CondoVoice - Spring 2011

www.ccitoronto.org

VOL. 15, NO.3 • SPRING 2011

P U B L I C AT I O N O F T H E C A N A D I A N C O N D O M I N I U M I N S T I T U T E - T O R O N T O & A R E A C H A P T E R P U B L I C AT I O N D E L’ I N S T I T U T C A N A D I E N D E S C O N D O M I N I U M S - C H A P I T R E D E T O R O N T O E T R É G I O N

Condo of the Year, 3rd Quarter Finalist Ballantrae Communities Plus: ■

■

■

■

A Property Manager’s Perspective on Accessibility

■

To Refurb or Not to Refurb

The Bloodmobile: Your Friendly Neighbourhood Blood Donor Clinic is Now Coming to Your Condominium Parking Lot!

■

Property Taxes - Paying Your Fair Share… And Then Some!

■

Double Taxation Avoided

■

You Can’t Say That! - Dealing with Defamation in Condos

■

Disclosure Statements: You Just Bought A Condo – Surprise!

Cover Your Assets Green Condo Champions: How two different condos arrived at the same money-saving place by embracing energy efficiency

… and more

PM #40047055

Canadian Condominium Institute / Institut canadien des condominiums Toronto & Area Chapter 2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite 310, Toronto, ON M2J 1W8 Tel.: (416) 491-6216 Fax: (416) 491-1670 E-mail: ccitoronto@taylorenterprises.com Website: www.ccitoronto.org

2010/2011 Board of Directors PRESIDENT Bill Thompson, BA, RCM, ACCI, FCCI (Member, Education Committee,Member, Membership Committee, Chair, Conference Committee) Malvern Condominium Property Management

VICE-PRESIDENTS Brian Horlick, B.Comm., B.C.L., LL.B., ACCI (Co-Chair, Legislative Committee, Member, Government Relations Committee, Member, Conference Committee) Horlick Levitt Di Lella LLP Mario Deo, LL.B. (Member, Public Relations Committee Member, Conference Committee) Fine & Deo LLP

SECRETARY/TREASURER Bob Girard, B.Comm, RCM, ACCI, FCCI (Chair, Special Projects Committee/President’s Club Sessions, Member, Education Committee) AA Property Management & Associates

PAST PRESIDENT Armand Conant, B.Eng., LL.B., D.E.S.S. (Co-Chair, Legislative Committee, Co-Chair, Government Relations Committee) Heenan Blaikie LLP

BOARD MEMBERS Gordon Chong, DDS (Member, Legislative Committee Member, Government Relations Committee Member, Public Relations Committee) MTCC # 0620 Jeff Jeffcoatt, P.Eng, BDS, RCM (Member, Education Committee Chair, Health and Safety Committee) Construction Control Inc. Lisa Kay, BA, CCI (Hons) (Co-Chair, Public Relations Committee, Member, Conference Committee, Member, Special Projects Committee) JCO & Associates Julian McNabb, BA (Member, Membership Committee Co-Chair, Public Relations Committee) Simerra Property Management Inc. Vic Persaud, BA (Chair, Membership Committee, Member, Special Projects Committee) Suncorp Valuations Ltd. Sally Thompson, P.Eng. (Member, Education Committee Member, Legislative Committee) Halsall Associates Ltd. John Warren, C.A. (Chair, Education Committee Member, Legislative Committee) Adams & Miles LLP

OPERATIONS MANAGER - Lynn Morrovat ADMINISTRATOR - Maria Galati EDUCATION COORDINATOR - Josee Lefebvre

Contents Features

9 12 14 19 21 29 33 49 52 57 59

A Property Manager’s Perspective on Accessibility

by Donna Farr

The Bloodmobile

by Len Rosen

Cover Your Assets

by Bill Thompson

Green Condo Champions

by Bryan Purcell

To Refurb or Not to Refurb

by Lisa Kay

Property Taxes: Paying Your Fair Share – And Then Some!

by Armand Conant

Double Taxation Avoided

by J. Robert Gardiner

You Can’t Say That! - Dealing with Defamation in Condos

by Brian Horlick

Disclosure Statements: You Just Bought A Condo – Surprise!

by Warren Kleiner

HST and Residential Condominium Corporations

by Glen MacMillan

You’ve Bought A Condo...Now What?

by Julian McNabb

CCI News 5 6 36 40 43 45 46 62

President’s Message From the Editor Condo of the Year - 3rd Quarter Finalist CCI-T Announces 2010 Condo of the Year 2010 Annual General Meeting of the CCI Toronto & Area Chapter ACCI Member Profile New Members CCI-T Committee Update

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

3

Contributors “TheCondoVoice” is published 4 times per year – Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter, by Taylor Enterprises Ltd. on behalf of the Canadian Condominium Institute Toronto & Area Chapter.

EDITOR: Mario Deo MAGAZINE DIRECTORS: Gordon Chong, Lisa Kay, Julian McNabb ADVERTISING: Maria Galati COMPOSITION: E-Graphics All advertising enquiries should be directed to Maria Galati at (416) 491-6216 ext.238 or ccitoronto@taylorenterprises.com

If you are interested in writing articles for TheCondoVoice magazine, please contact Maria Galati at (416) 491-6216 Ext 238 or at mariag@taylorenterprises.com.

Article topics must be on issues of interest to Condominium Directors and must be informative rather than commercial in nature.

The authors, the Canadian Condominium Institute and its representatives will not be held liable in any respect whatsoever for any statement or advice contained herein.

Articles should not be relied upon as a professional opinion or as an authoritative or comprehensive answer in any case.

Professional advice should be obtained after discussing all particulars applicable in the specific circumstances in order to obtain an opinion or report capable of absolving condominium directors from liability [under s. 37 (3) (b) of the Condominium Act, 1998].

Authors’ views expressed in any article are not necessarily those of the Canadian Condominium Institute. All contributors are deemed to have consented to publication of any information provided by them, including business or personal contact information.

Consider supporting the advertisers and service providers referred to in this magazine, recognizing that they have been supporters of CCI.

Advertisements are paid advertising and do not imply endorsement of or any liability whatsoever on the part of CCI with respect to any product, service or statement.

Publications Mail Agreement #40047055 Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to Circulation Dept. 2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite 310, Toronto, ON M2J 1W8

4

thecondovoice

Winter 2010

ARMAND G.R. CONANT, B. ENG., LL.B., D.E.S.S. (SORBONNE), (Property Taxes - Paying Your Fair Share … and then some!, page 29) is a partner in the full service law firm of Heenan Blaikie LLP, coheading its extensive condominium and real estate department. Armand is Past-President of CCI-Toronto, and is Co-Chair of the Legislative Committee. Armand is also a member of CCI National’s Government Relations Committee and assembled a “Condominium Primer”. In addition, Armand is a member of ACMO and sits on its Discipline Committee.

Armand is the first lawyer in Ontario to be a court appointed full Administrator. Armand is also an engineer and having received a Masters of Law degree from the Sorbonne (France), he is bilingual.

DONNA FARR, (A Property Manager’s Perspective on Accessibility, page 9), is the Training Coordinator for Brookfield Residential Services Ltd. She has been in the condominium industry for over 30 years and has been a Property Manager and a Regional Manager during the past 22 years she has been with Brookfield.

J. ROBERT GARDINER, B.A., LL.B., ACCI, FCCI, (Double Taxation Avoided, page 33) is senior partner in the law firm Gardiner Miller Arnold LLP, practicing condominium law in Toronto. Bob has written or edited 10 books and 260 published articles on condo law. He is a past president of CCI – Toronto.

BRIAN HORLICK, B.COMM., B.C.L. LL.B., ACCI (You Can’t Say That! - Dealing with Defamation in Condos, page 49) has been successfully engaged in the practice of law for 25 years. He is a senior partner with the law firm of Horlick Levitt Di Lella LLP and is an expert in the area of condominium law. He is a director on the CCI Toronto Board and Co-Chairs its Legislative Committee. Brian is also a member of the CCI/ACMO Government Relations Committee and is Chair of the ACMO Associates Executive Communications Committee.

LISA KAY, (To Refurb or Not to Refurb, page 21) is the sales and marketing manager for JCO & Associates. She is a director of CCI Toronto and sits on the ACMO Associates Executive Committee. Tel.

416-529-5078 E-mail: lisakay@jcoandassociates.com

WARREN D. KLEINER, (Disclosure Statements: You Just Bought A Condo – Surprise!, page 52) is a lawyer practicing condominium law with the Condominium Practice Group at the law firm of Miller Thomson LLP. Warren is also a member of the Toronto Chapter of CCI and ACMO. He is the editor of the Condominium Practice Group’s “Let’s Talk Condo” newsletter. Warren’s goal is to provide his condominium clients with efficient and cost effective service while finding practical solutions to problems and keeping clients up to date with the evolving state of condominium law.

GLEN MACMILLAN (HST and Residential Condominium Corporations, page 57) is a tax partner at Adams & Miles LLP, a CA firm with offices in Toronto and Brampton. Adams & Miles LLP provides audit, accounting and tax services to over 300 condominiums across Greater Toronto Area.

JULIAN MCNABB (You’ve Bought a Condo...Now What?, page 59) is the Manager of New Community Development at Simerra Property Management Inc. He is also a CCI Toronto Director, Co-Chair of the Public Relations Committee and sits on the Membership Committee.

BRYAN PURCELL, (Green Condo Champions, page 19) received his HBA from the University of Toronto in 2005 and his MA from McMaster University in 2008. He has worked extensively in the field of sustainability, most recently coordinating energy conservation programs with the University of Toronto Sustainability Office. He currently manages the TowerWise and LightSavers programs for the Toronto Atmospheric Fund.

LEN ROSEN (The Bloodmobile, page 12) is Community Development Coordinator for Toronto’s new Bloodmobile.

BILL THOMPSON (Cover Your Assets, page 14) is the President of Malvern Condominium Property Management, which is an “ACMO 2000 Certified Company”. Bill is President of the Toronto Chapter and sits on the National Executive Board of Directors for CCI National. He is a past director on the ACMO Board. Bill is a frequent lecturer and guest speaker at numerous industry conferences and courses.

President’s Message would like to take this opportunity to thank the CCI Toronto board for electing me as Chapter President at their November meeting. It will be my honour and my pleasure to try and carry out that role for the next two years. The vacancy left by Armand Conant will be very hard to fill. He leaves such a large void for one with such a small stature! I am sure you will all join with me to thank him for all of his hard work and the sacrifices that he made so freely during the last two years. Trust me when I say that we are not going to let him off easy. He will still carry out a very active role on the Board, and continue to represent us with all of his commitment and dedication. I look forward to receiving his wisdom during my term as President.

I

As I sit here contemplating what my role will be in the next two years, I can’t help but think that it will be a time of change and a time of challenge. CCI Toronto has come of age and has taken on a leadership role in the world of Condominiums.

Our Legislative Committee has, in cooperation with The Association of Condominium Managers of Ontario, been able to get the attention of the various areas of Government that impact the Condominium world in Ontario. We were actually able to get an audience with Minister John Gerretsen, who is the Minister in charge of Consumer Services, which regulates and oversees Condominiums in Ontario. That is no small feat yet is not the end of our mission, it is simply a means to create better communication with the government about the needs of Condominiums and their Owners. We are trying to get some very necessary changes implemented to The Condominium Act, 1998. Despite many changes in government appointments, we believe that we are making headway.

We are an active member of the CCI Ontario Caucus, which is a committee made up of all CCI chapters across the province. Their goal is to focus and steer the various chapters through matters of a provincial nature, such as Property Taxation for Condominium Owners. Later in this publication, in the article entitled Double Taxation Avoided, recent successes in this area with regard to the double taxation of Condominium amenity units are addressed. Please take the time to read that article and make sure that your Condominium gets their paperwork in order to correct this inequity. The Caucus is also focusing on a local and provincial strategy to equalize either the tax rate or the services being provided via the property tax paid by each Condominium Owner. This initiative will take the cooperation of thousands of Condominium Owners and Boards to make an impact on the elected officials, so please make sure you do your part to help out when asked.

Another obvious challenge comes with the introduction of electric cars into the market.

Condominiums are generally poorly equipped to deal with the infrastructure and logistics of making electricity available to their Owners. There will be help needed from the political powers to make this possible in the very near future. CCI Toronto is striving to be at the table when this matter gets the attention that it deserves.

