I sent them an e-mail asking about the 500m thing. They (obviously) just gave me a vague answer stating that the local zoning etc. are all taken into account when determining the risk factor of the proposed location (which is odd given that they originally said this was up to the municipality). I have heard that about being within 500m of a house, but I have not heard back from them with a denial (yet) and we have a few houses within the radius. I'll let everyone know if they do (we are also under 20k sqft, so maybe a double whammy).
MMPR Grow op: Small Scale
- Thread starter maximum
- Start date
I sent them an e-mail asking about the 500m thing. They (obviously) just gave me a vague answer stating that the local zoning etc. are all taken into account when determining the risk factor of the proposed location (which is odd given that they originally said this was up to the municipality). I have heard that about being within 500m of a house, but I have not heard back from them with a denial (yet) and we have a few houses within the radius. I'll let everyone know if they do (we are also under 20k sqft, so maybe a double whammy).
ya even with a solid source, you never know what they might change tomorrow. they have and do say the muny will hold those regs up, but in all fact the gov is the final say in distance to a house. its there way of axing you. they also wont say much to you if your within a boundry, they string you along then find something to cut you with.
well the first 13 will have things to work on for some new rules, and theory are being dealt with. some things cant change. all 13 have inspection issues that they are working on.
if already a lp, they have made in the first wave of "pree april\' applications. now the H|C| is smart and is changing things fast.
theres also large wording catches, like not how large the building is compares to security layout or fencing sizes.
whos my source? cant tell ya that. ill say 25 yrs in the gov, 20 yrs lobbyist, very close to harpo. but totally disagrees with harpos thaughts on this stuf.
also my lender....
MarijeJane
Well-Known Member
"theres also large wording catches, like not how large the building is compares to security layout or fencing sizes. "
I appreciate you sharing info, and your CV sounds impressive.... but I am confused. Where are the wording catches about "how large the building is compared to security...? I haven't seen any of this anywhere. Please give me a link to the documents. I do not have the connections you have and am struggling to keep up on the changes from Health Canada. Thanks again!
oddish
Well-Known Member
@MarijeJane it's not about what it says in the documents anymore. Now it's about what they're going to put in those documents or how that can skew them to work in their favour. These new things are "leaks" that you won't see documented for a while, if at all. They're just the reasoning behind rejecting people - the reason they actually give you could be one of as many as they choose.
It even says in the original regulations that they can reject your application if they feel that there's a decent probability that you might go astray at some point in time. They always leave themselves a way out.
It even says in the original regulations that they can reject your application if they feel that there's a decent probability that you might go astray at some point in time. They always leave themselves a way out.
Devil Lettuce
Well-Known Member
I agree with Oddish.......it seems like the spirit of this thread has died, and most applicants (either successful or rejected) have chosen to not return to share their experiences and knowledge. I'm sure many plan on continuing to fight, and are choosing to keep this information to themselves which is completely understandable. It really would benefit everyone involved if parties that have been rejected would come forward and share info. If enough people speak up, it would be a start at pushing back and putting some pressure on HC to stop screwing around the little guys. It would also give a clearer picture of what is really going on inside HC.
We dont really know how many have been rejected, or even how many have applied. What I mean by this is that I have submitted an application that I later withdrew. I then submitted an application that was rejected because it was missing some items (ie. image showing 500 m radius, even though it dosn't say anywhere that this is needed). Now I have re-submitted the application with the 500 m radius etc.
Depending on how they do their math, I alone could count for 3 applications; one withdrawn, one rejected, and one in limbo.
They say they have received X applications, but are these all separate applicants or just re-submissions. They say they have rejected Y applications, but how many of these have re-submitted? I personally think they are trying to make the numbers look higher than they are to justify more restrictive policies, but this is just speculation.
That being said, it would definitely be nice to hear from some of those who have been declined.
Depending on how they do their math, I alone could count for 3 applications; one withdrawn, one rejected, and one in limbo.
They say they have received X applications, but are these all separate applicants or just re-submissions. They say they have rejected Y applications, but how many of these have re-submitted? I personally think they are trying to make the numbers look higher than they are to justify more restrictive policies, but this is just speculation.
That being said, it would definitely be nice to hear from some of those who have been declined.
oddish
Well-Known Member
I agree entirely, however at this stage they are reportedly rejecting applicants who have been in the running for 6 months+ and they are not accepting re-applications from the same individuals (again, reportedly - I'm not Health Canada).
