Yellowknife (Nov 24/06) - Communities in the Northwest Territories fed up with homes and apartments being used habitually for illegal activities are being asked for their say as the territorial government prepares legislation to get rid of them.

How it works Step one A citizen believes their community or neighbourhood is being negatively affected by activities on or near a property. The concerned citizen makes a confidential complaint to the director of community operations. Step two The director conducts an investigation to determine the validity of a complaint. If a complaint is determined to be frivolous, the director may not act on the complaint. All attempts will be made to resolve the matter informally and the director may also send a warning letter to the property's owner, its occupant or others deemed appropriate. Step three If the complaint has validity, and activities occurring on the property pose an immediate threat to the health, safety and security of the community or neighbourhood, the director has the ability to seek a Community Safety Order from the court. Step four The court has the authority to issue orders to vacate a property, terminate a lease agreement, or close a property for up to 90 days. Before the closure date, the owner or occupant may apply to court to have it set aside the order, and the court may set aside the order if criminal activities have ceased, or vary the order if it is necessary the property be used again. Step five Once the closure order is issued, the director can enter the property without the owner or occupant's consent to close the property. Measures can include ordering all the occupants of the property to leave immediately, attaching a lock or security device, erecting a fence, terminating utilities services and making interior/exterior alterations to the property so it is not a hazard while closed. Step six The director is not responsible for any costs incurred. These are to be covered by the occupant or owner of the property in question. The property occupant or owner may appeal the costs within 30 days of receipt.

The territorial government is consulting communities on its proposed Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods (SCAN) Act. If passed, it would give courts the power to evict tenants and shut down drug dens, brothels and properties where perpetual criminal activity occurs, based on confidential tips and subsequent investigations.

"I want this to be the bug spray for those cockroaches," Yellowknife Centre MLA Robert Hawkins told News/North last month of the SCAN initiative he is spearheading at the Legislative Assembly.

On Monday, 24 Yellowknife residents turned up at Northern United Place for a public meeting to discuss SCAN and last week, 30 people attended a similar gathering in Fort Smith. Consultations will take place in Inuvik, Fort Simpson, Norman Wells and Behchoko (tonight). Residents unable to attend can email, fax or post comments to the Justice Ministry until Jan. 19. According to Megan Holsapple, communications advisor with NWT Justice, legislation could be tabled in the new year.

While the Yukon is implementing SCAN policies and procedures (its SCAN act passed in May), Manitoba and Saskatchewan have had SCAN legislation for several years.

Al Cameron, manager of investigation for the Manitoba Department of Justice's Public Investigation Unit, said two investigators and a registrar joined him when he got the province's SCAN program going in 2002.

Since then his team, expanded by one investigator this year with plans to hire two more for 2007, has looked into 1,368 complaints which resulted in 198 evictions.

"The whole act is triggered by a complaint from the community," said Cameron, explaining the process.

"The registrar takes the complaint and does a background check on either the owner or occupant and checks with local police to see what they know and to make sure they aren't getting in the way of an existing operation."

Then the SCAN unit's investigation begins, in order to prove the activities in the complaint are habitual and are having an adverse affect on the community.

"If it's true we have a range of responses," said Cameron.

The formal response is getting a court-ordered Community Safety Order, whereby the occupant is ordered out of the residence for 90 days. According to Cameron, only once in four years has this course of action been taken.

"This was for a crack house that was going for more than 10 years and it completely disrupted the neighbourhood," said Cameron.

His unit "went straight to court for a Community Safety Order (and) for the first time in well over a decade that neighbourhood had relief."

Informal resolutions range from five-day evictions to simply letting the occupant or owner know they've been caught in the act. Cameron said in many instances the latter is enough to stop the criminal behaviour.

"This (legislation) fills a gap between criminal law and civil law," said Cameron. "Police deal with bodies and this deals with property."

In the case of the crack house, Cameron said police did what they could, arresting numerous people. But prior to SCAN, there was nothing in the law that allowed them to close down the house itself.

And it's this defining aspect of SCAN that Cameron believes has kept enforcement from violating citizens' rights.

"It's legislation that deals with the use of property and that keeps us from running afoul of the Charter (of Rights and Freedoms)," he said. "And it's successful in Manitoba because it's grassroots. It's not fancy but it allows the average citizen in Manitoba to have a direct route to justice."

This prairie province has had SCAN legislation in place since 2005. In that time, it has resulted in 174 evictions from the work of 778 investigations.

Murray Sawatsky, executive director of the Law Enforcement Services Branch of the province's Justice Department, said while the program has been effective, it comes with some cost.

"It's fairly expensive because we have 10 investigators - five in Regina and five in Saskatoon - who must travel around the province, so the meals, travel expenses and lodgings can add up," Sawatsky said.

Its 2006/2007 budget is $913,000.

"I think it has been very successful as a lot of people have felt it gave them the power to reclaim their neighbourhoods," he said. "(And) we find the level of co-operation between investigators and police has been great as the act allows investigators to share information."

In May of this year, the Yukon government passed its SCAN legislation and Leslie Carberry with the Yukon Justice Department is working to get the program up and running.

To date the department has hired two dedicated investigators and one on-call auxiliary - all former police officers skilled in investigation - and has sent two representatives on fact-finding missions to Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

"The Yukon is going to face some significant challenges compared to Manitoba and Saskatchewan," said Carberry in reference to the territory's dispersed population and small communities in which many people are related to each other.

"What SCAN can do is allow people to make a confidential complaint and in a small population this will be a good thing," she said.

With a start-up budget of $350,000 and an anticipated annual cost of $300,000 to operate, Carberry is ready to get going and believes Yukon communities are as well.

"It's law enforcement with a community development twist," she said.

"The whole goal is to get people to stop drug-selling, bootlegging, prostitution and inhalant use.

"It's a well-coordinated, well-structured approach to community problems. Everywhere we've been to date, people are very excited and anticipating this legislation to get going on this."