Safety in Condominiums has become a growing concern in recent years. As Condominiums and their structures and systems become more and more complicated, the regulations dealing with the safe operations is becoming a more prominent issue. CCI Toronto has appointed the very capable Jeff Jeffcoatt as our member to sit on a Service Sector Joint Health & Safety Committee put together by the WSIB to identify better ways to educate Condominiums about the safe operation of their workplaces.

Continued on page 66 Spring 2011

thecondovoice

5

From the Editor Simplicity Trumps Fairness – The Condominium Reality?

How many of you have experienced a condominium corporation where there are town home units and a high-rise building in the same corporation? Commercial units within a residential complex pose exactly the same issues but, for simplicity in this editorial, I have used the town home/high-rise model.

The inevitable result of that type of a project is the ongoing and sometimes acrimonious discussions between the town home unit owners and the high-rise unit owners, each accusing the other of spending a disproportionate share of the budget for each sector. Put another way,

The Reality: Usually when all of the expenses are stacked up, calculated, then crunched out, there is a material difference in the common expenses required to be paid by town home units and high-rise units. The declarant usually apportions a square-foot cost common expense to the town home units and another square-foot cost to the high-rise units to reflect the roughly estimated difference in cost of maintaining each type of structure.

While an engineering study or some other reasonable assessment evaluating the cost of the town homes and high-rise units respectively would be better, my understanding is that this is rarely done.

In any event, the differing percentages are placed in the Declaration and if there are any inequities that arise later a solution is almost impossible due to the difficulty in amending the Declaration.

The Solution – Fairness Solutions to problems always range from common sense to silliness. Condominiums are no different. One permanently established, continually flexible and arguably fair solution to the above problem, is to include provisions in the main body of a Declaration, and in Schedules “D” and “E” of the declaration allowing the corporation to charge continually flexible levels of common expenses for each type of structure. How is this done?

There will be, in the case of the above condominium, three types of Schedule Ds and three budgets.

One budget would target the costs required to operate, maintain and repair the town houses, and the town houses would have a specific percentage allocation in Schedule D. A second budget would apply solely to the expenses for the high-rise units and a corresponding percentage allocation in Schedule D. A third budget would apply to the expenses needed for those services or assets that are used by both the town homes and the high-rise (i.e. recreational facilities, walkways, parking garages, etc.) and a corresponding percentage allocation in Schedule D. Schedule E, which lists the types of expenses that form part of the common expenses, would then be tailored to account specifically for costs that apply exclusively to the town home structure, and the high-rise structure, and generally to both structures.

Yes, the arrangement is slightly more complicated but, once put into place, is no more difficult than one budget because you are dealing with exactly the same expenses, except that the expenses are organized into better categories. The great thing about it is that the town home units and the highrises will likely get along better with the three-budget scenario than a single-budget scenario, because each sector can govern and control their own expenses and benefit from their own efforts to curb expenditures.

Continued on page 67

6

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

A Property Manager’s Perspective on Accessibility

BY DONNA FARR, RCM, ACCI BROOKFIELD RESIDENTIAL SERVICES LTD. s well as being a Property Manager, I have a somewhat unique position of also being mobility-challenged. I use a cane and a scooter. Although I have been proactive on the accessibility issue for most of my career, only now do I truly understand how difficult it can be for someone who is physically challenged.

A

The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, (“AOWDA”) has strict requirements enforcing accessibility. Under AOWDA, Ontario Regulation 429/07 — Accessibility Standards for Customer Service — is being implemented on January 1, 2012.

This regulation requires every organization with more than one employee to establish policies and procedures for providing services to those with disabilities. For organizations with over 20 employees, an online report as well as written policies and procedures must be submitted. This new requirement, which we believe will apply to condominiums, will require written policies and procedures to ensure that the condominium is providing accessible customer service.

Training our staff members to provide good customer service to those with disabilities will not be too difficult for the majority of condominiums; however, dealing with the physical requirements to accommodate residents with disabilities is much more challenging.

Most condominium corporations are not accessible, although they may have added some components which make access easier, such as automatic doors.

What condominiums do towards making their buildings more accessible greatly depends on the attitude of the Board of Directors. I have heard too many times that Boards and Residents

ignore the needs of their residents who have disabilities until the frustrated disabled residents take them before a Human Rights tribunal. This attitude can be costly both in terms of dollars, as they will likely be forced to comply with rulings to make the area more accessible, and in harmony among the residents. I have been told that Human

‘Most condominium corporations are not accessible, although they may have added some components which make access easier…’ fear that, should they address accessibility issues, their site will look like a nursing home with wheelchairs full of people lining up in the lobby. In my experience, this scenario has never occurred. Certainly people do gather in the public areas of the site from time to time, but not because they are in wheelchairs. Loneliness and the need for social interaction occur whether the residents are handicapped or not.

Beyond training staff, what are the steps a Corporation needs to take towards accessibility? The most important part is the attitude of the Board of Directors and residents towards this issue. Some Boards — usually in the “wheelchairs in the lobby” mindset —

Rights defense issues are one of the largest and fastest-growing areas of insurance claims.

Taking the First Step

The first step needs to be a Corporation policy. Many of our properties will find it difficult to meet total accessibility standards due to structural or physical limitations - particularly the width of entrances. The Board can make a policy that accessibility will be one of the considerations any time they propose renovations to the property. Therefore, when elevators need to be modernized or cabs refurbished, consideration will be made to lowering the call buttons to Continued on page 10

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

9

‘…if the Corporation has disabled residents, the best option, in my opinion, is to meet with those residents who have disabilities.’ handicapped height and adding Braille numbers to the call buttons as well as audible signals. When corridor renovations are done, consideration will be given to changing the door knobs to levers, which are useful to all residents, but particularly those with arthritis who can no longer turn a door handle.

There are several conditions under which a person can be disabled: mobility, sight and hearing are the most common.

The Property Manager needs to take a walk and look at things from the standpoint of someone who is disabled.

There are also several companies providing accessibility audits that can perform this work.

Access

Can a resident with a walker, scooter or wheelchair get into the building? Is there a curb cut at the building entrances and exits to ramp the access?

Are there trip hazards with concrete or paving stones? Does the building have handicapped parking? Are residents with mobility difficulties able to park in the garage and get into the building safely? What would the building do with a vehicle required by a handicapped resident that is too high to get into the garage? Handicapped vans frequently have an extension to the roof.

In townhouses, does the Board have an access plan for residents who might have a disability? It would be a good idea to look at the townhouses and see how a Board-approved accessible ramp can be installed.

Can a resident who is mobility-challenged get their mail or access other services? Are there any internal doors that provide a barrier to the mail room 10

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

or the Security desk? In a townhouse project, is the mail delivered to each door or is there a set of group mailboxes that may need attention to access?

Many properties have now installed automatic doors. I have had some Boards who insist that only handicapped residents can use the automatic doors (usually by a remote control).

Why? Everyone who has bundle buggies, golf clubs, suitcases or their hands full of bags appreciates these conveniences. There are usually no more maintenance issues if everyone uses the doors rather than only a few.

Recreation facilities are usually more problematic. In these areas it is usually wise to note what facilities have accessibility problems, but only consider making the changes based on resident need. I had one building where the pool and change rooms were accessible; however, the pool water at 82 degrees was too cold for the residents with disabilities to use. They preferred to go to a local hot pool for swimming and therapy.

Vision

Incorporating Braille on signs and audible alarms generally deal with this disability. I will talk about seeing-eye dogs later.

Hearing

This is a really common disability, particularly in an older demographic.

Boards need to decide who will provide and pay for visual alarms or “bed-shak-

ers” for fire alarms. E-mail accounts for the Security Desk, Superintendent and Property Manager can usually handle the need for communication with those who are completely deaf.

Animals

Even in a no-pet building, seeing-eye dogs should be allowed. The Board, however, should decide how they will deal with “hearing ear” dogs and service animals that assist individuals in wheelchairs. Some individuals with mental disabilities will request permission for a “comfort animal” that helps to calm them or keep them emotionally balanced. Requests for accommodation for service animals should be discussed with the Corporation’s lawyer. A list of service animals and what services they provide to their owner can be found at: http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/en/mcss/pro grams/accessibility/ComplyingStandard s/trainingResourcesAODA/unit6.aspx

The Next Step

Once a list has been developed for changes that would be needed to the

common elements, estimated costs should be attached and the list prioritized. If there are no residents with disabilities in the Corporation, this list and the Board policies alone provide a clear indication to owners and prospective owners that the Board does consider accessibility issues and has a method to deal with any concerns.

However, if the Corporation has disabled residents, the best option, in my opinion, is to meet with those residents who have disabilities. Many Boards feel that this will just encourage those with disabilities to ask for everything and cost the Corporation a lot of money.

That has not been my experience.

Disabled owners also pay maintenance fees and don’t want to raise the maintenance fees unreasonably. Having an open discussion with these residents on the areas of the property that gives them difficulty decreases the likelihood that a Human Rights case will be filed. They also may be quite willing to wait, if there is a major project in the future where accessibility in specific areas can be addressed. Residents with disabilities can also be very helpful in setting appropriate opening times for automatic doors and elevator doors or assisting with an accessibility project when work is being planned.

When an accessibility complaint is taken to the Human Rights Tribunal, the Corporation must prove that making the change will cause undue hardship to the Corporation. This is difficult to prove and, as a result, many Human Rights cases result in the Corporation having to make the alteration to provide accessibility. By taking a reasonable approach, having appropriate policies and procedures in place and working with the disabled residents, the Corporation will save money in the long term and have happier residents. ■

• • • • • • • • • • •

Condominium cleaning specialists WHMIS Trained Cleaners Underground garage cleanup Quality control communication log sheet Floors – wax and polishing Uniformed cleaners on premises Fully trained, bonded and insured Commercial and industrial cleaning service Carpet cleaning Exterior highrise window cleaning Building corridor renovations

Head Office (905)

832-6614

Toll-free (877)

253-3648

Fax

832-6614

(905)

49 Elm Street, Suite 202, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1H1 E-mail: info@whiterosejanitorial.com

www.whiterosejanitorial.com

EXCEEDING YOUR EXPECTATIONS “...combined security and emergency response with concierge and hospitality.”

“...our team prides itself on being able to provide our clients with a secure and pleasant environment in which to live.” “...Sentinel gives you the ability to search for records on a fully integrated, secure database.”

E-mail: info@pillarsecurity.ca

Pillar Security has been providing exceptional concierge and security services for upscale residential complexes for 17 years. We offer a unique level of service that focuses on superior communication with residents, board members and property management. As a company, we embrace a simple business philosophy of “Exceeding Your Expectations”.

2333 Dundas Street West, Suite 206 Toronto, Ontario M6R 3A6 Direct line: 416-777-1812 Fax: 416-777-0555

www.pillarsecurity.ca

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

11

THE BLOODMOBILE: Your Friendly Neighbourhood Blood Donor Clinic is Now Coming to Your Condominium Parking Lot

BY LEN ROSEN, CANADIAN BLOOD SERVICES

e all have heard the advertisement slogan, “blood, it’s in you to give.” But only 3.4% of Canadians are registered donors and in Toronto only 1.8%. Yet 52% of Canadians know of a family member who has needed blood or blood products for surgery or other medical treatment.

W

Why this discrepancy between active donors and the general public’s knowledge of the important part blood plays in our lives?

Most of us are very busy in our lives.

That is particularly true for urban dwelling Canadians. Taking the time and effort to donate is not always easy or convenient.

Enter the Bloodmobile

The Bloodmobile is a mobile donor clinic on wheels. It looks like a semitrailer on the outside but inside it has 4 donor stations and all the technology needed to collect blood. It can park curb side or in a parking lot and be open

for business in a matter of minutes. The Bloodmobile is self-powered and climate controlled.

The first Bloodmobile, launched in Ottawa, is the size of a city bus. It has been operating for several years in that city.

In September 2010, Toronto got its own Bloodmobile, which was soon followed by Vancouver’s in October 2010. These vehicles are semi-trailers like the one pictured here.

‘The Bloodmobile changes the way Canadian Blood Services can approach neighbourhood communities.’

Toronto’s Bloodmobile was launched in September 2010 and can be seen frequently throughout the city.

