Editor’s note: REM reached out to MREB for more information on the SGM, its outcome and the decision to move forward with the Cornerstone amalgamation. As of the time of writing, we have not heard back. Any information received will be added here.

 

On Monday, July 1, the Cornerstone Association of Realtors (Cornerstone) began its operations.

This follows a special general meeting (SGM) held by the Mississauga Real Estate Board (MREB) on June 26, where a vote in favour of terminating its amalgamation with three other Ontario boards as Cornerstone took place.

 

SGM vote to reverse decision didn’t stop amalgamation

 

However, MREB’s amalgamation has moved forward, as confirmed in a July 2 email to Cornerstone members from Bill Duce, CEO of Cornerstone:

“Like any amalgamation, this is not about endings but rather new beginnings. All four partnering associations, Hamilton-Burlington, Waterloo Region, Simcoe & District and Mississauga will continue into Cornerstone. We take our extensive and celebrated past into new beginnings to become better together. 

Nothing about this was easy, and by no means is the heavy lifting finished; it is just beginning. As you are likely aware, there has been some eleventh-hour angst at one of our partner associations when some vocal members tried to withdraw from the amalgamation. These members were engaged, passionate and cared deeply about their association. While some of their concerns were absolutely on the spot, others were based on misinformation that created fear, uncertainty and doubt.”

 

‘(MREB) did not honour the mandate of the SGM verdict nor communicate to membership what steps they took after’

 

Tahir Qureshi, broker of record and president of City-Pro Realty Inc., Brokerage, was one such concerned member. Quershi left the new association on July 2. “I have terminated my brokerage membership and designated TRREB as my home board,” he explains, despite supporting and partaking in MREB, his local board, for years.

“The painful part is the SGM reversing the amalgamation was not considered by the board … (They) did not honour the mandate of the SGM verdict nor communicate to the membership what steps they took after the SGM mandate.”

Tehreem Kamal, broker with Royal LePage Real Estate Services Ltd., Brokerage, echoes this sentiment and shares: “The Mississauga Real Estate Board of directors having chosen to disregard the members’ mandate is a serious violation of the Ontario Not-for-Profit Corporations Act (ONCA) and Mississauga Real Estate Board bylaws.

Also important is that the chair and three other directors had a direct conflict of interest in this matter from the start. When the then-president decided not to be on the task force, the president elect was appointed to the task force along with the chair and two other directors. It was determined at the last two meetings of the board (late last year) that the task force would become the (Cornerstone) board once the individual boards were dissolved.”

 

‘Amalgamations between real estate associations are not about MLS systems alone’

 

In his email, Duce goes on to explain that Cornerstone is fully aware of the concerns regarding access to MLS information:

“While the province’s inefficient and arbitrary ‘MLS system boundaries’ are actively shifting, members are still required to access two or more MLS systems. We are actively working on this issue and will continue until a satisfactory solution is reached.

Cornerstone staunchly believes that all Ontario realtors must have access to all Ontario MLS information to fulfill their fiduciary duties to their clients. It is not about how much data one has access to or having more data; you need all the data — full stop.“

He states that the amalgamation task force saw a presentation from PropTx, but that their “immediate attention is on completing the remaining tasks of our amalgamation while ensuring we provide our users with a robust and stable system … Amalgamations between real estate associations are not about MLS systems alone. We see multiple examples of associations within the same MLS system still pursuing amalgamations to provide additional efficiencies and excellence to their members.”

 

Duce’s wrap-up reiterates that real estate is local and that Cornerstone believes boards need to be as well. 

 

Editor’s note: REM reached out to MREB for more information on the SGM and outcome. We’ll update this article as we hear back and learn more.

 

On January 31 this year, Mississauga Real Estate Board (MREB) members voted to amalgamate with the Realtors Association of Hamilton-Burlington (RAHB), the Waterloo Region Association of Realtors (WRAR) and the Simcoe & District Real Estate Board (SDREB) to become Cornerstone Association of Realtors on July 1, 2024.

However, due to large concerns, last month, some MREB members, with the support of several past presidents of MREB, requested the board call a members-only special general meeting (SGM) to rescind the vote to amalgamate.

The request was granted, and a meeting was held on June 26.

 

‘Consensus was unanimous … It’s all about MLS data and access. That’s what we need as working realtors’

 

“An overwhelming majority of the membership was in the room, and the membership’s consensus was unanimous,” Tehreem Kamal, broker with Royal LePage Real Estate Services Ltd., Brokerage, reports about rescinding the vote to amalgamate.

Kamal notes there were more members present than at the earlier SGM in January, where the amalgamation was voted in favour. “However,” she points out, “As cited before, the landscape was different and things have changed rapidly.”

Kamal also highlights that a key factor swaying the vote transpired over the past two weeks: “The Oakville, Milton and District Real Estate Board (OMDREB) decided they would be leaving ITSO (Information Technology Systems Ontario) once their contract comes to an end, and joining Cornerstone wouldn’t be an option.

Basically, it’s all about MLS data and access to data, because that’s what we need as working realtors.”

 

OMDREB’s decision

 

Initially, the proposed amalgamation had MREB and other Ontario boards being part of one board and one MLS system: ITSO’s Matrix. MREB, OMDREB, London and St. Thomas Association of Realtors (LSTAR), Niagara Association of Realtors (NAR) and WRAR all use this system.

Kamal explains that OMDREB’s decision plays a key role as there’s a lot of business crossover from Mississauga to Oakville and vice versa, and that Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) statistics support this.

About the upcoming change for OMDREB, Anthony Danko, OMDREB president, says:

“Realtors can see for themselves how fast things are changing in organized real estate. Local boards are amalgamating, how we access and receive our MLS data is changing and, perhaps most importantly, the push for province-wide data is becoming stronger than ever.

OMDREB’s goal has always been to ensure our members have access to the most comprehensive data set possible, culminating in one province-wide MLS. Additionally, reviewing and considering your options when contracts approach renewal is good business practice. Knowing that the ITSO contract was approaching renewal, OMDREB’s board of directors did its due diligence by exploring all avenues to provide our members with the best data set possible.

Based on our extensive consultations and the feedback we received from members, along with the fact that it holds nearly all of the data within our jurisdiction, OMDREB decided to move forward with using PropTx as our MLS services provider, which will happen later this year.”

 

The MREB membership directed its board of directors to immediately stop the process, terminate the amalgamation and, if there’s any need, seek an injunction.

 

On May 23, 2024, Information Technology Systems Ontario (ITSO) provided a memo to the boards of its member associations about new exclusive listing functionality it planned to implement as early as this month within its Matrix system.

ITSO sought feedback from its CEO Advisory Group on whether the functionality should be made available system-wide or on an opt-in basis as a non-basic service. However, the organization halted its efforts less than two weeks later.

 

Issues with adding exclusives to an MLS system

 

REM obtained ITSO’s memo, which discusses the issues of adding exclusive listings to the Matrix system after those listings have sold (which is often done for tracking statistics, financing purposes or use in comparative market analyses).

It notes, “The practice raises concerns under Rule 2.08, which provides that a listing is not acceptable if it is not available for showings and the registration of offers. If a listing is already sold before it is entered into the ITSO system, then it is not available for other realtors to cooperate on and therefore is a violation of Rule 2.08.

It is extremely frustrating for realtors to see a new listing, or have their clients see one in an auto-email, only to find out that the property is already sold when they contact the listing realtor for a showing. Adding these listings as MLS listings diminishes confidence in what is supposed to be a cooperative system. Further, the sale price for an exclusive listing is not necessarily reflective of what would be obtained for an MLS listing, so entering these listings into the ITSO system can skew statistics.”

 

How the functionality would help the industry

 

The memo goes on to note there are legitimate reasons for entering these listings into ITSO’s system: “Historically there was no easy way to capture this data for sales records or for financing purposes. The ITSO board of directors wants to respond to the needs of our users so that they will not be forced to breach the MLS rules or, alternatively, find a workaround to avoid compliance issues.”

It then explains this is why ITSO created the Alternative Listing Task Force (ALTF) in 2022, which determined the following, and unanimously agreed to recommend proceeding with the closed exclusive listing functionality:

1. “Augmenting the ITSO system with exclusive listings would be beneficial for statistical and financing purposes.
2. Enabling realtors to put exclusive listings into the ITSO system directly to a pending or closed status will likely increase compliance with Rule 2.08 for MLS listings, as there will no longer be a need to add exclusive listings to system inaccurately as MLS listings.
3. Adding this functionality to the ITSO system could also potentially entice more commercial realtors to put listings into the ITSO system, as MLS rules are often seen as a constraint for commercial listings.
4. Augmenting the ITSO system with exclusive listings could also provide an avenue for assignment listings to get exposure to realtors without being publicly advertised.”

