"Unquestionable" EAPH GEORGINA PROPERTY OPERATIONS CURRENT FACTS:
EAPH/Alliance Group’s Legal Eagles are on the DIRT in Georgina regarding the Town of Georgina temporary hold up of the Alliance Group Aggregate Businesses activities at the Georgina property, concerning the properties previous owners Superior Court Injunction to stop importing fill on to the property for the property pit area rehabilitation.
The Town of Georgina temporary hold up and the property use controversy with the new owners; Alliance Group, will have an amiable resolve for all and the EAPH/Alliance Group Aggregate Businesses operations and the Legalized Marijuana advancements will move forward at a rapid pace and as are allowed at the Georgina property. EAPH/Alliance Group will PREVAIL at Georgina and WIN all conflicts regarding the temporary hold up and the GROUND use controversy and are now anticipating the start of the more lucrative AGGREGATE BUSINESSES activities at the site.
EAPH’s COO, who is also the President of the Alliance Group is a Developer and a Contractor and was very attuned to and aware of all Georgina local Zoning rules, regulations, permits, licenses, etc. when the Alliance Group purchased the 135 acres Georgnia property (www.growmmj.site) and EAPH later made an investment in the property for the various uses mentioned below:
On the front 90 acres area of the property, that fronts on Smith Boulevard, the new property owners, the Alliance Group, will be providing Aggregate Businesses services such as recycling, manufacturing of various industrial products, waste management services, cement/asphalt plant and other type aggregate services and products, and has signed contracts with several local construction companies.
On the rear 45 acres area of the property, that borders on Frog Street at the rear of the property, EAPH/Alliance Group are pursuing several avenues for a Health Canada Medical/Recreational Marijuana License/Letter to build a marijuana facility on the rear 45 acres area of the property in Georgina, Canada. Easton is currently in negotiations with 2 ACMPR applicants with one of the companies having received approval and a Health Canada compliance number on its ACMPR application for a marijuana cultivators / growers license to meet the federal medical / recreational launch of Marijuana for the country of Canada. Terms include an Easton financing commitment upon approval of a letter to build from Health Canada. These negotiations are a result of Easton’s ongoing quest to acquire businesses and assets in various pharmaceutical sectors and other growing industries to build shareholder value. Also, Easton has had high-level discussions with a Marijuana license holder from Jamaica, who is also a late stage LP applicant in Canada with regards to distribution and possible partnership.
GEORGINA ZONING LAWS are existing and as follows and allow for all the above pending property activities:
Front 90 Acre Area Zoning; M-3 Extractive Industrial Allows:
Batching Plant, Aggregate Washing, Aggregate Crushing, Aggregate Recycling, Aggregate Screening, Asphalt Plant, Concrete Structure Manufacturing, Pit, Police Station, Quarry, Accessory Buildings and Structures.
Rear 45 Acre Area Zoning; RU Rural Allows:
Agricultural, farm produce and many other legal uses, for example: Marijuana Facility/Production.
GEORGINA PROPERTY EXISTING SUPERIOR COURT INJUNCTION/TEMPORARY HOLD UP ISSUES:
The Town of Georgina placed an injunction on the previous owners of the property to not allow the importing of any fill on to the property for the property rehabilitation. The previous owner appealed the Town of Georgina’s injunction that prevented the importing of fill on to the property with off-site fill materials to rehilbilate the property back to farm land. The previous owner lost the appeal and the Superior Court issued an order to cease imported fill activities.
The Superior Court order was not an order to stop the other allowed permitted zoning activities and the importing of clean materials for other allowable activities such as M-3 Extractive Industrial Zoning Allows: Batching Plant, Aggregate Washing, Aggregate Crushing, Aggregate Recycling, Aggregate Screening, Asphalt Plant, Concrete Structure Manufacturing, Pit, Police Station, Quarry, Accessory Buildings and Structures.