12

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

A state-of-the-art mobile clinic on wheels, this picture shows you the interior of Toronto’s new Bloodmobile.

The Bloodmobile changes the way Canadian Blood Services can approach neighbourhood communities. It can park in a condominium parking lot and be available for residents to donate on a weeknight or weekend requiring no travel and little time. That convenience makes it possible for Canadians who are condominium owners and residents to become active donors.

Why is that important? Despite the fact that Canadian Blood Services runs 43 permanent clinics and holds 22,000 mobile clinics annually the potential for the system to become stressed is growing each year. Our most active and loyal donors in this country are between the ages of 45 and 54. These current donors may become users of blood products in the next decade and with that demographic shift it may mean more blood will be used, while fewer donors will be available to donate.

Canadian Blood Services Needs 85,000 New Donors Annually

Through the Bloodmobile program we can build that capacity, tapping into the potential that is represented by residential communities like condominiums.

To do this we want to make donating blood as convenient and easy as possible.

If you are as old as I am, age 62, you probably remember the Bookmobile. It came to your school or community centre usually once a week. It made finding new books to read easy and convenient.

That’s what the Bloodmobile is intended to be - easy, convenient, safe and reassuring.

For more information about the Bloodmobile program, you can visit www.blood.ca/bloodmobile. In Toronto you can call 416.550.2059 to arrange to have someone meet with your condominium association to discuss requirements for bringing the Bloodmobile right to your doorstep. ■

If we can add 85,000 new donors each year to our donor base and have them donate at least once per year we can ensure that we meet the demand for blood in hospitals.

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

13

Cover Your Assets

BY BILL THOMPSON BA, RCM, ACCI, FCCI MALVERN CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

This article was prepared for a seminar presented at the 2010 ACMO/CCI Condominium Conference here are many written, and many more unwritten, expectations in the world based upon culture, the legal system, religion, and other societal standards by which we conduct our lives, and our businesses. Sometimes we don’t really know why we do something a certain way, we just do it that way because we have always done it that way.

T

As part of our everyday existence, we realize that we need to interact in a predictable, justifiable manner in everything we do in today’s society. Just try driving down a one-way street in the wrong direction. Every concerned citizen will politely let you know that you are not meeting their expectations.

Some may use professional tools, like their car horn, while others will rely on more primitive sign language to get their point across.

Their reaction to your breaking the rules is extremely predictable. The same predictability in response can be seen when you do not meet their expectations in business. Your clients will use many different means to let you know where you have let them down. With today’s systems of communication, you will likely get their displeasure in writing via an email, or they may take the time to fill in whatever other complaint system tools you have supplied to them online. Less often, although more aggressively, you will receive the traditional telephone call scolding, but that 14

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

is usually followed up in writing these days, for legal purposes of course.

Any of these responses can lead to the intervention by their lawyer! This short seminar of ours is designed to look at that one predictable response which is the legal recourse response.

Collection of Maintenance Fees Arguably, more letters are sent and received in the world of Condominium that relate to the payment and collection of maintenance fees than all of the other areas combined. Think about it.

Before your year starts, you are sending

‘Arguably, more letters are sent and received in the world of Condominium that relate to the payment and collection of maintenance fees than all of the other areas combined.’

There are things that you can do that will help to ensure that legal action is encountered less often.

Most of the defenses that you will use arise long before the first phone call from your disenchanted client and are buried in your work in the basic design of your systems.

There are two areas in the Condominium that will lead to the majority of client dissatisfaction and legal recourse.

These areas both involve money, of course, since nothing boils an owner’s blood faster that a dispute about finances. The two areas that I am going to review are Collection Systems and issuing Status Certificates.

the Owners their budget packages, which may include many pages of detailed calculations and in-depth explanations of the Condominium’s plan for success. This will undoubtedly elicit a response from the Owners questioning every line and every thought process that makes up the budget. It is very important, in any collection system, to be able to prove when you mailed the budget and to whom. While the Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”) requires the budget to be mailed to all owners on record before the Condominium can change the maintenance fees, it does not require proof that the Owner received the budget. In other words, it is Canada Post’s responsibility to get the budget to

the Owner and not the Condominium’s.

The Act also does not require notice to be sent to Owners in the case of delinquency in their payments until the very last month. The Condominium has an “automatic” lien on the maintenance fees unless the fees become delinquent beyond three months. Exactly what three months means can be interpreted in two different ways. The first way says that even if the Owner owes only one dollar for a period of time approaching three months, then a lien must be placed. This is a strict aged receivable method. If the money was owing on January 1st, then the lien must be placed by no later than the end of March.

This method creates an unfair system of collection, since the Lien notice and registration costs will exceed $1,000.00 in the most efficient collection systems.

Imagine placing a lien at a cost of $1,000.00 to collect one dollar in fees!

The other method involves a “fund accounting” method that applies all payments in a predictable manner against the longest outstanding fees.

The same dollar could be unpaid but the system of applying fees against the longest outstanding debt keeps that one outstanding dollar in the “current” amounts owing column. This method will ensure that a Lien is placed only when it is necessary (when three months of fees are outstanding), which creates a more equitable system. It is wise to have a written collection policy to outline this system and have your Boards approve it for their Condominiums. This pre-approval will help to ensure that the collection policy is consistent and enforceable.

Although the Act does not require notices to be sent to the Owners in arrears except in the third month, it is recommended that notice be sent each month to keep the Owners aware of their responsibility. A consistent system of sending arrears letters on the 10th day of each and every month will also help to ensure that there is no belief that your collection system is

“high-handed”.

Since the Act was revised in 2001, the condominium has had the right to charge back to Owners a reasonable collection charge that it incurs in the collection or attempted collection of the Maintenance fees. If the Management contract allows for a reasonable collection charge, then this can be passed

It is important to not only complete and send the Form 14 correctly and on time, but also document when and how it was sent.’ along as a “user fee” to those Owners who are continually in arrears. This is a great tool to help collect the fees because the Condo fees are no longer considered to be a free loan from the Condominium to some Owners. The greatest majority of Owners pay their fees on time, so why should they be subsidizing the cost of collecting the fees from those few who do not?

In the third month of arrears, the Act requires that a Form 14 be sent to those owners on record notifying them of the upcoming Lien placement. A Form 14 is a regulated form in the Act entitled “Notice of Lien to Owner”. Who sends this Notice, and how much it costs to send depends upon your collection system. Many Managers send it, and others send it through the Corporation’s Lawyer. Regardless of who is sending it, it is incumbent on the sender to ensure that it is completed properly and sent to the Owner at least ten days before the final Lien file is sent for processing.

A good system will have a protocol that requires a second party to review the Notices prior to them being sent. That person can check for errors and also verify that the notice was actually sent.

Failing to send it on time will not allow

the Lien to be processed and registered on time and could open up the collection process to challenge. It is important to not only complete and send the Form 14 correctly and on time, but also document when and how it was sent.

The actual registration of the Lien should, in this writer’s opinion, be done by a Lawyer familiar with Condominiums. Any other party will simply not have enough knowledge or experience to ensure that the Lien is enforceable and that the outstanding fees are secured and collected in a timely manner.

Economic and efficiency considerations would dictate that a single source Lawyer should be used to place all Liens for a Management company. Many Lawyers do not like this approach since it removes a revenue source from their firm, but the Owners appreciate the fact that their collection costs have been controlled by this efficiency. This also allows for good communication between the collection parties to ensure that the Lien has been properly placed and is fully enforceable.

Status Certificates Status Certificates (Form 13) by their very purpose are ripe for dispute. The Status Certificate is a “disclosure” document completed by the Condominium (or its appointed Agent) in a very limited time for a party that is likely acquiring an interest in the Condominium. Although anyone can request a Status Certificate the only party that would reasonably need one would be a prospective purchaser, or mortgagee, or a current Owner who wants binding disclosure on the Condominium.

The Status Certificate looks at various areas of the Condominium’s operations and requires disclosure of any information that the Condominium may have.

These areas range from the current status of a particular unit, to legal problems and administration problems in the Condominium, to future cost estimates and Reserve Fund planning, and many other areas. There are 34 sections in the Certificate. Once again, this is

Continued on page 16

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

15

an area that deals with financial disclosure and is therefore more likely to end up in a dispute between parties, so it is imperative that a good system of tracking and reporting be developed.

There are many different systems used in issuing Status Certificates. One system would involve the preparation of the Certificate by the on-site Manager and the final signature by a

Board Member. Some Condominiums have the Board prepare and sign the Status Certificate without the help of a Manager. Another system has the Management company prepare and sign the certificate as authorized by the Board in the Management Contract.

Each system has its advantages and disadvantages. Given the short time period in which to issue the certificate, the

most efficient system would involve the fewest parties with the most available time. That would lean toward a Management company issued and signed certificate, and this is the system that I will be reviewing.

Given the ten day limitation period to issue the Status Certificate, it is important to have most of the disclosure information available before the request is received. This is where a good tracking system is an irreplaceable tool. Information can be gathered as part of the everyday routine. Review of the Minutes of a Board meeting will disclose many things about the operation of a Condominium. Are they running a deficit? Is it expected to be recovered before year end? Is there discussion of Legal matters? Is the Board discussing the possibility of a special assessment or a budget change? Are they considering a change in the assets that could be considered substantial? Is there an outstanding Tarion payment?

Is the Board considering a new Reserve Fund Study?

Many of these day-to-day things need to be disclosed to a potential purchaser because they could materially affect their purchase value, or satisfaction.

Part of a good management system involves the regular and timely review of the Manager’s reports, the financial statements and the Board Meeting Minutes. All of these documents are created as a form of written report to another party and will become official documents of the Condominium. At least 75% of all items that are reported in Status Certificates can be tracked back to these three documents. At the time of this review, it is easy to review the documents from a Status Certificate disclosure point of view, and to capture the items that need to be reported in the certificate. It is also useful to create a date when that inclusion clause should be revisited for updating. This can be done in a simple database or spreadsheet. Some of the Condominium Administration computer programs are already integrating this tracking into their software in order to help track and 16

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

speed up the issuing of Status Certificates.

It is important to have the Board review the current generic Status Certificate on a regular basis when the Manager or another Agent is issuing the certificate to ensure that it properly discloses all of their collective knowledge. If a Board meets without their Manager from time-to-time, it is also important that the minutes be sent to the Manager so that any items affecting the Status Certificate can be included in future certificates. The Board may wish to have their Lawyer review their whole certificate to ensure that the wording is appropriate. Many Boards will ask their Lawyer to provide wording for a specific problem, such as a special assessment or a lawsuit that is ongoing.

The one thought to keep in mind when trying to decide how much disclosure is enough is that the truth is always the best disclosure. If a discussion of a special assessment has taken place and

has not been dismissed by the Board at a meeting, then disclose that the Board has discussed the possibility of a special assessment. It really is that simple. The facts, as at the time of the issuing of the Status Certificate, need to be put down on paper and signed as correct. The facts could change the next day, but that does not affect the accuracy of the Certificate when it was issued.

Many Lawyers looking for an “update� will call just before closing. They will simply want to know if the maintenance fees were paid or some other simple matter. There is absolutely no information that can be provided verbally except to the Owner of the unit. Privacy issues restrict giving information to any person, except through the status certificate. If the Owner simply wants an updated statement of account, then fax or email them that statement. The Owner can provide that information to their Lawyer if they choose to do so.

It is common that there to be at least

sixty days between the issuing of the status certificate and the closing date for a new Owner. In those sixty days, there could be many changes to the status of a condominium, including the arrears for the particular unit. The Condominium could have voted to terminate or there could be a special assessment for a million dollars per unit! Lawyers typically do not request a new certificate just before closing, since most of them purchase Title Insurance which can be relied upon if there is some undisclosed matter that costs the purchaser money or interferes with their title to the unit. I am quite sure that this is not a long-term successful strategy. It seems akin to driving with your eyes closed because you have good collision insurance!

A second status certificate request should be received by the Condominium around the tenth day before closing. The second certificate would give the Owner the best protection and the best disclosure. â–

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

17

Green Condo Champions: How two different condos arrived at the same money-saving place by embracing energy efficiency

BY BRYAN PURCELL, TORONTO ATMOSPHERIC FUND

With the global economy on the mend, energy prices are starting to increase.