 

The process and journey

 

The memo continues to describe the process and journey ITSO took in developing the exclusive listing functionality.

ITSO’s board of directors approved the ALTF’s recommendation in September 2022 along with its finalized rules for sold exclusive listings in March 2023, which the CEO Advisory Group discussed in April 2023. After some delays in development work and the Trust in Real Estate Services Act (TRESA) coming into effect on December 1, 2023, ITSO changed the rules for exclusive listings to include TRESA terminology changes before meeting with the CEO Advisory Group in December 2023. The intent was to consult about active exclusive listings, but this was put on hold (due to member associations’ work being done with the Ontario Realtor Wellness Plan).

The ALTF met this year to discuss and finalize changes to the exclusive listing rules to accommodate active listings. This caused a delay in launching the functionality for sold exclusives.

In the end, ITSO’s board approved the exclusive listing rules at its May 2024 meeting. The board found the proposed system enhancement would be welcomed by realtors “to fill a void they have been working around” along with association staff “who should see a reduction in listings violating the MLS rules as a result of providing a legitimate method of adding sold exclusive listings to the system for internal use.”

The memo encourages member associations and realtors to familiarize themselves with the exclusive listing rules and notes that Rule 9.01 requires realtors to obtain consent from their clients to collect, use and disclose the exclusive listing in the ITSO system (with sample language provided).

 

Response from CREA

 

After the memo was sent, ITSO had planned to consult with its members on the new functionality and determine how the service could be implemented. However, this was stopped on June 4, when the organization received an email from James Mabey, chair of the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA).

Mabey tells REM that CREA became aware of the new functionality towards the end of May. “When it came to our attention, we took the opportunity to meet with them and make sure we had a really good sense of what they were trying to accomplish and why. Once we started looking at it, we came to the conclusion quite quickly that it was fundamentally, in our opinion, offside with Article 30 of the Realtor Code and also the Cooperation Policy.”

His email notes that CREA learned of ITSO’s proposal on May 27 in a memo entitled New Matrix Functionality. It says that the functionality appears to be non-compliant with the requirements of Article 30 of the Realtor Code (Duty of Cooperation) and the Realtor Cooperation Policy (the “Policy”) because the proposed functionality “appears to segregate “exclusive listings” from MLS listings “when a client is looking to limit marketing of the property” (as stated in (ITSO’s) memo).”

Mabey writes that placing listings in ITSO’s system this way falls under the definition of “public marketing” under the Realtor Cooperation Policy, as follows:

““Public marketing” means the representation or marketing of a listing to the public or anyone not directly affiliated with the listing brokerage/office in a business capacity. For clarity, public marketing does not include one-to-one direct communication with a realtor unaffiliated with the listing brokerage/office. Public marketing includes any representation regarding the sale of a property, including but not limited to, flyers, yard signs, digital marketing on public-facing websites, brokerage website displays (including IDX and VOW) and onsite brokerage promotion, digital communications marketing (i.e. email blasts, newsletters, social media posts), multi-brokerage listing sharing networks and applications available to the general public.”

So, he concludes, a listing appearing as an “exclusive listing” would trigger the requirement to also place that listing on an MLS system within three days as set out in paragraph 2 of the Policy: “Within three (3) days of public marketing, realtors must place the listing on an MLS system for cooperation with other realtors.”

Mabey highlights that a listing appearing only in the “exclusive listing” portion of ITSO’s system and not on the MLS system doesn’t satisfy the Policy (regardless of the fact that MLS listings are searchable in Matrix).

 

Request to immediately suspend functionality implementation

 

He then makes some other related points and states it’s CREA’s view that ITSO’s proposal “may expose ITSO member boards, associations and realtors to disciplinary action under CREA’s bylaws and rules for failing to comply with CREA’s policies and the Realtor Code.”

The email concludes with CREA’s request that ITSO “immediately suspend all implementation of its proposal and notify CREA member boards and associations that are members of ITSO that it has done so,” along with, “We respect ITSO’s attempts to provide innovative solutions for its members and if ITSO Boards and Associations believe there is an opportunity for improvements to the Realtor Cooperation Policy our door remains open to that feedback.”

During his interview with REM, Mabey points out that the Realtor Cooperation Policy was put together with a lot of consultation from CREA members, and it was passed with a very large majority. “Anytime a policy comes into place, we look to make sure our members are well served. We have a Realtor Code committee that reviews policies on a regular basis. We’re always happy to collaborate. We value our relationship with ITSO and our collaborative efforts to work well with them,” he explains.

Mabey suggests that anytime a board or association is working on something like this, the sooner they reach out and engage with CREA to confirm everyone’s on the same page and that any barriers or differences in interpretation are established, the easier it will be to collaborate and ensure that joint members are served as well as possible.

 

ITSO’s response

 

On June 6, Blair Campbell, president of ITSO, responded to Mabey’s email, confirming that ITSO agrees to suspend the new exclusive listing functionality implementation in Matrix. 

 

Authority to interpret and apply Realtor Code as deemed appropriate

 

Campbell goes on to explain why ITSO is disappointed that CREA feels the new functionality breaches the Realtor Cooperation Policy, particularly since CREA’s rules state that boards and associations have exclusive authority to interpret and apply the Realtor Code as they deem appropriate. He points out that ITSO enforces the Realtor Code for 11 real estate boards, pursuant to CREA’s bylaws and rules, and therefore feels ITSO should have this same authority.

He then explains that ITSO has been actively enforcing Article 30 of the Realtor Code since it came into force and is well versed in the requirements of the Realtor Cooperation Policy, plus the organization’s staff have talked to every realtor named as a respondent in these “PSC (professional standards committee) incidents” — which is how they know that realtors want the functionality.

In response, Mabey tells REM, “Our boards and associations have some latitude in interpreting the code. In this case, we believe the interpretation is fundamentally different. It’s not just a grey area. (The code) was evaluated by our legal team and the people who had developed the policies with us and (the interpretation) is just fundamentally inconsistent — it’s not a degree of latitude difference.“

 

Realtors can’t always meet MLS listing standards only with additional effort

 

Campbell also writes, “Our end users want a way to comply with the Realtor Cooperation Policy while still respecting their clients’ wishes and the nature of exclusive listings. At the same time, ITSO wants to maintain the integrity of the MLS data in our system. We respectfully disagree with your assertion that realtors are always able to meet the standards of MLS listings simply by incurring additional effort.”

The examples Campbell cites include properties that can’t be shown because there’s no access during the winter or where tenants will not allow anyone to enter the property, including properties the listing realtor can’t enter to verify basic details like the number of bedrooms or measurements, whether due to a power of sale or uncooperative tenants.

“These listings cannot meet the standards of an MLS listing and must be taken exclusively,” he writes. “Permitting these listings to be entered on our system as MLS listings with remarks saying ‘no showings’, that ‘the listing brokerage takes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information’ or ‘buyer to verify all details’ goes against CREA’s three pillars and interpretations of the MLS marks and will deteriorate the quality of the MLS data on ITSO’s MLS system.”

Mabey tells REM that MLS systems across the country have different rules and different barriers to entry into the system in terms of the number of fields, the amount of data that must be put in, restrictions on showings, etc.

“If those pieces of MLS rules need to be reevaluated in context of the Realtor Cooperation Policy, then those boards and associations could definitely review the rules in that context to ensure they’re still best serving their members (and) maybe prohibit some of those listings going into the MLS,” he suggests. “I would encourage (them) to review the MLS policies they feel might not be working well with the new cooperation policy and figure out what’s best for them.”

While Mabey notes that if a realtor can’t provide the sufficient level of detail, maybe public marketing the property isn’t the best choice, he points out that CREA isn’t aware of any situation where the barrier is so high that the decision shouldn’t be made to publicly market a listing. “In (that) case, they have other opportunities because the policy doesn’t (forbid) taking an exclusive listing.”

 

A matter of enforcement

 

Campbell also points out that CREA’s stance assumes all listings entered into ITSO’s MLS system as active exclusives would fall under the Realtor Cooperation Policy, but how listings are entered (as MLS or exclusive) is actually a matter of enforcement.