ACTUAL SUPERIOR COURT APPEAL DECISION DOCUMENTS:
SUPERIOR COURT:
Facts:
The appellants, 1124123 Ontario Limited (“112 Ontario”) and Marvin Blanchard, appeal the order of the application judge granting the respondent, The Corporation of the Town of Georgina (the “Town”) a permanent injunction restraining the appellants from contravening the Town’s Site Alteration By-law in connection with property owned by 112 Ontario (the “Property”). Blanchard held a license under the Aggregate Resources Act to extract aggregate from the Property (the “License”). He stopped extracting in 2007. On June 12, 2007, the Ministry of Natural Resources issued a Rehabilitation Order to Blanchard to comply with s. 48(1) of the Act, which requires a license to “perform progressive rehabilitation and final rehabilitation on the site in accordance with this Act, the regulations, the site plan and the conditions of the license or permit to the satisfaction of the Minister.” On October 21, 2013, the Minister revoked Blanchard’s License. The License required Blanchard to perform a final rehabilitation of the Property. Blanchard’s position was that he needed to truck fill onto the Property to rehabilitate it in accordance with the Act. The Town’s position was that the Site Alteration By-law prohibited Blanchard from bringing fill on to his Property unless the License permitted him to do so. Ontario took the position that the License does not permit Blanchard to import fill to rehabilitate the Property.
The Town obtained a final injunction restraining Blanchard from contravening its Site Alteration By-law, including prohibiting him from importing fill onto the property. The appellants appeal, seeking to set aside the final injunction.
Issues:
(1) Whether the application judge erred in interpreting the Act and the License as prohibiting them from bringing fill on to the Property to rehabilitate it.
(2) Whether the terms of the final injunction are too broad and would prevent them from rehabilitating the Property.
Holding:
Appeal dismissed.
Reasoning:
(1) No. The appellants observed that the Act defines “rehabilitate” as meaning “to treat land from which aggregate has been excavated so that the use or condition of the land (a) is restored to its former use or condition, or (b) is changed to another use or condition that is or will be compatible with the use of adjacent land.” The appellants contended that since the Property was previously used as an alfalfa crop farm, the definition of “rehabilitate” entitles them to bring fill onto the Property to restore it to former use. The Court disagreed. The appellants’ argument ignored that the License was subject to specific conditions about how the appellants are to rehabilitate the excavated sites. The Court held that there was ample evidence to support the application judge’s findings that there was no provision in the site plans for the importing of fill onto the site for rehabilitation purposes, and that a Rehabilitation Order issued in 2007 clearly described how the rehabilitation of the site was to be done using onsite materials. The Court also rejected the appellants’ submission that a regulation under the Act in force at the time the License was issued allows them to import fill.
(2) No. The appellants argued that the final injunction, by permanently restraining them from contravening the provisions of the Town’s site Alteration By-law, prevented them from performing the sloping and grading of the pit required by the notes in the Final Rehabilitation Plan. They argued that would result in a conflict between the By-law and the Act. They contended that the By-law is rendered inoperative to the extent of its inconsistency with the provisions of the License or site plans. The Court rejected this submission. The Town acknowledged that any rehabilitation performed by way of a site alteration properly authorized under a license issued pursuant to the Aggregate Resources Act, whether taking place during the currency of the license or after the expiration/revocation of same, is exempt from the provisions of the Site Alteration By-law. The Town’s acknowledgement was based on Part 3, s 3.1(h) of the Site Alteration By-law, which states that it does not apply to the alteration of grade of land undertaken on land described in a license for a pit under the Aggregate Resources Act. The section of the Site Alteration By-law prohibiting site alteration is expressly made subject to Part 3 of the By-law. The final injunction does not interfere with the appellants’ ability to rehabilitate the Property. END OF SUPERIOR COURT DOCS
ALLIANCE GROUP CURRENT PROPERTY ACTIVITIES:
The Georgina property previous owners Superior Court injunction history has no bearing or substance on the current existing property Zoning Laws allowable uses by the Alliance Group Aggregate Businesses as their use will conform with all local current Zoning Laws and requirements; “It’s all about the ZONING LAWS”. Georgina existing Property Zoning Laws which do not change when a property ownership changes. Alliance Group, the new property owners, Aggregate Businesses activities are not in violation of any previous property injunctions, or any of the allowable Georgina Zoning Laws and are following all subject zoning laws/ordinances and will be doing same for all future Aggregate Businesses operations, and the allowable existing Georgina Zoning Laws will PREVAIL regarding the temporary hold up with the Town of Georgina, and EAPH/Alliance Group is fully cooperating with the Town of Georgina and will be in full compliance with all current local Zoning Laws, permits, licenses, etc. as required.