Is your building ready for higher rates? he folks at 15 Kensington Road and Two Aberfoyle Crescent are.

While one building is over 35 years old and the other is less than 10, both have implemented ambitious energy efficiency retrofits that have dramatically cut their utility costs and quickly paid for themselves.

T

Constructed in 1974, 15 Kensington is a 210-unit condominium building located in Brampton, Ontario. Here, a comprehensive upgrade of the building’s systems cut gas use by 28%, water use by 29% and slashed the electricity used for cooling in half. This reduction in energy use also decreased the building’s greenhouse gas emissions by an aver-

age of over 300 tonnes of CO2e per annum.

At Two Aberfoyle Crescent, board member Jim Book’s interest in adding a solar system to the building led to an examination of all of the building’s overall energy use. What the board discovered was that despite its relatively young age, the building could easily benefit from a number of system updates. Solar was put on the backburner while the board looked at how to put its energy house in order.

Over at 15 Kensington, aging boilers, an inefficient air handling system, and the requirement to replace a chiller containing CFCs led the board to realize they needed to be proactive if they wanted to keep maintenance fees under control.

Together with the board, property manager Ehsan Haghi mapped out an approach where savings from initial measures would generate cash flow through utility savings that would help offset the cost of longer payback items.

A similar approach was taken at Aberfoyle, where lighting upgrades and new exhaust fan controls in the underground garage generated savings to help pay for larger ticket items like boilers.

As an older building, Kensington had

the advantage of being able to dip into its reserve funds to pay for a lot of its bigger ticket items while Aberfoyle could only use the surplus in its reserves. But for both buildings, a careful staging of upgrade measures helped to maximize the savings and minimize disruption and the impact on building cash flow or reserves.

Kensington got started by replacing conventional domestic hot water boilers with much more fuel efficient condensing boilers, while Aberfoyle focused on electricity savings by replacing T12 fluorescents with T8s in the parking garage and installing carbon monoxide detectors which, in turn, now triggered exhaust fan operations only when needed, reducing their use by 90%.

Both buildings later replaced atmospheric boilers with condensing boilers for building heat. At Kensington, five atmospheric boilers were replaced with two condensing boilers, of which only one is usually needed to adequately heat the building. Aberfoyle chose a slightly different approach, installing two new condensing boilers but retaining four of its older boilers to help carry the load in peak periods. It also replaced one of two atmospheric domestic hot water boilers with a condensing boiler with new controls.

Continued on page 20

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

19

At Kensington, the new boilers were deliberately oversized so that later they could be linked into the air handling unit and replace the highly-inefficient standalone burner used to heat incoming air. Aberfoyle, like Kensington, replaced the conventional fan motor in its air handling unit (AHU) with an electricity-saving variable speed drive.

Unfortunately, it later discovered that its originally oversized AHU was being turned on and off too frequently, causing maintenance headaches. The building managers are now looking at using that extra capacity by following along the lines of what Kensington did in hooking the AHU to the building’s main heating and cooling systems.

Kensington then tackled two more items: It replaced more than 200 waterwasting toilets with top-efficiency models (toilet water use was reduced by 68%) and upgraded to a high-efficiency chiller. The building’s chiller needed to be replaced anyway, but 15 Kensington decided to invest in a highefficiency chiller which would improve performance while using half as much energy as the old one.

At 15 Kensington, the overall project reduced the building’s annual utility costs by over $65,000. The green upgrades will pay for themselves in under five years and created a Net Present Value of over $183,000 for the building. For Two Aberfoyle, the simple payback was under three years and the Net Present Value of the upgrades is $270,000.

In retrospect both projects look like nobrainers. But the building managers and boards had to work together to make the case to residents in both buildings. The Kensington board and manager prepared a detailed budget demonstrating the clear financial advantages of the retrofit while Book arranged a “town hall” meeting at Aberfoyle to explain how fast payback upgrades could be used to pay for more costly items with deeper returns.

Both used newsletters and notices to keep residents informed as work pro20

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

gressed, while Kensington’s manager broke savings down on a per-unit basis to dispel any concerns about who would really benefit.

These are among the valuable lessons captured in a new series of case studies prepared by the TowerWise program to help condominium boards understand the potential benefits of a retrofit and to learn from the experience of others.

The full case studies are available at www.towerwise.ca/case_studies.

Another great resource for condo residents is the new Power of Green guide to planning and executing a retrofit.

The guide walks you through the steps of assessing your building’s current systems and performance, deciding which upgrade measures make sense, developing an integrated plan to maximize return on investment, and selling a retrofit to your fellow board members and residents.

The guide also has sections on how to finance a retrofit, including the legal steps required before dipping into reserves or taking out a loan; renewable energy options, including solar water and pool heating; solar electricity generation (solar PV); and geothermal heating and cooling. You can download the guide or order print copies at www.towerwise.ca/power_of_green.

And remember, if your condo is located in the 416 area code, our free Conservation Advisor service is here to help you plan your retrofit and access government and utility incentives.

Conservation Advisor Mara Del Bianco can be reached at 416-931-1463 or by emailing advisor@towerwise.ca.

The truth is that in almost every case condos can save “big” on energy costs right now. But those inevitable future increases in utility costs are going to make getting control of your single largest addressable expense all the more urgent. So take a look at the great resources available at TowerWise.ca and make it your 2011 project to begin doing something about those utility bills. ■

To Refurb or Not to Refurb

BY LISA KAY, BA, CCI (HON'S) JCO & ASSOCIATES

I may be a newcomer to the world of condominium refurbishments but I am no stranger to construction and design .....on a personal level. Having a father and brother who have beautifully refurbished several homes themselves and a mother who skillfully sewed many drapes and bedding made of silk and crushed velvet (a talent I like to think was passed on to me) there were very few discrepancies in the projects that we all undertook.

Each of us had a specific and unique skill which was unchallenged by the others for the very same reason. On any one “refurbishment” project there would be a maximum of 3 specially-skilled family members making decisions and executing the work in their field of expertise.

Now if a condominium only had three specially-skilled individuals living in it, and they all had the utmost respect for one another’s abilities, a condominium refurbishment project would be a joyful undertaking. You probably know where I am going with this.......

There is no doubt that the very nature of a condominium can, and will, add complications to such a project. But condominium refurbishment projects can have exceptional benefits to the owners, including pride of ownership and increased values, and are worth undertaking. With a little finesse and the help of qualified refurbishment professionals you can accomplish such a project with great results.

I asked industry experts to comment on what are the most important things to consider for your condo refurbishment. Linda Pinizzotto, a real estate veteran, Jose De Oliveira, a condominium refurbishment general contractor, Trevor Kruse, an interior design guru and Brian Horlick, a condominium lawyer, all provide insight.

First, I thought it was important to examine the very reason to undertake a refurbishment project – maintaining market values and pride of ownership.

Linda Pinizzotto has entered many condos with prospective buyers and has a great sense of what sells…

Q. Linda, please provide your insight on the value of a condominium common element refurbishment to a prospective buyer.

A. There is no doubt a refurbishment enhances its saleability and increases unit values. When purchasers are shopping for a condominium they want to feel visually pleased when they enter the building. In today’s real estate market, there is a huge competition between condominium buildings.

Older buildings are having trouble competing with new construction largely due to their aesthetics. Although some of the older units are larger and offer more square footage than newly constructed units, their values are compromised if the design is dated and there is visible wear and tear.

A decision to purchase rests not only on price but also on how the buyer “feels” about the building. Do they feel excited and comfortable with the design, style and atmosphere it presents? Is the concierge desk visible, are there security cameras and how efficient was the security intercom system on entry? I find amenities are important but, if there is anything that turns a buyer off, it is the wear and tear in the hallways and a dated lobby. The word ‘tired’ gets tacked onto the building which is really no different from a single family home that is in rough shape.

Continued on page 23

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

21

Q. How does a renovation to the interior of a unit compare to that of a common element refurbishment?

A. If an owner renovates his unit to include granites, hardwoods and new kitchen cabinets, although helpful, their unit value is still inhibited because of the condition of the building. The common areas of a lobby and corridor are the entrance to their own unit and are obviously travelled through before the oasis of a renovated unit is reached – leaving a bad first impression.

A condo building that appears “tired” will affect the market value of every owner’s unit in the building. The financial viability of the building and whether it is a sound investment is largely dependent on its unit value in the resale market. Even if the maintenance fees are higher than normal, purchasers are not as concerned if the building has been updated and modernized because they feel it is holding its value and is saleable.

Q. How can a condominium market their refurbishment to prospective buyers?

A. Our TREB MLS system has an area to highlight a full description of the unit and the building to include all the amenities. It is important for owners to ensure they provide the details of their building’s refurbishment to their agent when they list their unit for sale.

There are almost 29,000 Realtors in the Toronto Real Estate Board alone who have direct access to this information.

There is no better way to promote the value of a common element refurbishment to enhance the market values of the units in any particular building.

Executing a refurbishment project can be a bit overwhelming. Jose De Oliveira has managed hundreds of refurbishment projects and has an opinion on what a board should consider to executive such a project.

Q. Jose, briefly, what are the steps required for a board to undertake a refurbishment project?

A. When planning a redesign, a board must determine what work they want to do and review the reserve fund study to see how much money has been allocated for that particular work. The board should then seek an ARIDO designer – a professional designer who is a member of the Association of Registered Interior Designers of Ontario who has experience in condominium renovations. Condominium refurbishments are much more complicated than the redesign of the interior of a private residence so hiring the right professionals for the job will save a great deal of time and money.

Once a designer is chosen he/she will work with the board to create a few design options that reflect the desired image of the building. These options can be shown to the unit owners to get their feedback before a final decision is made.

of a condo refurbishment that perhaps a layperson would not.

A professional designer will know the latest technological advances in materials and products and make informed choices from these products that meet safety requirements. They will also know which products will stand the test of time in a condominium. There are new materials available that will work better than the originals and that meet the current Ontario Building Code.

Designers will also be familiar with the latest in condo design and will make recommendations that will help maximize the value of the refurbishment.

An experienced general contractor will know when building permits are required and will be able to make recommendations on the cost effectiveness of considered changes. Their trades

‘Resident demographics influence the design solution in that we prefer the visual for the project to properly represent the owners.’

At this point the board can now seek a general contractor to execute the job.

They, too, should be experienced in condominium refurbishments. It is highly recommended in both cases that the designer and general contractor are bonded and insured to reduce risk to the condominium. During this process I recommend that the board check references from both the designer and general contractor and go and visit sites that they have completed so assessments can be made of both quality of workmanship and design.

Q. Some condo boards wish to undertake some or all of the design and project management tasks to save money. Can you elaborate on the value of hiring a professional designer and general contractor who have worked in condominiums?

A. Experienced professionals in the industry will be aware of many aspects

will be aware of the owners’ schedules, be mindful of noise disturbances and will keep the job site tidy and safe.

They will understand the importance of regular communications to the property manager who, in turn, will keep the owners abreast of the refurbishment schedule and progress of the project.

They will focus on minimizing the disturbance to all the owners.

It is foolish and extremely risky for a board to take on a designer and/or a general contractor role as there is a great deal of diligence and knowledge required. Prior to undertaking a project the Board must clearly understand the legal ramifications and possible liabilities associated with their decisions.

Hiring the right professionals up front will save a great deal of time and money over the long term because they will ensure the job is completed in a Continued on page 24

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

23

timely fashion and in compliance with all regulations governing the work.

Trevor Kruse knows the new and existing condominium design market well. He has a great understanding of what the new developments are offering and what existing condos should do to keep up. I have asked him to comment on the factors he considers when creating a design solution for a condominium.

Q. Trevor, when asked to redesign a condo, what do you think are the primary considerations you and the board must make?

A. There are really three primary considerations; available budget, resident demographic and exterior architecture.

These are the issues that reflect every decision we make for our ultimate solution. Available budget is affected by a couple of factors. Firstly, monies available from the reserve fund; we always try to work within that budget so that

24

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

there is no need for any special assessment. The other and more significant factor is which, if any, existing materials or features can remain and, therefore, do not require replacing. This could include hard surfaces like stone floors or wood paneling, light fixtures, or suite entrances. The items that affect the budget most are carpeting, wall coverings, and lighting – of which lighting is the most likely candidate for not being replaced.

