be more attention paid to proactive enforcement than is recognized in the staff report. We know from experience with other city by-laws that a complaint-driven process is by itself is inadequate and needs to be bolstered a proactive system of purposeful and targeted enforcement. Sitting back and waiting for complaints is not enough. In particular, we are concerned about a report in the London Free Press report, city staff said that "Londoners who blow the whistle on neighbours will be asked if they're willing to testify if the matter goes to court." Of course this would be ideal, but we all know that neighbours are often hesitant to do this, and tenants may be hesitant to complain about their landlords and employees may be hesitant to complain about their employers.

Therefore, it is important that complaints be received and processed by the City even if the complainant is hesitant to be publicly identified, and that the city avoid sending the message that there will be no enforcement unless someone complains.

Second, the staff report indicates that first time offenders be issued a warning. We are opposed to this proposal.  There has been a phase-in/education period of over two years and if this has been at all effective, we should be prepared to issue citations when the law is violated. 2007 and 2008 would have been the appropriate time to send information letters to residents posting signs, but the city chose not to do this.  Certainly the city might want to consider a smaller fine for a first time offense by a resident, with the larger fine progressing in case of a subsequent offense, but there should be a sanction of some sort otherwise there is less incentive to comply with the law.

Third, the city could impose a progressively larger fine than the $125 which was discussed at the ETC. We support Councillor Orser’s suggestion that authority for a higher level be obtained. Unfortunately, his motion did not receive a second at the ETC and was therefore not fully debated. Section 4 of the by-law as enacted in 2006 provides that “…any person who contravenes this by-law is guilty of an offence and, upon conviction, is liable to a fine or penalty provided for in the Provincial Offences Act. . .”  To ensure that the possibility of citation have adequate deterrent effect, we would raise the potential fine as suggested by Councillor Orser at the ETC.

Fourth, we are concerned that the new sections 2.1 through 2.10 will cause some confusion and detract from the fact that there is already a clear offence section in the by-law as stated above.  While we have no objection to the proposed language insofar as it gives the city additional enforcement tools, as written the mandatory language could be taken to read this is instead of the remedy in section 4 of the act (contravention being a Provincial Offense).  This issue was raised at the ETC and the solicitor’s office assured the committee that the intention was to create a set of additional enforcement tools, not to supplant the ability to issue a citation under section 4.

This intention should be clearly indicated in the text of the amendments for additional certainty. Add text before section 2.1 indicating ‘in addition to the penalties contained in section 4, the city may utilize the measures in sections 2.1 through 2.10.’  Or the new text can be added as a schedule, and section 4 could be amended to refer to these supplementary measures.   In either case, it is important to make clear that the city does not have to go through this work order procedure as a condition precedent to issuing a general citation.

In summary, we would request that following four points be added:

1)      Assure that complaints be received and processed even if a complainant is hesitant to be publicly identified,  and also consider affirmative and targeted proactive enforcement measures;

2)      Citations, not warnings,  be issued upon contravention of the by-law;

3)      Authority be sought for general citations up to the sum of $500; and

4)      Insert text into the by-law for greater certainty making it explicit that new sections 2.1 through 2.10 are supplementary to the penalty measures already in place.

We would also urge the city set up a phone number and e-mail address for intake of complaints which are prominently distributed in subsequent outreach efforts.

Thank you for your attention to these concerns, we look forward to continued cooperation with the city in terms of making sure that this by-law is effectively enforced.