“ITSO and its member associations could still require all listings falling under the Realtor Cooperation Policy to go on the system as MLS listings. Then, the exclusive functionality could be used for the legitimate purposes it was created for — capturing sold exclusives, commercial listings, new builds, assignment sales with clauses that disallow advertising as an MLS listing, etc.”

 

‘Enforcing (the) Realtor Cooperation Policy within current MLS system limitations puts ITSO and its members at risk’

 

Campbell notes that ITSO feels enforcing CREA’s Realtor Cooperation Policy within the current MLS system limitations put both ITSO and its members at risk in light of:

• the United States Department of Justice’s position on the National Association of Realtors’ Clear Cooperation Policy,
• recent press suggesting CREA’s policy may be anti-competitive and
• the Ontario TRESA regulations that require registrants to abide by the lawful instructions of their clients.

He concludes by urging CREA to reconsider its position, stating: “The Realtor Cooperation Policy does not specify that listings must be entered on an MLS system as MLS listings — it says the listings must be placed on an MLS system for cooperation with other realtors.

It is open to CREA to interpret the policy to allow listings on the MLS system as exclusive listings provided the listing realtor is willing to cooperate with other realtors. This would achieve the purpose of the Realtor Cooperation Policy while maintaining the exclusive nature of the listing, respecting sellers’ wishes, enabling Ontario realtors to comply with their regulatory obligations and allowing ITSO to maintain the integrity of the MLS system data that we have worked so hard to achieve.”

 

‘We do not want any of our members to be in breach of their obligations in organized real estate’

 

Campbell shares this statement about the situation and ITSO’s reason for suspending the functionality’s implementation:

“It is ITSO’s position alone that listings falling under the Realtor Cooperation Policy should be able to go on the MLS system as exclusive listings with cooperation. We did not have a chance to discuss all aspects of this functionality with our members prior to CREA sending us a letter requesting that we suspend its implementation.  

We are disappointed that CREA has reached this conclusion and prevented us from implementing functionality that would be of great benefit to the realtor users of our system.

ITSO views MLS listings as the preferred method for selling and buying properties. However, the value of an MLS system is determined not only by the integrity and accuracy of the data but also by the completeness of the database. We’ve all been in a meeting where a client asked about an exclusive listing, and we didn’t have access to the information the client wanted. Being able to capture exclusive listing data would increase the value of the MLS system while maintaining the integrity of MLS listing data. At the same time, capturing exclusive listings would enable realtors to appear more professional and to better serve their clients.

That said, the interests of our members are ITSO’s priority and we do not want any of our members to be in breach of their obligations in organized real estate. That is why we agreed to suspend the implementation of this functionality.”

 

Editor’s note:

On June 14, 2024, REM received the following information from Tehreem Kamal: “More than 10 per cent of MREB’s members have signed a petition for an SGM to be called to rescind the vote to amalgamate with WRAR, RAHB and SDREB. MREB is holding the SGM for its members on June 26.”

 

Over the past several months, members of the Mississauga Real Estate Board (MREB) have been expecting to amalgamate with several other Ontario boards on July 1, as the new Cornerstone Association of Realtors (Cornerstone).

What they likely weren’t expecting are some major concerns that have come up since January’s membership vote.

 

Background

 

In October 2023, the Realtors Association of Hamilton-Burlington (RAHB), the Waterloo Region Association of Realtors (WRAR), the Simcoe & District Real Estate Board (SDREB) and MREB announced that SDREB and MREB signed a letter of intent to join the amalgamation of the four organizations.

On January 31 of this year, MREB members voted to amalgamate with RAHB, WRAR and SDREB to become Cornerstone Association of Realtors on July 1, 2024.

Tehreem Kamal, broker with Royal LePage Real Estate Services Ltd., Brokerage, sat down with REM to explain the issues concerning many members and past presidents of MREB — with less than a month to go before the change takes place.

Kamal, a past president herself, has not served MREB or its committees (or any other board) since her term finished in 2019. She was alerted to the concerns in May at an event hosted by MREB, where conversation ensued about the landscape rapidly changing and what MREB is doing.

“I inquired further to find out the facts, what has changed, why there are concerns and who has them,” she explains. “A few questions were asked of the board of directors and president, and a meeting of past presidents was called on May 8 where (they) answered questions.” This included an inquiry about where the strategic plan could be found. Kamal says the group was told MREB is working under status quo and to “trust the process.”

 

Original vision for amalgamating

 

Initially, the two immediate past presidents of MREB were tasked to engage in conversations on behalf of MREB about an amalgamation, as per their leadership positions. They provided their consent for amalgamation, along with and based on the unanimous consent of MREB.

“All sides came together and started working on a plan and feasibility, and there was a lot of work done from all ends. MREB has spent a lot of money and staff resources,” Kamal notes.

The original vision of the proposed amalgamation was for MREB and other Ontario boards to be part of one board and one MLS system: Information Technology Systems Ontario (ITSO)’s Matrix. MREB, Oakville, Milton and District Real Estate Board (OMDREB), London and St.Thomas Association of Realtors (LSTAR), Niagara Association of Realtors (NAR) and WRAR all use this system.

Boards from Mississauga to London, Niagara and others in between were to become part of one amalgamated organization with better representation and collaboration among member boards. Members could access all they need to serve clients while not paying too many fees for it.

“The main thing is a member on the street is tired of paying too much for too many boards,” Kamal explains. “Agents are always struggling with the fact that to access one system or one MLS or a particular property, they must pay multiple fees throughout Ontario. With Matrix, a lot of boards were being served from one MLS system. It was very convenient and facilitating — agents can just go into that system and pull up the archives to serve their client better, to get all the information on hand.”

 

MLS system decision extension

 

The initial term of ITSO’s MLS services agreement was three years and ends on December 31, 2024. Any association/board that does not wish to renew the term is required to give ITSO six months’ notice, which would have made the deadline July 1, 2024.

However, ITSO confirmed that many of its member groups expressed a desire for more time to decide to continue with the services or switch to a different provider.

For this reason, in February, ITSO’s board of directors notified all its members that they would extend the deadline for giving notice of non-renewal until September 30, 2024.

Tom Lebour, broker at Royal LePage Real Estate Services Ltd., Brokerage, and past president of MREB and the Toronto Real Estate Board (now the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board), says this extension is a result of the changes taking place. “While MREB was given the amalgamation mandate four months ago by membership, since then the MLS landscape has changed quickly and several boards have switched systems.”

He believes that since ITSO has delayed the deadline for its MLS agreement renewal until September 30 — giving three additional months at status quo — this gives boards at least that much time to reassess, take a better look and decide later.

 

Missing pieces and a changed vision

 

While Kamal feels the vision was well intended and done in good faith, some key pieces seem to be missing. Early on, MREB’s two immediate past presidents sent concerns in a letter and email to MREB, asking things like what the organizational chart would look like, who would be CEO, what would happen to MREB’s membership money and if MREB was vetting all their contracts with a lawyer.

As a MREB member, Kamal has requested the board provide her with summaries or minutes of the meetings from October to date, so she can review them to see what’s changed and how.

The boards that were originally going to amalgamate have changed course, too. Since the start, she says that LSTAR and NAR joined another service provider. OMDREB is also possibly leaving Matrix for another system with 80,000 members in Ontario. “There’s power in numbers,” she notes. “If the strength of membership is with one MLS provider to the tune of 80,000 members, where we’d see most GTA listings, then how does it make sense to create a silo of possibly 8,000 members?”

Although this changing landscape alters the original vision, Kamal acknowledges these decisions were surely made with members’ best interests in mind. She knows the boards are autonomous non-profit organizations serving their membership, and she’s confident they’re listening to their membership and what’s best for them.

Nonetheless, with the original amalgamation plan being multiple boards and a few having since changed their MLS system plans, Cornerstone now comes down to four: MREB, RAHB, WRAR and SDREB.

 

Key concerns

 

Kamal and others wonder if MREB is truly listening to what’s going on in the industry as a whole and to what will be most beneficial for membership since the landscape and technology are changing so rapidly. There are a few key concerns about amalgamating.

For one, the original vision is fragmented because the new group of amalgamated boards is smaller and won’t have the same power and benefits as intended. Plus, some MREB members feel they will end up paying for multiple boards all over again instead of one where everyone would be under the same umbrella.  