We then shape every subsequent design decision and finish selection to fit within the budget available by considering judiciously how and where we use materials appropriately.

Resident demographics influence the design solution in that we prefer the visual for the project to properly represent the owners. For example in a building with an older more established demographic that is primarily owner occupied we would try to use higher end classic finishes. While for a build-

ing with a higher renter mix we would tend to employ more indestructible finishes that will survive a more transient occupant.

For a young urban demographic we employ contemporary materials, details and vocabularies where, if we have an older more traditional owner group, we lean to more traditional materials, details and finishes. More often than not a transition solution is the most appropriate and a deft combination of materials and solution is employed.

The exterior architecture is one of the most significant factors influencing our design choices. We attempt to respect the existing exterior architecture when we determine a design direction for the interior refurbishment. We find often that existing solutions that we are asked to replace have no relationship to the buildings they are in. This is our opportunity to bring the two together. Our solutions often improve upon the original solution the buildings had when they

were first built and handed over to the corporation. We are finding more and more that the finished design solution is successful when it meshes with the architecture rather than contrasting it.

Of course with many undertakings in a condominium there are usually legal aspects to consider. Brian Horlick has been involved with many condos for their refurbishments and offers us his expertise.

Q. Brian, when a condominium is undertaking a refurbishment project when is it considered maintenance and repair versus an addition, alteration or improvement?

A. The Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”) treats maintenance and repair differently from an addition, alteration or improvement (an “AAI”). Sections 89 and 90 of the Act provide, among other things, that “repair” includes repair and replace after damage or failure, and “maintain” includes repair after normal wear and tear. Generally, the condominium corporation has the obligation to repair and maintain the common elements, although this may be varied by the corporation’s declaration.

Section 97 of the Act, by comparison, deals with AAIs, specifically as those terms relate to the common elements.

The court in Wentworth Condominium Corp. No. 198 v. McMahon defined an “addition” as something that is joined or connected to a structure, an “alteration” as something that changes the structure, and an “improvement” as betterment of the property or an enhancement of the value of the property.

Section 97 further states that, if the corporation has an obligation to repair or maintain the common elements and carries out that obligation “using materials that are as reasonably close in quality to the original as is appropriate in accordance with current construction standards”, that work will not be deemed to be an AAI. In commenting on this

provision, the court in Little v.

Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corp. No. 590 said that section 97 was not intended to be a “cultural straitjacket”; that is, the corporation may update the items being repaired or maintained using modern materials and technology without such an update being considered an AAI. Q. Can all refurbishments be paid for out of the reserve fund?

A. The question of whether work falls under the heading of repair and maintenance or that of an AAI is important for at least two reasons. For one, section 93 of the Act provides, among other things, that a condominium corporation shall establish and maintain one or more reserve funds, which fund(s) shall

Q. When do the owners need to approve a refurbishment project?

A. Based on the criteria set out above, if the refurbishment project is an AAI to the common elements, there are other provisions of section 97 of the Act that need to be considered. These include the obligation, in certain circumstances, to notify the owners of the planned change.

Section 97 sets out what are, in essence, three separate categories for AAIs to the common elements. The first is for an AAI that has an estimated cost, in any given month, of no more than the greater of $1,000 and 1% of the annual budgeted common expenses for the current fiscal year. For most condominium corporations, this latter amount

‘The Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”) treats maintenance and repair differently from an addition, alteration or improvement (an “AAI”).’ be used “solely for the purpose of major repair and replacement of the common elements and assets of the corporation”.

Note that the Act does not require a condominium corporation to use monies from its reserve fund to pay for such items, but rather states that those monies can only be used to pay for such items.

As such, repair or maintenance of the common elements generally will be a permissible reserve fund expenditure, whereas an AAI to the common elements generally will not. Any condominium corporation that is doing a refurbishment project needs to consider which of these two headings the project falls under.

If it is determined that the expenditure is an AAI then these expenditures can be funded by one or more of operating surplus, special assessment or loan.

will be far greater than $1,000. An AAI that fits into this category can be done by the corporation by resolution of the board and without notice to the owners. Note that this provision refers to the estimated cost in any given month; arguably, a corporation could spread work out over a period of several months such that the cost in any one of those months would not exceed 1% of the budgeted common expenses, and the corporation would thereby not be required to give notice to the owners of the AAI. The second category is where the AAI has an estimated cost that exceeds the threshold set out in the above paragraph, but its total estimated cost is less than 10% of the annual budgeted common expenses for the current fiscal year. In the case of an AAI in this category, the board must give the owners Continued on page 27

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

25

26

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

notice, and the owners may, within 30 days, requisition a meeting for the purpose of voting on the proposed AAI.

The third category is where the AAI has an estimated total cost that exceeds 10% of the annual budget. Such an AAI is considered to be “substantial” pursuant to section 97, and must be approved by the owners of at least 66 2/3% of the units. Note that the board may choose to treat any AAI as substantial and requiring this 66 2/3% approval, even if the AAI falls below the aforementioned 10% threshold.

Q. What other items should a condo consider for their refurbishment project?

A. In addition to the foregoing, any corporation that is planning a refurbishment of its common elements should also be mindful of a number of other issues. Without going into too much detail, these include: • ensuring that the contract(s) for the refurbishment is/are properly tendered so as to ensure that the corporation pays a competitive price for the refurbishment; • obtaining all necessary approvals from municipal, provincial and/or federal governmental authorities for the refurbishment; • ensuring that the refurbishment is done pursuant to CCDC standard contracts with standard terms, as reviewed and amended by the corporation’s solicitor; • ensuring that all contractors and their personnel working on the refurbishment are properly bonded and insured; and • where appropriate, retaining a qualified project manager to oversee the refurbishment.

Whether your condo is relatively new or approaching the 30-year mark there is no question that the appearance of your condo’s entrance and corridors are important. The competition to keep market values in line with your new condominium neighbour exists, especially in the GTA.

Understand your budget, seek professional support and invest in the appearance of the common areas of your condo and it will positively contribute to your own personal investment .

Thank you to the following contributors of this article:

Linda Pinizzotto is a Top Producing Realtor and Chairman Award Winner with Sutton Group Quantum Realty and has sold thousands of condominiums since 1979. She is President of two downtown Toronto condominium buildings, Director and Political Action Chair for a Real Estate Board and the Founder-President of the Condo Owners Association (COA).

Jose De Oliveira is a principal of JCO & Associates, general contractors specializing in condominium refurbishments for over 21 years. Jose is an Honorary Member of ACMO Associate Committee and a member of ACMO Certification and Standards Committee.

Trevor Kruse, the principal of Hudson Kruse Design, has over 20 years of interior design experience. This Torontobased firm specializes in condominium refurbishment and residential development.

Trevor has been creating welcoming residences and liveable communities all across North America.

Brian Horlick has practiced law for over 25 years and specializes in condominium law. He is a senior partner with the law firm of Horlick Levitt Di Lella LLP, is a director on the CCI Toronto Board and Co-Chairs its Legislative Committee. Brian is also a member of the CCI/ACMO Government Relations Committee and is Chair of the ACMO Associates Executive Communications Committee. ■

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

27

Property Taxes Paying Your Fair Share – And Then Some!

BY ARMAND CONANT, B.ENG., LL.B., D.E.S.S. (SORBONNE) HEENAN BLAIKIE LLP e’ve all heard the old saying that the only sure things in life are death and taxes.

Unfortunately, if you’re a condominium owner in Ontario, some of that taxation may also be unfair, at least when it comes to property taxes.

W

Property taxes are assessed in Ontario to pay for municipal services (e.g. garbage pick-up, snow plowing/removal, provision of sewers, etc.) and infrastructure (maintenance of roads, lighting, sidewalks, etc.). Each property in the province has its value determined by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC); this assessment is supposed to approximate the market value of the property. Every municipality calculates the municipal portion of the property tax liability using rates it sets for each of the property classifications identified by the provincial government (called the “Mill” rate). For this purpose, all condominium units are classed as “residential” properties. The tax rates for the educational portion of property taxes are set directly by the province.

A problem arises because condos, whether high-rise or townhouse, consume less municipal services or at least at a lower rate than do detached residences. For instance, many condo

complexes have systems of internal roads; the condominium corporation is responsible for these roads, their lighting and adjacent sidewalks and curbs – not the municipality.

Take, as an example, ten single-family

twenty times that of the ten single-family homes, but “per-unit” service and infrastructure consumption is much lower.

The inequity only gets more dramatic when you consider that a large portion of new home construction is actually new condo construction. In fact, in Toronto, more than half of residential construction is for condominiums. This will be a windfall for municipalities and an undue burden for unit owners.

The municipalities themselves recognize the issue. The City of Brantford has passed a by-law enabling it to tax condos at a separate and lower rate, and after considerable effort by many residents, including Ed Schollen, the Town of Markham has passed a resolution urging the province to adopt a separate tax rate for condos.

homes and a 500-unit condo high-rise.

The ten single-family homes occupy about the same footprint on the ground as the high-rise condo with 500 units.

Even allowing for the lower assessed values of the condominium units, the aggregate tax bill for the condominium can come in at anywhere from ten to

The CCI Ontario Caucus (consisting of representatives from all seven CCI Ontario Chapters) believes that the fairest, and most workable, way is to address this issue province-wide through the creation of at least one condominium residential property assessment class. Municipal governments cannot establish property classes for taxation purposes on their own. The power to create new classes

Continued on page 30

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

29

‘What we are seeking is fair treatment for the owners of condominium corporations (which means the unit owners) by having the total taxes they pay more fairly reflect their use of municipal services.’ rests with the provincial government, so we will need to advocate to the province to amend the Assessment Act and rectify the issue. However, we will not rest there because concurrently we will work with municipalities in an effort to have them reallocate or vary certain services to, or taxes collected from, condo owners to eliminate, or at least minimize, this taxation inequity.

The Caucus is well-positioned to bring about the change. It has recently revived itself to address this and other pending province-wide condo issues and I have the privilege of being its current Chairman. With representatives

30

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

from urban, suburban and rural areas, the Caucus brings all these different perspectives to the issues it will address, giving us greater credibility with our governmental counterparts. It goes without saying that we have the drive and ambition to effect meaningful change.

What is the process as we move forward?

This will not be an easy fight to win (both with respect to the government and non-condo owners), and we are mustering the information we need. We will need to show that we are not seek-

ing preferential treatment, so we will be gathering statistical information showing how condo taxation is disproportionate to the services consumed.

Our emphasis is not on taxes paid by individual owners but on the aggregate paid on behalf of each condominium corporation – this makes the disparity clearly visible. What we are seeking is fair treatment for the owners of condominium corporations (which means the unit owners) by having the total taxes they pay more fairly reflect their use of municipal services.

We will need to demonstrate support for this initiative. To this end, we established a committee of the Caucus (made

up of Al Siaroff, Ed Keeleyside and Chaired by Rob Mullin) to design a campaign for CCI members, all owners and others supportive of this issue to write, email or call their MPPs, all candidates in the upcoming provincial election, and their local municipal councillors, indicating their concern that condominium owners are, indeed, taxed disproportionately. Watch your e-mail and future issues of CondoVoice for further information on this.

and appreciates your support in our efforts on your behalf.

Hot Off the Press…

Just as this article went into its final editing process, we received word from Al Siaroff of the Golden Horseshoe Chapter of CCI, that the City of Cambridge, recognizing our Fair

Taxation Campaign, has instructed City staff to review options to address the inequitable taxation faced by condominium owners, including establishing its own condo tax rates and petitioning MPAC to do so. This is great news, and shows that municipalities are aware of, and willing to take action to, address this important issue! ■

We need to ensure, in this provincial election year, that the issue has a prominent place on the agendas or election platforms of the major political parties.

The Caucus and the joint CCI TorontoACMO Government Relations Committee will be driving this process to some extent, using our provincial contacts, and we encourage you, should you attend an all-candidates debate in your riding, to raise a question about it as well. The more informed “buzz” we can generate, the greater the impact we will have.

We will need to have concrete proposals for amending the legislation.

Through our Legislative Committee, we will be developing this; once again, watch your e-mail and CondoVoice for news.

We will have to work to enlist the support of municipalities for the amendment. We already know that the City of Brantford and the Town of Markham are behind us, and we will be looking for opportunities to bring others on-side.

