« Ind. Courts - Michigan City paper calls for Judge Koethe to resign | Main | Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court decision in school finance case pending »

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Environment - "Scores of Indiana homes contaminated by meth labs sit abandoned"

The ILB had a comprehensive entry on March 30th, headed "Meth lab cleanup a hassle for landlords" and quoting a South Bend Tribune story. The entry begins with quotes from the August 6, 2006 ILB entry, headed: "Who should pay price for meth messes?" where I questioned whether property owners would be able to bear the burden imposed by the rule, and also questioned whether the rule went beyond the directive set in the authorizing statute.

Today the Indianapolis Star has a lengthy, front-page story by Francesca Jarosz, headed "Scores of Indiana homes contaminated by meth labs sit abandoned." Unfortunately, rather than addressing the issues raised by the rule, the story is aimed at problems with enforcing the rule.

Some quotes from the story:

Under state regulations, owners are responsible for paying to test properties where meth labs are found and, if necessary, for cleanup to make the properties safe for people to live in.

But getting owners to clean up the properties has proved difficult in many counties, where health department officials lack the authority to enforce the regulations or the money to do the cleanup themselves. In many cases, the residences sit vacant.

At least 18 states require residences with meth residue to be cleaned. In many, the bill is the responsibility of property owners, said Steve Mojonnier, who wrote the state cleanup rule and works in the Indiana Department of Environmental Management's Office of Legal Counsel.

Making sure the properties are decontaminated is important, health officials say. Meth labs can leave behind residue and contaminants such as iodine and hydrogen chloride that can be detected for more than a decade. * * *

The percentage of residences that are abandoned after meth labs are found varies from county to county, but in areas where meth manufacture has been on the rise, health officials say they constitute the majority.

In LaGrange County, at least 30 houses, trailers and apartments where meth labs have been discovered sit vacant. In Noble County, about 13 residences have yet to be cleaned, and many haven't been tested for contamination. In Elkhart County, the toll stands at 31 residences, some of which have been abandoned for more than two years.

"Unfortunately for us, we don't see any letup," said John Hulewicz, environmental health supervisor at the Elkhart County Health Department. "You have good landlords, but economically it doesn't make sense for them to clean up the property."

Police report meth lab discoveries to county health department officials. In most cases, the health departments prohibit occupancy of the property and send owners a letter with information about getting the residence tested and cleaned.

But after the letter is sent, health department officials can't force property owners to pay for the initial testing, which averages about $1,500, or the cleanup, which can cost from $3,000 to $30,000. Insurance companies, typically, have not provided help.

The departments also don't have money to pay for decontamination if owners choose not to clean up the property or to take the alternate route of demolishing it.

When a property where meth was made is abandoned, neighbors and others in the community sometimes have to deal with the effects, such as reduced property values and increased squatters, vermin and illegal activity. * * *

In many counties, officials rarely follow through to see whether properties have been inhabited after they're marked for meth lab cleanup, often because they don't have the manpower.

"It's really hard to keep track of what's going on," said Jack Chronister, the environmentalist for the Noble County Health Department. "It's absolutely a concern."

State officials recognize the problem but say they are constrained in how to fix it. Providing state funding for cleanup would fall on lawmakers, who have other budgetary priorities, IDEM's Mojonnier said.

"There's not a lot of money floating around," he said. "To clean up after criminal activity is not a high-profile item."

My thoughts. The ILB has a long list of entries dealing with meth cleanup. Rural properties and urban settings are both impacted. An effective answer needs to be found, right now it appears we have nothing of the sort. What approaches are being used in other states? What about a cleanup fund financed by a tax on the ingredients used to make meth?

Posted by Marcia Oddi on May 10, 2009 01:45 PM
Posted to Environment