“I have personally listed and sold properties in London, and so have colleagues in my office — we go all over the GTA, wherever the client takes us,” Kamal explains.

“Likewise, many in my office work and live in Niagara, and they work here (in Mississauga), Oakville and Milton, too. For them, it’s going to be the same problem. The solution that was created, unfortunately, is not relevant or realistic anymore.” Kamal stresses that this is why information and access to data and archives are extremely important.

She says another main concern is the premise being presented to Mississauga’s membership that with the amalgamation there will be a stronger voice in the industry at large, with the provincial and national assemblies.

“It’s actually the opposite. On their own right now, the boards left in the proposed amalgamation total (a certain number of) votes in the Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA) assembly. When they come together, the formula that allocates votes kicks in differently and cuts down the votes. How are we a stronger voice if we don’t have the same vote count? This was my question at that (May) president’s meeting with the board.”

The way it works with OREA is a member board’s vote allocation is calculated by a formula set out in the OREA bylaw and is based on the number of individual members of the member board.  A newly amalgamated member board’s vote allocation would be based on the total number of individual members of the newly amalgamated member board and calculated according to that formula.

As well, Kamal and others are wondering what happens to MREB’s money once July 1 comes. “More than $2 million of membership money will be folded over to (Cornerstone). How will accessing it be handled if we need to get something done in Mississauga in the coming months to, let’s say, do any advocacy work?”

Lebour echoes this sentiment and is concerned the funds will be much harder to access once they’re within the new organization. “The $2.5 million that will be thrown into the (Cornerstone) pot wasn’t hidden, but it wasn’t pointed out,” he notes.

These concerns were raised repeatedly and Kamal says there’s been no clear answer, “Which means that things are not clear. So why the rush to get into this amalgamation? All over the world, whether it’s real estate or a multinational company, organizations come together. However, they do years and years of feasibility reports, studies and what-if scenarios.

All of this is happening, to my knowledge, from October 2023. Within a span of less than 12 months, how can we fold an organization that has sustained itself for 70 years?”

 

Advocacy and MREB’s role

 

Right now, there’s a mayoral by-election in Mississauga. Kamal explains that during these times, MREB has historically reached out to city council and been engaged in government relations and advocacy efforts. But right now, she says MREB is nowhere to be seen.

“This is one of the most important key events in Mississauga. Everybody’s talking about housing and MREB is the pillar, the stakeholder that represents people directly connected with housing — yet, they’re hugely absent in this, which is a huge red flag.”

Lebour points out that in 2021, a rumour surfaced about implementing a land transfer tax and MREB worked with OREA to stop it. “It never materialized,” he recalls. “Now, I’m not sure Cornerstone will be effective at devoting time to local issues, which is very important.”

Wondering why MREB’s focus has shifted, Kamal emailed the board to ask how it’s positioning itself in terms of mayoral debate, reaching out to candidates — and a potential municipal land transfer tax being implemented, again.

Lebour notes one of the leading Mississauga mayoral candidates in the by-election hinted about revisiting the tax and that MREB has a strong government relations committee for local advocacy work. “Mississauga has historically defended imposing a municipal land transfer tax over the years, and I have been part of that,” Kamal affirms.

The response she received to her email was that the board is too busy hosting events like a golf tournament and receptions. Kamal acknowledges the importance of running well-intended charity events like these but stresses that MREB’s job, first and foremost, is “to protect the interest of the consumer on the street pertaining to housing.”

“We cannot take our eyes off the ball,” she stresses. “If this amalgamation or anything else is detracting from what MREB has actually stood for in the past and should still be standing for, there is something seriously wrong.”

 

Transparency needed with partner boards

 

Kamal points out that other amalgamating boards should know about what’s happening. “Do they understand that MREB’s membership is not on the same page as they were in January and that they’re probably moving towards an amalgamation with potential turbulence? They have a duty of care to their membership, so who’s keeping them in the loop?”

Kamal feels that MREB should be very transparent with their partners and not just the people representing the amalgamation task force. They shouldn’t be led into something that MREB isn’t 100 per cent ready for. “Even if a director is not on the task force, they should know they need to go back to their brokerages and say, ‘We’re heading into an amalgamation where one of the key partners coming in with possibly 2,200 members and resources of more than $2.5 million is probably having second thoughts.’”

 

The SGM request

 

“Every member that I’ve spoken to, every past president that has discussed, exchanged ideas and brainstormed — we are all for collaboration, but not for creating silos of the Mississauga board and others. This is the challenge and why membership has requested MREB to call an SGM,” Kamal states.

In May, past MREB presidents and industry members collected signatures that would go on a letter petitioning MREB for a special general meeting (SGM). An email (obtained by REM), signed by past presidents John Cassan and Michael Mills, reiterates concerns regarding the proposed amalgamation, mentions the petition being signed with the SGM request, asks MREB to “pause the amalgamation and call for a meeting of the membership” and states, “It is foolhardy, risky and downright reckless to proceed with the amalgamation.”

The pair recount a past error when MREB’s MLS system was sold to the Toronto board in the 1980s, despite membership concerns: “This short-sighted decision cost us dearly. It took us almost four decades to recover from this mistake, making our board a successful enterprise and here we are again.” They warn MREB it’s about to make a “terrible mistake which will cost us dearly.”

Following this, on May 28, 10 past presidents of MREB, including Cassan and Mills, signed a letter to MREB that requested it call a members-only SGM within the next 10 days. The letter advised the board to “not be hasty in signing any contracts without satisfying members’ concerns at the proposed SGM.”

While Kamal acknowledges that MREB’s repeated response, “the membership voted yes in January to amalgamate,” is indeed true, at the same time she points out, “The information the membership was provided in January is not completely relevant anymore. It has changed drastically.

The membership, in view of today’s reality, would like to rescind the vote from January 31, have the board put a hard stop on anything (relating) to this proposed amalgamation and genuinely take stock of what’s happening in the real estate industry at large that will benefit our members.”

From there, she points out there’s always time to look into future options.

 

MREB’s response

 

As of the time of writing, MREB had not accepted the SGM request, nor had it responded to the email from Cassan and Mills. However, REM received the following statement from Rita Asadorian, chair of MREB:

“We have respected the clear and decisive mandate from our members. Despite this, a small group of individuals has attempted to disrupt the process. While a petition for a special general meeting was submitted on May 28, 2024, signed by 10 past presidents, it did not meet the 10 per cent member threshold required by the Ontario Not-for-Profit Corporations Act.

Nevertheless, we have been proactive in addressing concerns. The MREB board of directors hosted delegates from our partner boards at a board meeting to discuss and resolve any issues. This session was productive and satisfying for all attendees. 

Similarly, we held a session with our past presidents, providing comprehensive information and addressing their questions. Both meetings concluded with a positive consensus supporting the amalgamation.”

Asadorian points out that MREB understands significant decisions can generate some discontent but that, “We have consistently addressed the same concerns and must now proceed with the mandate provided by our members’ unanimous vote. We remain open to all questions and concerns, which can be directed to me at any time.”

She says that all four associations are “eager to demonstrate the benefits of our united efforts,” confirming that the amalgamation documents have been formally filed with the Ontario government and the process will move forward.

 

In January, the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA)’s Realtor Cooperation Policy took effect. The policy mandates that realtors place publicly marketed residential property listings on MLS within the time frame their board or association states, which must be up to three days, unless an exemption applies.

“Publicly marketed” here refers to representing a listing to anyone not directly affiliated in a business capacity with the listing brokerage or office. It excludes direct, one-to-one communication with a person or agent.

Effectively, the policy ensures most existing listings end up on Realtor.ca rather than on different platforms.

 

The rationale: How and who the policy is meant to help

 

In a statement to REM, CREA says that the policy is ultimately meant to address the negative effects of limited exposure marketing tactics that can harm both sellers and buyers and which keep listings off MLS systems, such as the abuse of “Coming Soon to MLS” signage in front of homes that often didn’t end up getting listed publicly.

The association says, “We understand that some sellers don’t want their property listed publicly, and the policy does allow for this.” (There’s a disclosure and consent form for opting-out that notes sellers who choose not to publicly market their property may decline to place their listing on an MLS system if they complete the form.)

