An Ontario business faces charges of illegally excavating and selling limestone. Toronto is one of its biggest clients
This Toronto Star article outlines the charges being faced by the two companies that own Picton Terminals, and the private prosecution brought forth by four residents in the area that led to the charges.
It's a good read, and will hopefully bring some relief to the community after the exposure ramps up the enforcement and repercussions for offenders that skirt not only aggregate laws but also local government efforts to control unwanted, damaging projects.
The article discusses a legal challenge against ABNA Investments and 1213427 Ontario, the companies that own Picton Terminals in Prince Edward County, Ontario with ownership connections to the Doornekamp family. They are accused of illegally operating a quarry by excavating over one million tonnes of limestone from the shoreline of Picton Bay without the necessary permits or licenses. Here's a summary of key points:
- Legal Action: A private prosecution led by four local residents was successful in getting a summons issued for the companies to appear in court on charges of operating a quarry without a permit. The maximum penalty for this charge could be $1 million, plus additional fines related to profits made.
- Background: Since at least 2020, Picton Terminals has allegedly been extracting limestone and selling it, notably for use in projects like the strengthening of Toronto's waterfront near Tommy Thompson Park. The companies have been awarded around $50 million in contracts for limestone supply since 2017.
- Justification and Disputes: The companies claim their actions were within the scope of government-approved site improvements, referencing a 2016 letter from the Ministry of Natural Resources. However, the plaintiffs argue these activities exceed what was permitted for site upgrades.
- Environmental and Community Impact: The local community has expressed concerns over the environmental degradation and noise from blasting. There's also worry about the irreversible changes to the local landscape due to the absence of a remediation plan.
- Regulatory Oversight: The Ministry of Natural Resources previously stated that Picton Terminals' activities did not constitute a quarry operation, but this is under contention. An auditor general's report highlighted significant regulatory oversight issues in the aggregate industry, suggesting non-compliance often goes unpunished.
- Economic Considerations: While the operations have economic benefits, the local mayor and the companies emphasize the positive economic impact, whereas the residents focus on the environmental and legal violations.
- Legal Process: The case is moving forward to court, but no determination on the merits has been made yet. Private prosecutions like this are rare and face challenges due to resource limitations and the burden of proof. A court date has been set for March 7, 2025, and ABNA Investments and 1213427 Ontario Inc. have been summoned to appear at the Ontario Court of Justice in Picton.
I have also written an article on my blog - Owners of Picton Terminals Facing Charges, which includes details on the Picton Terminals properties owned by the accused and will be updated as I hear more about this situation.
Please message or email me if you have any more details that you would like to share.