Finally, we are planning to excel at follow-through. This issue will not be decided as a result of the provincial election – we are prepared to be actively engaged leading to, through, and beyond the October 2011 election to ensure this issue is properly addressed.

We can only do this through a concerted effort of all stakeholders, so, once again, watch your e-mail and Condo Voice for updates on what we are doing, and ways in which you can help.

The Ontario Caucus is looking forward to working on this important initiative,

Continued on page 33 Spring 2011

thecondovoice

31

32

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

Double Taxation Avoided

BY J. ROBERT GARDINER, B.A., LL.B., ACCI, FCCI, GARDINER MILLER ARNOLD LLP

I

n a recent decision, the Assessment Review Board (“ARB”) reduced an assessment by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) of a condominium recreation centre from $1,740,000 to $1.

The case will likely have far-reaching implications for many condominium corporations’ unit owners who have suffered double taxation with respect to their corporation-owned guest, superintendent, recreation, gatehouse and other types of units.

Background

The Ballantrae Golf & Country Club in the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville is located in a gated condominium community consisting of 736 units in five condominiums surrounding a golf course, together with a sewage plant and Recreation Centre. Schickedanz Bros. Ltd., the developer, continued to hold ownership of a 4.18 acre parcel of land containing the 15,722 sq. ft., onestorey Recreation Centre, pending development of the fifth condominium corporation. MPAC assessed the Recreation Centre in the amount of $1,460,000 for the 2005 taxation year and $1,740,000 for the 2006 and 2007 taxation years.

ARB Decision

The ARB was persuaded by Schickedanz’ lawyers’ arguments that unit owners’ exclusive rights and con-

trols over the Recreation Centre equated to an easement. The ARB noted the various factors surrounding the unit purchases (including the restricted zoning for the Recreation Centre, provisions contained in the disclosure statement, declaration, purchase agreements

The ARB had determined in that case that the intent was to use the common areas for the shared use of the owners of the lots, and had therefore found that the common areas constituted easements in favour of the owners’ units, following a line of U.S. precedent cases.

‘The Schickedanz assessment case will become a powerful precedent affecting many recreation facilities, guest units, superintendent units, gatehouses and other units held by condominium corporations…’ and the vendor’s sales representations made to potential purchasers). The ARB accepted that those factors demonstrated that owners’ rights with respect to the Recreation Centre constituted an easement appurtenant to each of the residential units.

Sunset Lake

The ARB also adopted its decision in Sunset Lake Owners Association v.

MPAC where 141 residential lots shared rights-of-way over park routes, sports areas, docking facilities and parking, which MPAC had assessed separately.

Assessment of Servient Tenements

The Sunset case and the Schickedanz case both interpreted s. 9 (1) of the Assessment Act to conclude that where an easement is appurtenant to any land, that land must be assessed as part of the dominant tenement (the property which receives the benefit of the easement) at the added value which the easement gives to the dominant tenement, with the result that assessment of the shared lands (in this case the Recreation Centre Continued on page 34

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

33

freehold lands), as a servient tenement which is subject to the easement, must be reduced accordingly.

“Added Value”

The ARB held that the “added value” added to the dominant tenement units had to be subtracted from the value of the servient tenement Recreation Centre. In order to determine the amount of the “added value”, the ARB took into account the fact that Schickedanz was transferring the Recreation Centre to the five condominium corporations for a zero additional payment.

No Double Taxation

In the end, the ARB held that “The prevailing principle is that there should be no double taxation, no matter how small.” For each of the taxation years under appeal, the assessment of the Recreation Centre was therefore reduced to a nominal amount of $1.

Implications of the Schikedanz decision

The Schickedanz assessment case will become a powerful precedent affecting many recreation facilities, guest units, superintendent units, gatehouses and other units held by condominium corporations as “common amenity assets” on behalf of the unit owners, which they exclusively control in the nature of an easement. One can only hope that MPAC may adopt the general conceptual easement and “added value” reasoning for all common amenity units.

Section 37 Agreement Settlement

In a separate case, MPAC and TSCC 1649 entered into a Settlement Agreement whereby the assessment of a daycare unit was reduced from $1,928,000 to $5. The City of Toronto had imposed a s. 37 site plan development agreement upon all owners of the property to construct, furnish and equip a daycare facility to accommodate 52 children for 99 years.

34

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

‘It is double taxation for unit owners to pay the municipal taxes on their own units and also contribute in their common expense contributions to the common amenity unit’s taxes.’

The declarant (Waterclub) and the three sister condos who became the successor owners of the daycare centre were obligated to charge only nominal rent to the daycare operator and restrictions prevented sale of the daycare unit for anything other than nominal value. The costs of operating the daycare unit exceed any revenue to be generated by it.

The definition of “current value” referred to in s. 1, 19, 19.1 and 19.2 of the Assessment Act refers to the amount of money the fee simple, if unencumbered, would realize if sold at arm’s length by a willing seller to a willing buyer which, in this case, would be less than zero. The parties agreed upon an assessment of $5.

The Real Reason for Double Taxation

I learned about the Schickedanz decision, (rendered November 5, 2010), when I presented an introductory PowerPoint condo course at the annual retreat for MPAC’s policy, legal, appraisal managers and senior staff on November 10, 2010. I had the opportunity to present a very detailed analysis confirming the real reasons why the assessment and taxation of “common amenity units” is inappropriate, on a totally separate basis, founded upon provisions contained in the Condominium Act, 1998.

Those common amenity assets are owned by the condominium corporation as an agent on behalf of each of the unit owners who share the common amenity units in proportion to the “common interest” appurtenant to each of their units. Double taxation occurs

when common amenity assets are assessed and taxed, given the fact that the residential units have already been assessed for “current value”, which includes the value of each of their appurtenant common interests in the common amenity units. Owners are inevitably obligated to pay the common expenses required to cover all of the costs applicable to a condo corporation’s common amenity units or other lands held by the corporation - including the municipal realty taxes applicable to those common amenity assets.

“Common Interests”

Section 18 (2) of the Condominium Act provides that “the owners share the assets of the corporation in the same proportions as the proportions of their common interests in accordance with this Act, the declaration and the bylaws.” Despite the fact that the judge generally failed to rule favourably upon that concept in the case of MTCC 1172 v MPAC, individual unit owners were permitted by that case to appeal for a minor reduction in the current value assessment applicable to their individual units.

That case was a CCI-Toronto supported attempt to put an end to double taxation of unit owners. It is the author’s view that s. 15 must be construed subject to s. 18 of the Condominium Act. S. 15 provides that each unit, together with its appurtenant common interest, constitutes a parcel for the purpose of municipal assessment and taxation.

However, in a case where a corporation has acquired one or more assets which constitute units or land, there should be only a nominal assessment of $1 and no municipal taxation of such common

amenity unit parcels, because the value of those common amenity units is already included in the current value of the s. 18 common interests appurtenant to each of the owners’ units. It is double taxation for unit owners to pay the municipal taxes on their own units and also contribute in their common expense contributions to the common amenity unit’s taxes.

The concept of “current value” assessment requires MPAC to take into account many factors (including the value of amenities, rights and benefits attached to each of the units) when MPAC assesses the price which a willing buyer would likely pay to a willing seller in an open marketplace.

Common interests account for all of the condominium corporation’s common amenities held by it on behalf of all of its unit owners. The condominium corporation’s common amenity assets (whether units, common elements, freehold lands, concierge services or

chattels such as the on-site management office computer) all form part of the common interests appurtenant to each of the condominium corporation’s residential, parking and locker units in accordance with each of their respective proportionate shares of common interests.

File Before March 31st Deadline

If MPAC does not recognize the double taxation aspect in the assessment of your condominium corporation’s common amenity units in the next Assessment Notice, consider appealing taxes on behalf of all of the unit owners and on behalf of the condominium corporation.

Make sure you file the condominium corporation’s Notice of Reconsideration with MPAC before the March 31, 2011 filing deadline. Hopefully, your condo has passed an appropriate assessment by-law provision allowing the condominium corporation to appeal assessment on behalf of all owners.

Recommendations

We hope that double taxation appeals will not be necessary hereafter, but if they are, don’t just rely on the “easement” argument, because the “common interest” argument should have a broader scope to cover all types of common amenity units. In this article, I have simplified various complex arguments used by MPAC and the condominium corporations in the various cases, so keep in mind that your condominium corporation’s case must be individually considered and then carefully prepared and argued.

Make sure you retain a qualified assessment appraiser as a key witness and a condo lawyer experienced in following the appropriate procedures and marshaling all the assessment evidence and arguments necessary to win the case. ■

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

35

CONDO OF THE YEAR – 3rd Quarter Finalist YRVLCC - Ballantrae Communities

BY MICHELLE RAMSAY-BORG AND JAMES RUSSELL

LIVING IN A PARADISE OF THEIR OWN MAKING CCI Toronto is thrilled to announce that the Ballantrae Community has been selected as the third quarter finalist of the annual Condo of the Year Award. The following article was written as part of the corporation’s submission for entry to the contest. Our congratulations are extended to Ballantrae Communities,

YRVLCC 968, YRVLCC 1002,

YRVLCC 1066, YRVLCC 1079 and YRCECC # 967!

Further details on this contest may be found on the CCI-T website at www.ccitoronto.org.

The 2010 annual grand prize winner will be selected from amongst the four quarter finalists in the late summer of 2011 and will be announced at the CCI Toronto Annual General Meeting in September 2011

If you are looking for the capital of wellness, innovation and volunteerism, you need look no further than the Third Quarter Finalist for the CCI-Toronto Condo of the Year award: the Ballantrae Communities.

“We’re all thrilled. It’s a definite honour to be chosen as a quarter finalist,” says YRVLCC 1066 Board Member, Gerhild Somann.

Winning Qualities

Surrounded by the 2,200 hectares of the magnificent York Regional Forest and perched on the Oak Ridges Moraine, the Ballantrae Communities, a partnership of four YRVLCCs (York Region Vacant Land Condominium Corporations) and one YRCECC (York Region Common Element Condominium Corporation), is an exclusive neighbourhood of stunning, detached homes surrounding the Ballantrae Golf and Country Club, a championship 18-hole, public course.

Although to the casual observer it may look like yet another residential community, the planners and builders of the Ballantrae Communities – which includes close 36

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

to 900 detached houses and about 2000 residents – have created an idyllic adult lifestyle environment that provides not just shelter for the body, but also comfort for the soul. In other words, allaround wellness.

“It’s a very caring community,” says Bob Ross, YRVLCC 1002 Board member, “and that makes it easy to join in, meet people and make friends.”

But it wasn’t the easy social atmosphere, spectacular golf course, breathtaking forested surroundings or the emphasis on wellness that caught the attention of the CCI judges, it was the level of participation and volunteerism displayed by the Ballantrae Communities’ residents and the success they had in forging a united community out of the five condominium corporations.

But perhaps the single most important attribute that has contributed to the Ballantrae Communities’ success has been the amazing level of resident participation. An usually high percentage of the residents regularly attend AGMs and Town Hall Meetings and the many committees – including social, communications and website committees – are staffed entirely by volunteers. Street Captains – again volunteers – hand deliver to every home issues of the Ballantrae Communities’s 48-page,

glossy magazine Home on the Green, as well as fitness schedules and the newsletters of the individual YRVLCCs.

The Ballantrae Communities have also incorporated a number of other initiatives into the fabric of their community. Some of these initiatives include:

• A pedestrian, and bike-friendly 25km/h speed limit for cars

• An informal yet vigilant neighbourhood watch program

• A welcome committee to help newcomers become familiar with the facilities, regulations and amenities

• A committee that assists residents with errands, doctors’ appointments, and other non-emergency needs

• An active social committee that organizes theatre outings, casino visits, wine and shopping tours, ladies’ and gentlemen’s dinners, and Christmas and New Year’s parties Continued on page 38

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

37

the course and the community were still in the planning stage. The builder continued to work with Audubon throughout the development stage to ensure that all environmental guidelines were met or exceeded, as was the case with the Ballantrae Golf and Country Club’s efficient use of recycled storm water to irrigate the golf course. Their water-management program has raised the conservation standard for golf courses not only in Canada but also throughout the world.

