14 hours ago
Jersey States panel backs cannabis farm noise and smell complaint
A States' panel has upheld a complaint over the way the government handled residents' concerns about noise and smells from a cannabis farm in complaints panel said the Infrastructure and Environment Department had prioritised the interests of the Northern Leaf farm in St Lawrence to the detriment of people living nearby last panel said the government had taken too long to deal with residents' complaints, criticising its use of an unjust "sniff test" to decide whether cannabis odours from the farm were a Scate, Chief Officer of Infrastructure and Environment, said the department acknowledged the report but did not accept the findings.
The panel said the government officers had "misinterpreted" the law that covered how nuisances should be dealt added that delays in bringing forward an abatement notice for noise and any action in relation to the odours had been unreasonable and that there was enough evidence to have acted to quicker in respect to "odours emanating from the site".Head of the panel Geoffrey Crill said: "The fact that no precedents existed should not have prevented action from being taken by the department. "The board considers it unacceptable that the department simply extended the monitoring of odours in order to meet a threshold that had already been acknowledged as unworkable."
The government rejected the panel's decision, saying there were "many inaccuracies" in its Scate said: "Our responsibility is to uphold Jersey's regulatory framework fairly and impartially - that means acting in the interests of all parties, residents, businesses and the wider community."In the case of Northern Leaf, the department has issued a number of enforcement and noise asbatement notices and we have taken clear regulatory action in response to concerns raised. "We stand by our actions taken, ensuring that our interventions lead to meaningful and lasting improvements for those affected."
'Panel oversteps boundaries'
Mr Scate said there had been a "substantial investment of resources" into the case, including more than 10 officers over a four-year period and "over 1,000 hours of focused effort".He said: "We do not accept the view that more could or should have been done - our team has acted at all times with diligence, professionalism and within the scope of legislation."Mr Scate added that the department was "not afforded the opportunity to participate fully in the panel's hearing process". He said: "The absence of a right to reply or to clarify key information before conclusions were drawn is disappointing and does not reflect principles of procedural fairness."We believe the panel continues to overstep the boundaries of its remit, particularly in matters relating to professional judgment and legal process."The department said it would report to the States within the next three months with a full response to the decision.