CREA says that more sellers on MLS systems means more choices for buyers, and ultimately more buyers for those sellers. “Cooperation between realtors makes MLS systems more efficient, valuable and effective for the industry and for clients. For example, competitive market analyses are more comprehensive if a majority of listings are posted to MLS systems.”

Although the change was supported by over 80 per cent of voting delegates from Canada’s boards and associations at CREA’s 2023 AGM, some in the industry find it problematic.

 

How things are playing out

 

Eric Skicki is the founder and CEO of BrokerPocket — which he describes as the largest real estate agent-only marketplace for off-market listings in the residential space in Canada. His company and those like it are deeply affected by the change.

The policy applies to all real estate agents who are CREA members (about 160,000). Skicki points out that CREA is a monopoly in itself and has almost complete control of all residential transactions in Canada. “There is no secondary player (or) secondary market with the exception of BrokerPocket.”

He says he’s spoken to numerous people in organized real estate leadership positions and learned that many aren’t interested in enforcing this rule. “They have zero incentive and zero interest. Some have even expressed that if enforced, they see this potentially as a liability to the board or brokerage,” he explains.

CREA says it continues to receive input from various sources regarding policy enforcement.

BrokerPocket believes in competition and consumer choice. It isn’t looking for a “carve out” from CREA’s policy just for itself. In a perfect world, the restrictions the policy places on competition would be removed to allow all competitors, including BrokerPocket, to compete freely, thereby giving realtors, and ultimately consumers, more product choices as well as competitive prices.

 

‘Sometimes, privacy triumphs (profit)’

 

Skicki feels there’s a misstep in CREA deciding how and where the public sells their homes. “I think they’re doing this with the intention of when someone sells their house, the only thing they’re seeking is profit.”

He explains that profit isn’t always the only driving force and that sometimes, privacy is a key consideration.

“An example of this would be a divorce case. If someone’s going through a divorce and they live in a nice neighbourhood, do they want a ‘For Sale’ sign? Do they want people Googling the house and seeing inside? Do they want open houses? (No), they probably want a discreet sale.”

A homeowner may not wish to publicly list their home for many other reasons, including physical or mental health concerns or convenience.

 

Lawyer involvement

 

To navigate competition law issues, BrokerPocket partnered with lawyer John Syme, who says he was surprised to learn about the policy and the restrictions it placed on realtors and their ability to offer clients various service options, including BrokerPocket.

For 20 years, Syme was in-house Department of Justice counsel to the Commissioner of Competition and the Competition Bureau. In that capacity, he was lead litigation counsel to the Commissioner in several precedent-setting cases, representing the Commissioner before the Competition Tribunal, as well as before the Federal Court, Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada.

Since his 2019 retirement from the Department of Justice, Syme has provided competition law counsel to several private sector and government clients, along with training to a foreign national competition law enforcement authority.

He’s also co-counsel in two real estate industry class actions. “The focus of those cases are rules created and enforced by CREA and local real estate boards, like the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB) … (the) rules place certain restrictions on brokerages and realtors,” he says.

“In the first of the two cases we filed, the defendants sought to have the case dismissed, claiming it was fatally flawed. We fought off that challenge, with the Federal Court ‘green lighting’ the case to continue. That Federal Court decision is now the subject of an ongoing appeal.”

Syme is currently providing legal counsel to BrokerPocket and has agreed to take an equity interest in the company. “I became involved for two reasons,” he explains. “When Eric reached out to me, I was impressed with his vision for BrokerPocket as a competitive tool to let realtors do their jobs more efficiently and serve their clients better. I also thought I could assist with the competition issues that, among other things, CREA’s Cooperation Policy appeared to raise.”

 

Background on pocket listings

 

Syme points out that pocket listings are not new — they’ve been part of the real estate market for many years. Traditionally, agents and brokerages communicated with one another about pocket listings through informal channels, like word of mouth and email. There was no comprehensive database or listing where realtors and brokerages could see what properties were available as pocket listings or market them to other agents and brokerages.

“This situation was disadvantageous to both residential real estate sellers and buyers and, by extension, their realtors. A seller who has chosen to offer their home by way of pocket listing might get a lower price for their property because some (perhaps many) buyers who might be interested in the property would never find out it was for sale. Buyers would be disadvantaged because they might never become aware of properties that would be of interest to them,” he notes.

 

Competition Bureau consultation

 

Syme explains the team has spoken with the Competition Bureau to disclose all facts and how there are multiple angles to consider. He points out the issue goes beyond how the policy affects companies like BrokerPocket — it also impacts competition between CREA’s members, which falls under restrictive practices, as well as the public and consumer choice.

Although the Bureau is governed by strict confidentiality rules and can’t disclose where its investigation stands, Syme indicates that he understands the investigation is ongoing and that, “The Commissioner has shown repeatedly that he will take enforcement action where necessary to address competition concerns.”

He also notes the recent settlement agreement the Commissioner entered into with the Yukon Real Estate Association to address Commissioner concerns with membership practices in the real estate sector. “We’re hoping the Commissioner/Bureau will consider taking action to address CREA’s Cooperation Policy,” he says.

Skicki emphasizes that BrokerPocket is not looking to pursue a legal case at this time. “We encourage dialogue and we’re seeking a peaceful resolution to this. We encourage (CREA) to do a member poll perhaps, to find out what the members want.”

 

Where do agents stand?

 

Skicki doesn’t believe the industry agrees with CREA having the right to dictate how people choose to sell their homes. “The agents we’ve talked to believe it’s not only legally wrong, (but) it’s also optically wrong. It sends the wrong message to the public that agents want more control, that agents want to somehow have this hidden agenda of making more money and more commissions and (are) trying to further entrap (the public).”

BrokerPocket has been speaking and having an open dialogue with realtors on the policy’s impact, including at a meeting held in February which Mark Jensen, broker owner and broker of record of The Jensen Team, helped to organize.

Jensen has been using BrokerPocket for nearly three years. He says, “(Their) offering equips us with a distinct advantage, enabling us to present our clients with homes they might not have discovered otherwise.”

There were about 15-20 realtors at the February meeting from different companies with different business models, all affected by CREA’s rule in various ways. Skicki highlights that most who attended and are speaking out about the issue are hesitant or afraid to have their name mentioned because they’re governed by CREA and their local board, both of which have the power to discipline members. 

The outcome of the meeting was to announce that BrokerPocket is “with the agents and going to be a voice for the agents.” Skicki says many people are reaching out to them. “We get a lot of inbound calls, we get a lot of questions, not only (about) how we’re conducting ourselves but what’s our opinion and (if) we think it’s fair.”

 

It’s about consumer choice and free competition

 

Jensen points out that the topic is crucial yet often misunderstood, with implications that can adversely affect consumers.

He asserts that in real estate, the concept of exclusivity holds tremendous worth. “While price is a key consideration, convenience often surpasses it in importance. It’s crucial to acknowledge that not every home is a perfect fit for traditional MLS marketing. Sellers should rightfully have a choice in determining how their properties are marketed.”

Realtors can approach each home’s promotion with a range of options for selling, including MLS and pocket listings. Jensen believes that emphasizing unique selling points only on MLS is not marketing.

“The preparation phase (painting, home renovations, staging, etc.) for optimal MLS exposure can span from weeks to months, so giving the client the option to list their house as an off-market ‘for sale’ could eliminate the inconvenience of this process and could potentially save them money. Now, these marketing avenues are being restricted.”

Jensen shares potential benefits to not implementing the policy that weren’t listed in CREA’s whitepaper, a study the association commissioned that helped lead to the creation of the policy:

• May result in reduced exposure to tire kickers and (may) ensure your home is marketed to serious buyers
• May result in reduced showings and save you time away from your home
• May result in better offers and conditions as buyers appreciate exclusivity and are willing to pay a premium. The same reason Gucci, Prada and Rolex do not sell their products in Walmart
• Sellers may prefer the option of convenience over price. Hence companies like Uber Eats, Carvana, etc.
• May result in more privacy and keep random home viewers and potential thieves from viewing your home on mass distribution websites
• Will result in not having the data of your home permanently available as far as price changes and days on market

He believes that not allowing a realtor to market their property will definitely affect the sale price. “That is the situation we’re in now. Can you imagine the car industry telling the public that they have to list their car for sale only on AutoTrader?”

Skicki highlights that BrokerPocket is pro-choice and believes it’s ultimately up to the consumer to choose how and when they sell their home, without CREA dictating where the listing goes. 