The Alliance Group, the new property owners, are in full compliance with the current zoning laws that allows for import to the site of clean materials for Aggregate Washing, Aggregate Crushing, Aggregate Recycling, Aggregate Screening, etc. and then the allowable sale of same clean materials for export from the site. The Alliance Group Aggregate Businesses operations do not involve importing any fill materials to the site for any property rehabilitation and only involve the import/export of clean materials for recycling where applicable.
If the Alliance Group is required to rehabilitate the existing property pit area, that's not a big deal, if the existing Georgina pit area is required to be rehabilitated, as the Alliance Group has plenty of options with the existing fill materials that are abundant on the property, and also could use the excavated fill/soils from the foot print of the pending Marijuana Facility building, parking and retention basins areas for the existing pit rehabilitation, and that operation has nothing to do with the existing permitted uses zoning laws already being in place for other Aggregate Businesses activities.
EAPH/Alliance Group are developing the property and are preparing to soon start operations on its much more lucrative and profitable Aggregate Businesses on its Georgina property as well as its medical marijuana operations which Alliance is working towards commencing and maybe a HEALTH CANADA ACMPR Marijuana License and Marijuana Greenhouse Facility SOON. EAPH/Alliance Group invested MILLIONS into the property in Georgina for the AGGREGATE BUSINESSES and the RECREATIONAL/MEDICAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES that will produce constant EAPH/Alliance Group REVENUES, of which some have already started, and will continue for years.
EAPH/Alliance Group is building community deep in the DIRT of Georgina and bringing in new BUSINESSES, EMPLOYMENT and LOCAL INCOME opportunities. Georgina will be happy to have new allowed permitted zoning activities at the dormant Georgina pit property, it’s good business for everyone involved. Georgina will cash in on LEGAL MARIJUANA, why shouldn’t they, its LEGAL in all of CANADA, everybody will, at the least, the smarter ones. It’s great that Marijuana is LEGAL in Georgina; and some neighbors are excited about it and investing in EAPH.
Another EAPH/ALLIANCE GROUP NOTEABLES:
Additionally: “Grin and BAYER it”; EAPH along with BMV; EAPH/BMV invested MILLIONS into the licensing and distribution rights in Mexico/South American countries and then closed on joint ventures with several Big Pharma Companies; BAYER and others, for ROYALTIES REVENUES that are anticipated to start later this year or early 2019 and the EAPH REVENUES will continue for years.
EAPH is REAL, Alliance Group is REAL; BMV is REAL; BAYER is REAL; AGGREGATE REVENUES are REAL; LEGAL MARIJUANA is REAL and there is a REAL property in Georgina, Canada (www.growmmj.site) producing AGGREGATE REVENUES every day for EAPH/ALLIANCE GROUP and with a HEALTH CANADA LICENSED MARIJUANA Facility soon to commence.
EAPH is moving forward including an EAPH name change to better reflect its diversifying business segments, as the company gears up to enter additional lucrative business segments and industries, by investing in Real Estate, Gaming, Aggregates, Life Sciences (including Recreational / Medical Marijuana), Natural Resources and TMT (including AI, fintech, blockchain and mobile technologies).
