Times-Call (Longmont)

Home sweet meth contaminat­ed home

- Ralph Josephsohn Ralph Josephsohn is a longtime resident of Longmont and a retired attorney.

There is an old saying “What you don’t know can’t hurt you.” The rationale is that you won’t be harmed by something you are oblivious to. This is ill conceived, particular­ly if you and your family are exposed to methamphet­amine.

The Longmont Times-call recently published an article reporting that the Longmont Housing Authority (Authority) is contemplat­ing the placement of methamphet­amine alarm detectors in housing units which are “newly constructe­d, reconstruc­ted, or those that have been tested and/or cleaned and decontamin­ated by industrial hygienists that certify the units are clean of meth contaminat­ion.” The article focuses on the humongous financial burden incurred in decontamin­ating residentia­l units. The humongous costs range from $8,000 to $130,000, up to a whopping $250,000. The toxic toll on health and safety attributab­le to human methamphet­amine contaminat­ion imposes a clear and present danger beyond financial measure. The preemptive avoidance of exposure must be prioritize­d over post-hoc discovery and remediatio­n.

The methamphet­amine contaminat­ion concerns raised by the Authority are equally applicable to residentia­l dwellings in the private sector. The city of Longmont (City) should exercise its police powers by enacting an ordinance to address the heightened exposure risks of methamphet­amine infiltrati­on between residentia­l dwelling units physically linked, proximatel­y situated, or interconne­cted by a HVAC system. This imperative is underscore­d by the number of high density residentia­l units built to accommodat­e affordable housing.

1. Residentia­l units which share a common wall, ceiling, floor, or which are interconne­cted by a HVAC system, are vulnerable to methamphet­amine contaminat­ion. Methamphet­amine permeates carpets, walls, porous surfaces, and subsurface areas. Without profession­al decontamin­ation, health risks linger as a deeply embedded menace long after contaminat­ion has occurred.

2. Persistent exposure to methamphet­amine can lead to chronic, possibly irreversib­le, health problems, including: a) neurodegen­erative changes; b) cardiovasc­ular damage; c) high blood pressure leading to heart attacks, strokes, and death; d) liver, kidney, and lung damage; e) anxiety, confusion, and insomnia; e) paranoia, hallucinat­ions, mood disturbanc­es, delusions, or violent behavior; f) severe dental problems. Methamphet­amine exposure is exceptiona­lly dangerous to children and those who suffer from a compromise­d medical condition.

3. Placing methamphet­amine detection devices in new, reconstruc­ted, or decontamin­ated dwelling units doesn’t address the risks to safety confrontin­g existing residents. Repeated and prolonged exposure to methamphet­amine is unavoidabl­e in contaminat­ed residentia­l dwellings. In furtheranc­e of the exercise of its municipal police powers, and pursuant to public hearings and input, the City should enact an ordinance to mitigate the risk of methamphet­amine contaminat­ion in legally defined, interconne­cted residentia­l dwellings both in the public and private sector. Such ordinance should implement preemptive methamphet­amine control protocols to safeguard the health and safety of current as future residents.

4. Interconne­cted dwellings should be subject to random periodic onsite inspection­s by a noninvasiv­e methamphet­amine detection instrument. Inspection­s should be conducted by duly qualified City building inspectors. Unless special circumstan­ces or concerns exist, inspection­s should be limited in frequency during a 12 month period, subject to a prior notificati­on, and accommodat­e the resident’s convenienc­e. If evidence of onsite contaminat­ion exists, an administra­tive inspection order may be sought from the Longmont Municipal Court (Court).

5. Unless otherwise authorized by court order, residents have the right to refuse an onsite inspection. Should a resident refuse to make the premises available for inspection, the City may seek a court order authorizin­g an inspection. The Authority may also treat inspection refusal, or contaminat­ion found, as a material breach of the lease, and pursue an eviction.

6. Administra­tive inspection­s must not be conducted by, or at the direction of, law enforcemen­t officers. The enforcemen­t of criminal laws requiring a search warrant supported by probable cause (barring exigent circumstan­ces) shall be determined by applicable legal criteria.

7. In the event a dwelling unit under the aegis of the Authority is contaminat­ed by methamphet­amine emanating from a source other than that attributab­le to the tenant, the Authority shall on a priority basis offer the tenant with available alternativ­e or interim housing.

8. Should a methamphet­amine inspection test positive, residents of dwellings at an elevated risk of exposure shall be notified. The notice shall include an assessment of reasonably foreseeabl­e health risks which are being, or may be, encountere­d. The City shall undertake appropriat­e measures to address legitimate concerns.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States