“I’m not anti-industry — I like the industry and I’m pro-organized real estate. I already expressed to a few CREA board members that I would be happy to work alongside them. I’m a former realtor and used to own a brokerage. I think agents provide an incredible amount of value.

I truly believe that once (consumers) actually look at the facts, (CREA) will reconsider, and this will either be abolished or they’ll look at having special exemptions for companies like BrokerPocket, which would in turn allow agents and the public to have more choice.”

He emphasizes it comes down to the public “not really (being) aware of what’s happening … The exclusions CREA presented I don’t think are justified or make much sense, and I think they further alienate their own members and ultimately the public.”

Further, Jensen points out the contradiction with part of the second point of CREA’s Pledge of Competition, which states: “A brokerage may offer any variety of services e.g. exclusive, open, MLS listings, etc. Boards and real estate associations accept MLS listings regardless of the price, commission rates or fees, or the division thereof.”

 

‘There’s a need for a B2B model — that’s what’s missing’

 

Skicki says CREA should be able to work together with the private sector and ultimately the public. “We’re coming at this in a spirit of collaboration and a spirit of finding the best solution for the industry and the public. We’re not trying to disrupt the industry or trying to do anything that will diminish the agent or somehow interfere with the mandate of CREA or realtor.ca. I think it’s time to recognize there’s a need for a B2B model — that’s what’s missing.” 

When REM asked CREA if it sees a need for this type of model too and if this would be a threat to the current model, its stance wasn’t clear: “Realtors cooperate and collaborate, making MLS systems more efficient, valuable and effective for the industry and for clients. It remains a business decision for brokerages or realtors to adopt or subscribe to other services.”

“There are numerous grounds that CREA’s up against, and I don’t feel that fighting this, even if they win, will gain them anything.”

 

– Eric Skicki, founder and CEO, BrokerPocket

 

Moving forward: The ask of CREA

 

Despite the challenges for BrokerPocket created by the Realtor Cooperation Policy, the company reminds its users of the policy and the agent’s requirement to comply with CREA’s rules when uploading a listing. BrokerPocket notes that it’s the only major national real estate portal in Canada that encourages CREA compliance. 

CREA says that the policy came into force in January and is still relatively new. “As we have throughout this process, we continue to work with boards and associations to help ensure they have the tools and information they need.”

Skicki acknowledges, “There’s still time to reverse course, open discussions and take appropriate measures not only to avoid legal repercussions, but also to be seen as progressive and pro-competitive. BrokerPocket remains prepared to engage constructively with CREA to find a mutually acceptable path forward.” 

 

The Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB) has launched a case against two Ontario realtors, and two additional (unknown) defendants.

Court documents provided to REM state that the defendants — Sandra Maher and Penny Dutkowski, who are not TRREB members, along with two unknown individuals — used TRREB’s confidential or proprietary information to communicate with TRREB members. This includes via websites like nomandatoryorwp.ca and change.org/p/say-no-to-mandatory-realtor-benefits-orwp.

 

TRREB’s claim

 

TRREB’s Statement of Claim says, “All of the Defendants used TRREB content without authorization, including links to TRREB’s proprietary and confidential material.”

The claim goes into specifics of this, including that defendants “opposed ORWP and engaged in efforts to stop the implementation of ORWP applying to all Ontario realtors. The Defendants, and others, created a Meta Facebook page called “OROMOO” … stated to be an acronym for: Ontario Realtors Opposed to Mandatory OREA ORWP.

However, rather than the Meta Facebook page being directed at OREA, it was directed at TRREB, its officers, directors, members and employees. The OROMOO Meta Facebook page became a forum for libelous, slanderous and defamatory posts about TRREB, its officers, directors, employees and suppliers.”

Among other things, TRREB is claiming “$1 million for civil conspiracy, wrongful interference with economic relations, tortious interference and wrongful interference with contractual relations,” and, “In relation to any Defendants who are former TRREB members, damages in the amount of $1 million for breach of contract, and breaches of their membership obligations.”

About the case, John DiMichele, TRREB CEO, says, “Out of respect for the legal process, we will not be commenting considering that the matter is before the courts.”

 

Dutkowski and Maher’s defense

 

Dutkowski and Maher’s Statement of Defence states they “deny each and every allegation in the Statement of Claim, unless expressly admitted herein, and put the Plaintiff to the strict proof thereof.”

It explains that TRREB is a trade association operating on democratic principles that represents more than 70,000 real estate agents and brokers practicing in the GTA and that it’s also a constituent board of OREA, a professional association that represents real estate brokers and salespeople across Ontario.

“OREA is also a democratic institution that represents the interests of its members … This lawsuit is about that democratic process. TRREB takes issue with the fact that the Defendants sought to influence OREA policy in a manner that the TRREB Board of Directors did not like.

Specifically, the Defendants Penny Dutkowski and Sandra Maher – two long-time realtors and senior members of the profession – opposed the introduction of a mandatory health benefits plan that they felt would harm them and other more senior members of the profession (and in particular senior citizens).

TRREB now brings this lawsuit to silence dissent and to intimidate the Defendants and other realtors in Ontario. In reality, this claim is a political dispute disguised as a tort claim and bears all the hallmarks of strategic litigation against public participation (SLAPP). It should be summarily dismissed.”

 

Statement from defendants’ lawyers

 

Dutkowski and Maher are being represented by lawyers Robert Stellick and Simon Bieber of Adair Goldblatt Bieber LLP in Toronto. They made the following statement on behalf of their clients:

“As the Statement of Claim makes clear, our clients have been sued by TRREB for their efforts to overturn the OWRP. The specific claims being made against them are set out in the Statement of Claim.

As the Statement of Defence makes clear, it is our view that this lawsuit has no merit and has been brought to silence and intimidate our clients and other realtors in Ontario. We intend to bring an ‘anti-SLAPP’ motion to seek to have the claim summarily dismissed.”

 

What is a SLAPP suit?

 

A SLAPP suit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) is defined by the Toronto Metropolitan University’s Centre for Free Expression as follows:

“SLAPPs are lawsuits brought by individuals, corporations or others to intimidate and silence critics by forcing them into legal battles that would be extremely costly and time-consuming to fight. The goal was not to obtain justice; it was to exhaust, defeat and intimidate their critics into being silent.

A typical example is publishers, newspapers or media outlets being sued to stop publications which expose corporate or political wrongdoing. Similar tactics are used to mute the voices of community activists and researchers who are exposing harms from development projects or toxic chemicals or corporate malpractice.”

 

On April 12, the federal government announced its new housing plan. The plan will be supported by investments from Budget 2024, announced Tuesday.

“Canada can and will solve the housing crisis, and we’re going to do it by getting every home builder, not-for-profit, mayor, city councillor and premier pulling in the same direction to build the homes Canadians need,” The Honourable Sean Fraser, minister of housing, infrastructure and communities, says.

The housing plan outlines a strategy to obtain 3.87 million new homes by 2031, including at least 2 million net new homes in addition to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s forecast of 1.87 million being built by 2031. The federal government will support at least 1.2 million new homes, while it calls on all orders of government to build at least 800,000 more homes by 2031.

 

The government’s strategy

 

The Canadian government says it will achieve this in a few ways:

1. Building more by lowering the costs of homebuilding, helping cities make it easier to build faster, changing the way Canadian homebuilders manufacture homes and growing the workforce. This will include:

• A Public Lands for Homes Plan
• $15 billion in additional loans for the Apartment Construction Loan Program
• Launching Canada Builds, an approach to affordable homes for the middle class
• Supporting Indigenous Peoples living away from their communities in urban, rural and northern areas

2. Ensuring that every homeowner or renter has a home that suits their needs and the stability to retain it. This will include:

• Launching a Tenant Protection Fund
• Leveraging rental payment history to improve credit scores
• Increasing the Home Buyers’ Plan withdrawal limit by $25,000 and extending the grace period to repay by an additional three years
• Extending mortgage amortizations for first-time buyers of newly built homes

This last point in particular is something the Canadian Home Builders’ Association (CHBA) strongly supports: “CHBA has prioritized a return to 30-year amortization periods for first-time buyers for insured mortgages in its recommendations, as tight mortgage rules have been a major driver in falling homeownership rates. This measure is a game-changer for those who have been struggling with housing affordability and growing inequities in mortgage access,” states CHBA CEO Kevin Lee.