They even have their own sewage treatment plant, which serves to minimize the Communities’ impact on the Oak Ridges Moraine, a diverse ecosystem that includes woodlands, wetlands and kettle lakes and serves as home to a wealth of flora and fauna.

Viewed individually, these initiatives may seem like common sense, but there is nothing common about the level of volunteerism, participation and wellness that enables these initiatives to combine into a force stronger than its individual elements.

At the physical and social centre of the Ballantrae Communities is its stunning 5486 square-metre Recreation Centre that features controlled access, a wellequipped fitness centre, library, and a 15-metre-long salt-water swimming pool.

“Our recreation centre is also an openconcept facility so it’s easily adapted for residents with accessibility needs,” says Carlos Sousa, YRVLCC 968 Board member.

The Centre offers a wide selection of wellness programs, many geared toward seniors and empty nesters, including Pilates, stretching, aquafit, snooker, body balance, dance, and postoperative breast cancer exercise thera38

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

py. The programs are run by staff and resident volunteers who ensure that residents who want to be active have a wide selection of wellness and fun programs.

When asked why he moved to the Ballantrae Communities, Marty McGinnis, YRVLCC 1079 Board member, smiled and replied, “Because I wanted to play with kids my own age!”

Award-Winning from Day One The Ballantrae Communities began winning awards even before the first shovel slid into the ground. Some of those awards include: • Most Outstanding Adult Lifestyle Project Award (Ontario Home Builders’ Association) • Best Lifestyle Community (Urban Development Institute – Ontario) • Outstanding Planning Award for New Directions (Ontario Professional Planners Institute) • First Certified Bronze Audubon Signature Sanctuary in Canada

Yes, as far back as 2003, the Ballantrae Communities were recognized by Audubon International as, in their words, one of the “properties that complement(s) preserved lands. They contribute to the conservation of resources and the protection of both common and rare plants and wildlife.”

Interestingly, it was the Ballantrae Golf and Country Club that began a relationship with Audubon International while

A Wee Town Beside a Scottish Beach Located in the hamlet of Ballantrae, itself a part of the Town of WhitchurchStouffville, this Condo of the Year: Quarter Finalist was named for the village of Ballantrae in South Ayrshire, Scotland. And although Ballantrae in Gaelic means “town by the beach” the only waves within a ploughland or two are the gentle ripples caused by golf balls landing in one of the course’s water traps.

The Ballantrae Communities and golf course were built by Schickedanz Bros.

Ltd., a Toronto-based family business started in 1951 by four Schickedanz brothers.

The Ballantrae Communities and the Ballantrae Golf and Country Club are just one of the company’s award-winning jewels. Over the past sixty years, Schickedanz projects have spanned the 905 region, not to mention further-flung locations like Alberta, Florida and Carolina where they have built other residential communities, corporate centres, and long-term care facilities.

Governance A Vacant Land Condominium Corporation (VLCC) is possibly one of the most complex condominium organizations in Ontario and therefore represents a governance challenge.

Especially, says YRVLCC 1079 Board Member, Marty McGinnis, “In regard to balancing the rights of home ownership versus the responsibilities of the condominium corporation.”

Determined to maintain the spirit of the lifestyle and nurturing environment that first attracted residents to the Ballantrae Communities when they were still prospective buyers, the boards quickly realised that communication was key and, therefore, board heads maintain an active dialogue.

Although communication has proven to be crucial, it is more the pervasive spirit of participation that has facilitated successful governorship and effective decision-making.

“With its unique challenges and complexities, it is a pleasure to manage this vibrant community”, says Property Manager, Tammy Stapleton, with Simerra Property Management Inc. Like the residents of the Ballantrae Communities, she is proud that the community has become a blueprint for other condominiums wanting to create a well-governed and fiscally-strong corporation.

A recent, and successful representation, led by the Schickedanz Bros. and supported by CCI Toronto, that convinced the Assessment Review Board to reduce the MPAC’s assessment on the Ballantrae Community Centre from

$1,740,000 to $1 is just one example of that effective governance. The ruling was an important victory not only for the Ballantrae Communities but all condominium corporations and owners.

Fore!

The Canadian Condominium Institute congratulates the Ballantrae Communities made up of: • YRVLCC 968 • YRVLCC 1002 • YRVLCC 1066 • YRVLCC 1079 • YRVLCE 967

You justly deserved to win this year’s Condominium of the Year: Quarter Finalist award, not only because of your residents’ spirit, emphasis on wellness, caring attitude and level of participation, but also, with the help of your various boards and property managers, you have taken brick, mortar and grass-covered fairways and created a community to be proud of.

I think they call that kind of success a “hole in one.” ■

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

39

Member News

CCI-Toronto Announces

2010 Condominium of the Year Manhattan Place MTCC No. 595 From the Board’s Perspective

by Jackie Hogan and Zonia Motolko The Board of Directors of Manhattan Place, representing the owners, residents and staff, was very honoured to be selected as the recipient of the CCIToronto Condo of the Year award for 2010. We knew that we were up against some stiff competition and we extend our congratulations to the other three quarter finalists.

Upon hearing of the award Board members could not help but reflect upon all that has been accomplished over the past six years. Renewing and updating our building (now twenty-eight years young) has brought vitality to our living environment and fostered a strong sense of community. This could only have been achieved through the efforts of our conscientious property manager, our dedicated superintendent, our concierges and valet staff (who are employees of the Corporation), and of course the many hard-working volunteers on our various committees and groups.

This award was achieved through the efforts of dedicated volunteers on our

40

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

Energy, Social, Landscaping and Safety & Security Committees. In addition, Manhattan Place has been recognized for its award-winning newsletter, crafted by our Communications Committee.

the Board that the time had finally come, as it inevitably does to all highrise condominiums in their generational life cycle, to begin the renewal process.

Therefore, the Board began to move forward with one major repair and replacement project after another. And so it went from year to year, with cranes and jackhammers, swing stages and construction debris.

from below to remove the old generator from the lower level). A diesel fuel tank with increased capacity was added and a carbon monoxide detection system was installed in the garage (another energy saving project).

Also recognized as something special are the efforts of the Ideas Galore Energy efficient lighting was installed Group and the many clubs (Book, Pot throughout the building, with sensors Luck, Bridge, Aquafit and Library) who in the garbage chute rooms on every contribute to our social floor and in the change fabric; and the Condo rooms to close the lights Care Group who help when not in use. The marour residents with minor belite finish on our indoor in-suite repairs and swimming pool had to be other assistance. Our removed and replaced, strong core group of and the swimming pool volunteers expends deck, change rooms, great effort on a daily, saunas and showers were weekly, monthly and renovated. A barbecue yearly basis, year after and lounge furniture were year. In reviewing and added to our terrace area discussing, analyzing for the enjoyment of our and recommending, residents. New wooden planning and preparing, patio decks were built. fixing and tinkering, Insulated panels were finalizing and attending installed under and all of the many meetaround the ground level ings, gatherings and seawindows and the excluManhatten Place proudly displays their winning Condo of the Year entrance sign. sonal events, these volsive-use patio areas were Left to right: Jackie Hogan, Board VP, Para Chelvan, Valet, Stevo Petkovic, unteers help to make re-levelled.

We have an Superintendent, Adele Frydrych, Board Director, Miriam Servellon, Cleaner, Jey Sivapalan, Concierge.

Manhattan Place a ongoing comprehensive vibrant, involved comwindow replacement promunity of residents. This is indeed Improvements included replacing the gram. Currently, we are in the midst of impressive. The Board is most apprechiller, cooling tower and exhaust fans an elevator equipment modernization ciative of the dedication and teamwork on the roof, followed by replacement for our four elevator cabs. And that’s of our volunteers and very efficient of the complete boiler plant. Most of just the bigger projects – all of which staff. On behalf of the Board of the common element shut off valves have been accomplished without the Directors and residents, we thank you. and all of the re-circulating riser lines, need of any special assessment. which keep the hot water hot, were replaced. This involved removing dryEach project came with its own trials From the Manager’s wall in each unit to access the piping. and tribulations. Coordinating regular Perspective by Mike Wychara maintenance and repair projects often of Y.L. Hendler Ltd. Extensive garage repairs were underbecame a logistics nightmare when a taken and a new fire panel was large-scale replacement project (some In such a diverse community of cominstalled, as well as a new security sysof them lasting for many months) was peting interests as a residential condotem for our common element access in progress. As a manager, it has been minium, it all begins at the Board level. doors. The in-suite security system was very satisfying for me to see each proA manager can’t accomplish much replaced in every unit and there were ject completed: from the initial, often without the support and confidence of extensive exterior cladding and bricklengthy discussions with the Board, to the Board, a clear vision and firm work repairs. Some roofing repairs the review of the scope of work preinstructions, along with a willingness were undertaken and the main electrical pared by engineers, bid proposals and to let the manager manage. switchgear was replaced. the selection of contractors. Working through the process to completion with When I arrived at Manhattan Place A new upgraded emergency generator so many different trades, from conalmost six years ago, there was a recogwas installed (this involved shoring up struction guys to techy system Continued on page 42 nition and determination on the part of the upper level garage slab and ramp Spring 2011

thecondovoice

41

installers, electricians and plumbers, mechanics and roofers, drywallers and painters (to name just a few) has been an enjoyable challenge for me.

In the midst of all this, and in a hot real estate market, many units were bought and sold and, being an older building, most of these units were significantly renovated, bringing long lines of contractors to the property. With them came heavy demands on our staff for the coordination of debris removal and the seemingly-endless delivery of new materials, fixtures, flooring and appliances. Private contractors and new owners working to deadlines do not like to follow condo rules, I can tell you that much.

The Board also recognized the need for a new Operating By-law, Mediation and Arbitration By-law, and a Standard Unit By-law, all of which have been approved by a majority of the owners in recent years. The Rules for the Corporation were subjected to a lengthy

42

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

review and comprehensive revision by the Board in 2008 and were accepted by the owners.

The Board approved a Human Rights Policy, Occupational Health and Safety Policy, and Workplace Violence and Harassment Policies, all of which are prominently displayed in our main lobby for the review of all parties.

The Welcome Manual for all new residents was extensively revised and updated, and contains a plethora of information on who we are, our procedures, fire safety, recycling, using the in-suite security system, how to operate the heating and air conditioning unit(s), and more.

An informative website was created, and this can be viewed at www.manhattanplace.ca.

And finally, there are our residents.

One of the advantages of long-term stability in management is that I have had the opportunity to develop a friendly

rapport with many of our residents over time, have worked through their issues and concerns with them as they have arisen, and we have come to a common ground of understanding and respect through our several years of history together on the property.

One of my favourite things is to sit for a few moments with some of our elderly residents under the large canopy that we erect each year on our pool patio deck, and together we solve most of the world’s problems while enjoying the warmth of the sun. That kind of familiar interaction only comes from a strong feeling of community.

The Condo of the Year award is proudly on display in our main lobby and residents and visitors now walk past our new Condo of the Year sign recently installed at our front entrance. It is a fitting tribute to all of the people here who have done so much to make Manhattan Place a wonderful place to live. â–

Member News

2010 Annual General Meeting of the CCI Toronto & Area Chapter The 2010 CCI Toronto & Area Annual General Meeting was held on Thursday November 25th, 2010 at the Novotel North York Hotel. The AGM was preceded by an information seminar on the Fair Taxation for Condominiums and was followed by a Wine and Cheese networking forum. Attendance was terrific and we thank all those who attended!

Presenters Al Siaroff, Ed Schollen, Armand Conant and Bob Girard provided attendees with an in-depth look at taxation issues for condominiums and outlined the inequities condominiums face within the current tax structure.

Response from attendees was great and further updates on the efforts of CCI on this initiative will be forthcoming.

In accordance with the Chapter by-laws elections were held that evening and four positions were filled. CCI Toronto is pleased to announce that returning to the board for three year terms are: Brian Horlick, Bill Thompson, Lisa Kay and Julian McNabb.

As in the past, the Annual General Meeting served as a forum for our annual Awards Ceremonies. The Condominium Newsletter of the Year Award proudly went to PCC # 0199 for their corporation’s newsletter. In attendance that evening to receive the Award were Directors Axel Dudezki, Celina Ferreyra and Avril Kriek from Canlight Hall Management.

A platinum level Ambassador Award

Fair Taxation Seminar held November 25th, 2010.