I just want to hear from anyone that they received a yay/nay - this silence is killing me.
I just want to hear from anyone that they received a yay/nay - this silence is killing me.
Devil Lettuce
Well-Known Member
I for one can't believe how long this has gone with no new developments. Current LP's can't meet the demand and ensure constant supply, yet no new LP's have been approved and hit the list in months. The vast majority of the active applicants that I have been speaking with have heard nothing or very little from HC over the last few months, something's got to give here at some point as things cannot continue on like this indefinitely.
Devil Lettuce
Well-Known Member
Welcome to life during an RCMP investigation
These supposed diversion investigations would definitely be mucking up the works, but there is still a major bias towards the smaller-scale applicants in play. I've also spoken with some larger outfits that have had HC's undivided attention and have been progressing through the process very quickly. Even with this investigation, there are still some applicants moving through the queue.
oddish
Well-Known Member
They're moving through the queue, but not very quickly still. They all hit the same roadblock before the LOI from what I'm hearing.
That said, I'm also talking to a small LP that's made just as much headway as some of the larger ones. They're stuck in security checks now, but they've had direct communication with Health Canada, solid feedback and seem to be in a good place.. hopefully they don't just get shitcanned for being under 20,000 sq ft.
That said, I'm also talking to a small LP that's made just as much headway as some of the larger ones. They're stuck in security checks now, but they've had direct communication with Health Canada, solid feedback and seem to be in a good place.. hopefully they don't just get shitcanned for being under 20,000 sq ft.
Devil Lettuce
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure why initial size is so important to HC, it's the ultimate capacity for expansion that really matters, is it not? Given what we've already seen, wouldn't the government rather see a company start small and dial in their security and QA before ramping up unsustainably as others have?
they(rcmp) surely do drag their feet when they find out somone wants to grow pot eh
You have to be special and pass a test. lol
You have to be able to pay off authorities, when q'd to do so, without raising suspicion. lol
You have to be able to bend over and take it up the wazzo.
You have to be able to say "OK" when they tell you that you must pay MORE!
You must be able to walk away, when they realize the fiasco they've made of the whole deal.
You'll need a good lawyer when it's all said and done.
Enjoy being the worst kind of person there is.
The kind who thrive off of sick people!
You have to be special and pass a test. lol
You have to be able to pay off authorities, when q'd to do so, without raising suspicion. lol
You have to be able to bend over and take it up the wazzo.
You have to be able to say "OK" when they tell you that you must pay MORE!
You must be able to walk away, when they realize the fiasco they've made of the whole deal.
You'll need a good lawyer when it's all said and done.
Enjoy being the worst kind of person there is.
The kind who thrive off of sick people!
oddish
Well-Known Member
They would, as long as the facility/property allows for that. (speculation of course)
The issue is that expanding to a second facility means a second application (of sorts), second inspection, etc.
I agree with rnr and others who have noted that they want to keep the number of LPs low and the production at each place high - less people to govern just makes more sense on all fronts. The government has never been afraid of things like price fixing and market competition anyways.
The issue is that expanding to a second facility means a second application (of sorts), second inspection, etc.
I agree with rnr and others who have noted that they want to keep the number of LPs low and the production at each place high - less people to govern just makes more sense on all fronts. The government has never been afraid of things like price fixing and market competition anyways.
CannaReview
Well-Known Member
Well there's always Revenue Canada that can visit you just in case you couldn't keep your mouth shut.
this is 100%. they don't want a lot of LP, they want a handful that can supply the system. the delays are from the court case with patients, this has pissed off HC and they intend to win and screw the patients.
we all hope the courts favor patients but my dude says they wont allow it and will fuck with stuff to screw the patients cause they started with them. again harper dont want this to happen.
I also understand most new apps wont get going until the last 400 in process are dealt with.
rem 1-2 yrs for total application from start to loi or fully built before you grow, then can still be shut down.
don't look into this too much and just do what they ask. this will not be easy for any small people imo. you will need a solid backer that can afford to cover costs for yrs and or have a lobbyist but they want $10-5ok to anything. I just get advice, until I fully need them. best of luck
Princess of Pot
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry but I just don't believe this. There is zero information to back this up. It sounds too fishy to be true. What's to stop me from posting that unless the side of the building is painted green it's an automatic denial. If anyone has been denied on this ground post the letter of rejection. Also, they cannot just change the rules as they go, they are opening themselves up to lawsuits.
Similar threads