“This measure will avoid price escalation in the existing housing market while going a long way to enable our sector to respond to the government’s goal of getting 5.8 million new homes built over the next decade. It will allow more first-time buyers to enter the market and create the necessary conditions for increased housing starts because, quite simply, if buyers cannot get a mortgage to buy a home, then builders cannot build.”

3. Helping Canadians who can’t afford a home by creating more affordable and rental housing and eliminating chronic homelessness in Canada. This will include providing $1 billion for the Affordable Housing Fund and launching a $1.5 billion Canada Rental Protection Fund.

4. Attracting, training and hiring skilled-trade workers needed to build more homes, including $90 million for the Apprenticeship Service, $10 million for the Skilled Trades Awareness and Readiness program and $50 million for the Foreign Credential Recognition Program.

 

Measures applauded yet concerns remain

 

Christopher Alexander, president of Re/Max Canada, sheds light on housing supply and the national housing strategy:

“For several years now, Re/Max Canada has been advocating for a coherent and achievable national housing strategy that addresses lack of supply, to calm red-hot price increases and, more importantly, to improve affordability for a greater diversity of buyers and renters. Collaboration between our federal, provincial and municipal governments is the key to increasing housing supply and improving affordability in this country — through long-term, sustainable solutions.

Specifically, we should be expanding municipal zoning laws to allow for a greater diversity of housing, such as the missing middle, expanding capacity for laneway developments and the like and being more strategic and visionary in how we can use existing lands and real estate to drive our housing supply. For that, it’s going to take all of us.”

Royal LePage says it applauds the proposed measures to increase housing inventory and improve affordability for Canadians, but cautions that concrete action must follow these plans.

“Initiatives aimed at making it easier for young Canadians to enter the market are welcome. However, without a material increase in supply, further upward pressure will be placed on home prices. We need policies centered on demand to be met by equal, if not greater, emphasis on actions to increase housing supply,” Karen Yolevski, COO of Royal LePage Real Estate Services Ltd., expresses.

Royal LePage isn’t the only concerned group — CHBA cautions against potential measures that could increase housing costs, including already-planned building code changes that it says “will certainly raise home prices” and the proposed taxing of vacant land, which “must not increase the cost of land that is planned for development.”

Lee says, “The federal government has indicated with this budget that it intends to prioritize housing supply and affordability, including helping those Canadians who want to own a home fulfill that aspiration. CHBA and our members are eager to help make that happen.”

The Canadian Construction Association (CCA) shares similar sentiments: “Budget 2024 sets a bold objective to help Canadians buy homes but misses the mark on delivering sufficient investment and a plan to ensure a steady flow of funds to address our nation’s infrastructure challenges,” says Mary Van Buren, CCA president.

“While we acknowledge some initiatives, such as funding for creating affordable apartments, training and recruiting more workers and upgrading water and wastewater systems, the conditions attached and lack of strategic vision are concerning.”

 

Feedback from CREA and OREA

 

The Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) applauds the first, it says, of a “systems” approach to housing and home building. “Canada’s housing challenges have been building over many years and no one group can tackle it on their own,” says Janice Myers, CREA CEO. “Realtors across Canada have been advocating for a collaborative, multi-faceted approach for years. We’re ready to play our part.”

Likewise, the Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA) commends Prime Minister Trudeau and Minister Fraser for the plan’s measures aimed at ensuring critical land, infrastructure and zoning reforms occur to get more homes built.

However, the association points out a gap: “While OREA was pleased to see the re-introduction of 30-year mortgage amortizations for first-time homebuyers on new builds, we strongly believe this measure must be expanded for all homebuyers and types of homes.

As families look for a great place to lay down their roots, their budget shouldn’t be contingent on whether they’re purchasing a newly built or pre-owned home. In the middle of a housing affordability crisis, many Ontario families, not just first-time homebuyers, would benefit from the relief of 30-year amortizations on their mortgages,” says Tim Hudak, CEO of OREA.

 

TRREB’s take

 

The Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB) takes a similar position: “TRREB is pleased to see that Canada’s Housing Plan commits to helping future home buyers achieve their dreams through extending mortgage amortizations for first-time home buyers and increasing the home buyers’ plan withdrawal limit.

We also welcome the Plan’s strong commitment to provide funding to build affordable rental units that meet everyone’s needs … Finally, (the) Plan offers important support to existing homeowners with renovations and improving home energy efficiency,” says Jennifer Pearce, TRREB president.

While the board acknowledges that improving home energy efficiency is essential to helping families lower their energy bills, it encourages the federal government to focus on voluntary, incentive-based programs “instead of mandatory measures that will add red tape and costs to the buying or selling process.”

 

Where municipalities stand

 

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) president, Scott Pearce, says the Plan is a “promising step forward in tackling the housing and homelessness crises that affect too many Canadians.”

FCM feels existing infrastructure must be renewed, and new infrastructure built, to meet the 5.8 million housing unit goal. It calls on the federal government to bring together all orders of government to discuss a new Municipal Growth Framework to provide more effective long-term community support.

“Municipalities will work with all orders of government to deliver housing. We welcome new initiatives from the federal government and the provinces. But we only collect about 10 cents of every tax dollar and investments in infrastructure, most of which are borne by municipalities, which are critical to the efforts of building housing”, says Mike Savage, mayor of Halifax and chair of the Big City Mayors’ Caucus.

 

On Wednesday, the Government of Ontario introduced new housing legislation outlining the latest steps it’s taking to cut red tape and help municipalities get more homes built in their communities. This is key to the province’s commitment to building at least 1.5 million homes by 2031.

Paul Calandra, Ontario’s minister of municipal affairs and housing, minister of legislative affairs and government house leader, describes the Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act will help to “keep cutting red tape and make it cheaper and easier for Ontario families, workers and businesses when it comes to interacting with the Ontario government.”

Calandra says that all actions to date including the announcement are “saving people and businesses 1.5 billion hours and $1.2 billion each year.”

 

Over $1.8 billion in funding to help build housing-enabled infrastructure

 

He went on to highlight that municipalities know their communities best, including where it makes sense to build homes, and that this is why the government is providing funding and tools to build more homes and infrastructure needed to support homes of all types.

“Our government is providing over $1.8 billion to help build housing-enabled infrastructure across the province,” the minister announced. “This is on top of our $1.2 billion Building Faster fund, which is rewarding municipalities for hitting their housing targets.

 

Cutting red tape

 

Calandra outlined measures to build homes faster and at a lower cost:

• Letting homebuilders decide the right number of parking spaces in new residential near transit
• Making it easier to build new garden, laneway and basement suites by eliminating barriers to these units including maximum lot coverage and limits on the number of bedrooms allowed per lot
• Prioritizing infrastructure for ready-to-go housing projects with a new “use it or lose it” process to ensure that builders get moving once they receive their approvals
• Improving consultation in providing municipalities and builders with greater certainty to get more homes built faster including by limiting third-party appeals to the Ontario Land Tribunal
• Building more types of homes for more people by streamlining approvals for student housing, supporting standardized designs to reduce delays and costs and supporting innovative construction measures like mass timber

 

Where OREA and Ontario boards stand

 

Tim Hudak, CEO of the Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA), says the association is pleased to see progress on important solutions from its housing supply report and advocacy on modular construction, aimed at streamlining approvals and getting more homes built: 

• Exploring new financing and governance to support critical infrastructure like water and wastewater, which would reduce upfront costs to homebuyers by as much as $50,000
• Developing business service standards for permit/license services to reduce regulatory delays
• Eliminating parking minimums near transit to enable greater density along transit
• Making it easier to build more garden, laneway and basement suites
• Permitting mass timbre structures up to 18 storeys
• Supporting standardized designs to reduce delays and costs for modular homes

OREA notes another important solution in the Bill is streamlining approvals for student housing.

The Ottawa Real Estate Board (OREB) feels similarly. Its president, Curtis Fillier, says, “Ottawa’s housing crisis — like many others throughout the province — is rooted in a chronic lack of supply, and OREB is encouraged by the Ontario government’s focus on getting more homes built faster. Measures such as eliminating parking minimums near transit and making it easier to build garden, laneway or basement suites will help drive progress.”

Likewise, the Chatham-Kent Association of Realtors (CKAR) commends the Ontario government for its efforts to reduce red tape and for recognizing the barriers that limit the ability to increase housing supply. Specifically, the association feels the “use it or lose it” housing strategy for builders can help accelerate new home construction and increase overall supply, reduce bureaucratic obstacles and steer builders towards more affordable housing options.

Jennifer Pearce, president of the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB), says the new legislation would enact several important measures GTA realtors have worked closely with the government and real estate industry partners on over the last year.

She explains the proposal to limit third-party appeals of official plans, official plan amendments, zoning by-laws and zoning by-law amendments is a policy change “that could speed up the necessary approvals to get shovels in the ground faster on new housing. TRREB is advocating for changes to expedite housing approvals and we are encouraged the province is responding.”

TRREB also acknowledges the proposal to remove the requirement for a minimum amount of parking spaces in developments near most major transit stations will remove thousands of dollars in construction costs per parking space, making units more affordable for home buyers and more projects viable.

 

‘Still work to be done’

 

However, Hudak points out there is still work to be done: “Any changes to the Ontario Land Tribunal should be focused on preventing abuse and eliminating backlog. Similarly, any changes to how municipalities collect and spend development charges cannot increase costs for future homebuyers.” 

He highlights the association’s disappointment that two key recommendations by the Province’s Housing Affordability Task Force — strongly supported by Ontario realtors — were not included in the Bill.

 

Call for eliminating exclusionary zoning

 

“We need to build more homes on existing properties and allow upzoning along major transit corridors if we’re going to address the housing affordability and supply crisis in our province. The Province is making significant investments in transit and passenger rail, and building more homes along those lines is common sense. Eliminating exclusionary zoning and allowing four units, as-of-right, province-wide, is an essential key to unlocking affordable homeownership,” Hudak stresses.

Fillier agrees: “If Ontario is going to achieve its goal of 1.5 million new homes in Ontario by 2031, we need direct solutions to build up our communities — including building more homes on existing properties and allowing upzoning along major transit corridors.

That’s why OREB has been and will continue advocating for exclusionary zoning to be eliminated. We need the Ontario government to enable ‘as of right’ zoning for four units per lot, which will go a long way in developing middle housing that is sorely lacking in our markets. Without this, Ontarians will remain locked out of the housing market due to a lack of suitable and affordable housing.”

 

Standardized and widely accepted definitions for housing starts and completions needed

 

Pearce says that going forward, TRREB encourages the province to commit to standardized and widely accepted definitions for housing starts and completions as it tracks its progress towards meeting the 1.5 million homes target.

“Ontario was the first province in Canada to report on its housing supply progress and it’s crucial that we continue to present a consistent picture of the progress towards our goal,” she says.

 

“Building more types of homes for more people allows smaller municipalities like ours to explore creating affordable solutions to meet the wide needs of our community while considering cost-effective approaches for construction,” says Amber Pinsonneault, chair of CKAR Government Relations Committee.

“We are commending Minister Calandra and Premier Ford for introducing this piece of legislation that encourages all MPPs to get behind a bill to deliver more homes Ontario families can afford,” Pearce expresses.

Hudak says, “We commend Premier Ford and Minister Calandra for the actions put forward in this piece of legislation, but we hope to see them go further. The government needs to keep its foot on the gas with bold action if we’re going to accomplish the goal of building 1.5 million new homes by 2031.”

 

Earlier this month, a group of realtors from Greater Vancouver hosted a gala that raised $52,000 to support Camp Choice BC and its August camp funding.

Over 260 realtors were in attendance at Vancouver’s Italian Cultural Centre, including the CEO of Greater Vancouver Realtors (GVR), Jeff King, and the CEO of the British Columbia Real Estate Association (BCREA), Trevor Koot.

 

Gala highlights

 

The annual Camp Choice Gala is a cornerstone event for the organization’s fundraising. It includes sharing stories, hearing testimonials and seeing performances from teens who attended the camp and participating in a silent auction with a live auctioneer.

It was this auction that was the “standout” moment of the night, according to Phil Moore, vice chair, event organizer, facilitator and mentor at Camp Choice BC: “Myself, John Patricelli and Juliana Vallee offered four hours of (chores or) cleaning services, raising over $20,000.

These efforts are vital, as they ensure we can offer this life-changing experience to 50 to 60 youth without turning anyone away due to financial barriers.”

 

Phil Moore, Trevor Koot (BCREA) and Jeff King (GVR)

 

Vallee, who has been a part of the organization for the past two and half years and now sits on the board of directors, notes the bids started at $200 and jumped by the hundreds and then into the thousands. “Finally, a business owner jumped up and bid $20,000 which translates to sending approximately 20 youth to the camp,” she highlights. 

 

The leadership camp experience

 

Each year, the group fundraises (about $50,000-$70,000) for and hosts a one-week camp at Zajac Ranch in Mission, B.C., welcoming 50-60 youth facing challenges such as substance abuse, self-harm and underprivilege.

Every dollar is spent to maximize the positive impact on the youth served, ensuring they receive the full benefit of their experience at Camp Choice BC.

As facilitators and mentors, Moore, Patricelli and Vallee lead various sessions, providing guidance and support to both attendees and volunteer youth coaches. The program is designed to empower, inspire and transform, helping participants see beyond their current circumstances.

Each day is wrapped up with workshops and fun activities that bring out self-growth, powerful messages and opportunities to connect with others.

“These individuals have unique life situations and stories. Most of their experiences up to now have built in them emotional and rational processes that have not been serving them to choose well or receive all possible opportunities in life. There are levels of challenges they have had to face,” Patricelli, Camp Choice’s president and lead workshop facilitator, explains. “It’s about exploring their thinking process (and) opening up if they feel comfortable.”

At the end of the week, the team observes how participants have connected with each other. “In a short period of time, we notice a lightness to their smiles, a confidence we didn’t see before and a desire to return as well as continue growth. They have fun, meet new friends and build bonds that last,” says Patricelli.

Vallee agrees: “(It) allows kids to be kids and brings out and pushes them to be the best they can be. Youth come out of the camp inspired and empowered. Many who have attended stated that because of this camp, their lives have changed.”

She explains that not only are relationships built during the camp between the youth and coaches, but the relationship, mentorship and follow-up with the youth continue after it’s over.

 

The trio’s inspiration

 

Moore’s background with the Vancouver Police Department, particularly admiring the school liaison program, laid the foundation for his commitment to supporting youth at risk. “Discovering a program through PSI Seminars that brought leadership opportunities to young people from Oakland to a ranch in Napa Valley sparked the idea for Camp Choice BC.”

Patricelli describes himself as “someone whose youth (went from being) filled with wrong choices and living consequences of those choices to experiencing the power of redemption from personal mistakes … learning that at any moment one can make a choice that will also lead to success and better relationships with others.” He says this — and the higher calling he felt — is why he decided to get involved with Camp Choice.

So, alongside Patricelli and with Vallee on the board of directors, “(We) aimed to create a similar beacon of hope and leadership for youth in British Columbia,” Moore recalls.

 

About Camp Choice

 

Camp Choice was first founded in San Francisco a few years before it came to B.C. in 2016. “Over the last eight (years), the Camp Choice vision has maintained strong and the board of directors has evolved,” Patricelli says.

Camp Choice started as a non-profit organization and hosted its first leadership youth camp in 2017. After more growth and awareness, elevated fundraising (and the ability to provide tax receipts) became more essential to attract larger donations — which primarily come from realtors — it was registered as a charity in 2019.

 

About this year’s event and overall, Moore says, “We’re deeply grateful for the support from the realtor community, which has been instrumental in our ability to make a difference in these young lives. It should be noted that many of our volunteer camp counselors are realtors. We look forward to continuing this work, inspired by the transformations we witness each year.”

Learn more about Camp Choice BC here.

 

UPDATE Feb. 23: View the video announcement Re/Max sent to its agents

 

Today, Re/Max announced the replacement of president and CEO Nick Bailey. This coincided with the company sharing that its revenue fell for the sixth consecutive quarter: it dropped 5.2 per cent in Q4 of 2023 (earnings were $76.6 million).

This was the result of a slower-than-usual year for the industry thanks to low inventory and high home prices and interest rates. The company reports that for the year, revenue dropped 7.8 per cent from 2022 (to $325.7 million).

Bailey served as president for almost three years and CEO for two of those years. Earlier in his career, he held several positions at Re/Max World Holdings.

The company announced Amy Lessinger would take over from Bailey as president and will report directly to  Erik Carlson, Re/Max Holdings CEO.

 

Learn more about the leadership change here.

 

Photo source: news.remax.com