Directors Axel Dudezki, Celina Ferreyra and Avril Kriek from Canlight Hall Management accept the 2010 CCI Newsletter the Year Award for PCC #0199 & SCC #06 from CCI Public Relations Chair, Julian McNabb and CCI President, Armand Conant.

Fair Taxation Presenters, Al Siaroff, Ed Schollen, Armand Conant and Bob Girard.

CCI Toronto Membership Chair, Vic Persaud, presents an Ambassador Platinum Award to Janice Pynn, Executive Vice President of Simerra Property Management Ltd.

was presented by Membership Chair, Vic Persaud, to Simerra Property Management Inc. On hand to receive the Award was Simerra Executive Vice President, Janice Pynn. This is the third year in a row that Simerra has earned this top-level honour and CCI Toronto could not be more appreciative of Simerra’s outstanding recruitment efforts and support of the Institute.

Congratulations Simerra!

The second annual Condominium of the Year Award recipient was also announced that evening – as selected from the four quarter finalists throughout the year. Congratulations go out to MTCC # 0595 – Manhatten Place! For the full story and to find out more about Manhatten Place see page 40. ■

2010 Condo of the Year recipients.

L-R: Dave Churchill, Communications Committee rep; Jackie Hogan, Vice President; Gerald Hess, President; Zonia Motolko, Secretary; Vic Persaud, CCI-T Membership Chair; and CCI-T President, Armand Conant.

CCI T Vice President, Mario Deo presents Outgoing President, Armand Conant with a plaque and token of Appreciation.

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

43

44

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

Member News

ACCI Member Profile Michael Pascu, LLB,ACCI tinues to practice condominium law exclusively.

Michael has been involved with the condominium community ever since finishing law school. It started in 1996, when he completed a one year articling position with Delzotto, Zorzi, LLP, a law firm specializing in condominium law.

The exposure to the fascinating world of condominiums led Michael to decide to focus his career in this area. Upon being called to the Ontario bar in 1998, he joined the law firm of Fine & Deo, Barristers and Solicitors, where he con-

Michael’s involvement with the condominium community naturally led him to a need to contribute to the community, and for Michael, it was through education. He started with writing articles for the industry publications and progressed to the direct education of property managers, by becoming a regular instructor of the Condominium Law Course for Property Managers at Humber College, and he continues to do so to date. He also became, and continues to be, a member of CCI Toronto’s Education

Committee, as well as a member of ACMO’s Ethics Committee, whose mandate includes the promotion of ethical and professional practices in the industry, through education and disciplinary action.

Michael’s ongoing commitment to education led him to obtain his ACCI designation. He is proud to be an ACCI, not only because the designation signifies a high level of competence and commitment to the industry, but also because he wants to encourage others to see the value of being an ACCI and to strive to attain the designation. ■

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

45

New Members

CCI-Toronto Welcomes the Following New Members Corporate Members

YRCC # 0867

MTCC # 0865

YRSCC # 1179

PCC # 0414

Individual Members

HCC # 0307

MTCC # 1354

YRSCC # 1174

TSCC # 1485

M. Chai M. Horenfeldt N. Spiegel E. Devellis L. Goodayle S. Schell J. Stapley S. Zaidi

TSCC # 2062

Professional Members

PSCC # 0883 PSCC # 0888 PSCC # 0890

TCECC # 1909 TSCC # 1430 TSCC # 2048 TSCC # 2071

John AbedRabbo Polyzotis & Company LLP

TSCC # 2083 TSCC # 2094

Parm Chahal English Prestige Property Management

TSCC # 2102 TSCC # 2108 TSCC # 2116

46

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

Harsimrat Kaur Kahlon English Prestige Property Management Nancy Longueira Morrison Hershfield Limited Stephen Silver Goldview Property Management Ltd.

New Trade Members

D&D Party & Tent Rentals Massimo D’Amato

First Security Protection Services Inc. Dan Carpinisianu

Gulfstar Emergency Services Inc. Rick Myers

Heat Air Mechanical Derek Kernick Paladin Security Jacqueline Burke

Pine Glen Developments Inc. Eddie Jurinic

Rainbow International of North York John Ludwig Read Jones Christoffersen Ltd. Philip Sarvinis Rikos Ltd. E. Rudy Petershofer Roman Electronics Alexandru Muraru

Security Management Sean O’Brien Verona Stone David Fedrigo

SUMMA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC. PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT & CONSULTING

“Your condominium deserves personal attention and service.”

Over 26 years experience.

We provide Professional Condominium Property Management with attention to detail.

Expect Superior Service and a commitment to quality property management.

At Summa we take pride in managing your property.

647-341-7990 propman@summapm.com www.summapm.com

When experience and quality counts!

48

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

YOU CAN’T SAY THAT! Dealing with Defamation in Condos

BY BRIAN HORLICK, B.COMM., B.CL., LL.B., ACCI HORLICK LEVITT DI LELLA LLP

ne thing that must always be considered about living in a condominium corporation is the community of people at one’s doorstep. Such a community can, in theory, help build friendship, strength and a sense of belonging, and can be enormously rewarding for people who are a part of it. This article is not about any of these good things.

O

Rather, this article (unfortunately but necessarily) is about a frequent downside of that community of people – namely, the interpersonal conflict and acrimony that can result from dozens or hundreds of people living in close proximity. In the heat of conflict, a person may say or write something unkind, mean-spirited or derogatory about the person on the other side of the conflict.

Although this may, at times, seem like just another part of condominium living, that unkind, mean-spirited or derogatory statement could give rise to liability for defamation.

What is Defamation?

Defamation can be defined as the publication of a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society or to expose a person to hatred, contempt or ridicule. “Publication” can be distributing or communicating the statement

to people other than the person to whom the statement refers. A “statement” can be oral or in writing; oral defamation is generally referred to as slander, while written defamation is generally referred to as libel.

If a statement is defamatory there are certain defences available to the person making it.

These include truth or justification (the statement in question was true at the time that it was made); absolute privilege (available only to certain people in certain settings, such as members of a provincial or federal government or people participating in court or administrative tribunal proceedings); qualified privilege (where the statement was made without malice by a person who had a public duty to make the statement or where the statement was made in good faith to a person with whom the person making the statement shares a common interest); and fair comment (where the statement was on a matter of public interest, was made honestly and without malice based on the facts available to the speaker at the time that the statement was made, and was clear-

ly the speaker’s opinion and not an expression of fact). Once a statement has been established to be defamatory, the burden is on the person who made the complained-of statement to establish that one or more of the defences to defamation should apply.

Defamation in a Condominium Context

As noted above, when defamation occurs in a condominium context it is generally in the course of a larger conflict. One of, if not the, biggest sources of conflict is condominium governance.

Unit owners are wont to fight over Continued on page 50

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

49

(among other things) the election of directors, the removal of directors and what those directors are doing between election and removal. Often this conflict will escalate to a war of words and occasionally those words will be defamatory.

What is and is not defamatory in a condominium context? Obviously, the answer depends on the particulars of the situation at hand. Politely telling a director that you disagree with the decisions that he or she has made while on the board is not likely to be defamatory. Conversely, telling one’s fellow unit owners that a director is accepting kickbacks from the corporation’s contractors is substantially more likely to be defamatory and, if untrue, could lead to liability on the part of the person making the statement.

The courts have had a number of opportunities to consider defamation in a condominium context. In Marika Property Management Inc. v. Cappuccitti*, a 1997 case, a property manager sued Mr. Cappuccitti, a unit owner of a condominium corporation who wanted to be hired to manage that corporation and who had authored a newsletter which he then distributed to other unit owners. This newsletter stated, among other things, that the property manager was responsible for an unnecessary increase in the cost of cable television services; the property manager was responsible for an unnecessary increase in the cost of security services; and that

the property manager took advantage of bookkeeping errors to place liens on units in order to earn fees from placing the liens.

Mr. Cappuccitti did not file a defence, so, pursuant to the rules of the court, he was deemed to admit the statements made by the plaintiff in the statement of claim; however, the property manager was still required to prove to the court that he had suffered damages. In the circumstances, the court awarded damages of $85,000.00 to the property manager.

In Tremblay v. Campbell, a 2008 Newfoundland case, the president of a condominium corporation, Mr. Tremblay, sued Mr. Campbell, a friend of one of the unit owners. Mr. Campbell had written a letter to Mr. Tremblay accusing him of, among other things, having acted in a criminal and fraudulent manner and having deliberately abused his position as president.

At the end of the letter Mr. Campbell stated that he would be forwarding a copy of the letter to Mr. Tremblay’s employer and demanding Mr. Tremblay’s dismissal. Mr. Campbell did so and his unit owner friend distributed copies of the letter to all of the other unit owners and to the corporation’s bank.

Mr. Campbell attempted to rely on the defences of truth, fair comment and qualified privilege. However, the court held that none of these defences were

available to Mr. Campbell; the statements made were not true, Mr. Campbell had made same maliciously and Mr. Campbell had no public or other duty to make the statements. The court held that Mr. Campbell was liable for having defamed Mr. Tremblay and awarded damages exceeding $23,000.00.

However, not all defamation claims in a condominium context lead to success for the plaintiff. In Bird v. York Condominium Corp. No. 340, a 2002 case, a former director, Ms. Bird, sued the condominium corporation and its president. Ms. Bird claimed that the president had defamed her at a meeting of owners at which the president had incorrectly stated that Ms. Bird was responsible for the termination of the corporation’s former property manager and, consequently, for problems that the corporation had encountered subsequent to such termination. Ms. Bird further claimed that the posting of board meeting minutes which stated that she was willing to settle her claim against the corporation in exchange for payment of money was defamatory.

In response, the corporation and its president denied that the complainedof statements were defamatory and, in the alternative, relied on the defences of truth, fair comment, and qualified privilege. The court held that the complained-of statements were not defamatory and further held that, if same had been defamatory, the defences of fair

EXPERTS IN CONDOMINIUM LAW 100 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 870, Toronto ON M2N 6N5

50

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

T. 416.512.7440

F. 416.512.8710

www.hldlawyers.com

comment and qualified privilege were available to the defendants.

More recently, in Swan v. Goan, a 2010 case, Mr. Swan, a former director, brought a total of five claims against the corporation, two of its directors (including two claims against Ms. Goan) and the property manager.

Mr. Swan’s claims arose out of a requisition for removal that was organized

by Ms. Goan as a result of what the requisition described as Mr. Swan’s failure to act honestly and in good faith in the course of his actions as a director.

At the meeting held pursuant to the requisition, Mr. Swan was removed.

should be awarded for a successful defamation claim.

At the same time, the threat of a defamation claim should not prevent a unit owner or board member from making an honest, reasonable statement about another person, provided that the statement is made in good faith and without malice. As shown in the Bird and Swan decisions mentioned above, the courts are willing to allow defendants to avail themselves of the defences of qualified privilege and fair

comment if the situation warrants.

Indeed, the existence of cases assigning liability for defamation in condominiums should be seen as positive; the threat of such liability may cause people to focus on being reasonable, and not hurtful or offensive, in their discussion and criticism of issues specific to their condominium corporation. ■ * – It appears that the transcription of the reported decision misspelled “Mareka” as “Marika” when listing the names of the parties.

Mr. Swan claimed that the statements made in the requisition, together with statements that Mr. Swan claimed had been made orally to unit owners, amounted to defamation. The defendants denied that the complained-of statements were defamatory and relied on the defences of truth and fair comment. The court held that Mr. Swan had no cause of action against the corporation, the other director or the property manager. With respect to the claims against Ms. Goan, the court held that the complained-of statements did not amount to defamation, and further held that the defences of truth, fair comment and qualified privilege were available to the defendants. The court awarded one set of costs totalling $3,750 to the defendants.

What Can Be Learned?

Although the four cases above hardly amount to an exhaustive exploration of the issue of defamation in a condominium context, there are a couple of lessons that can be taken from them. For one, making potentially defamatory statements with malice appears to increase the likelihood of being held to be liable for defamation. This is sensible, because, among other reasons, malice prevents a defendant from being able to rely on the defences of fair comment and/or qualified privilege. Malice is also considered by the court in the course of determining what damages Spring 2011

thecondovoice

51

Disclosure Statements: You Just Bought A Condo – Surprise!

BY WARREN D. KLEINER, BA (HONS), LL.B. MILLER THOMSON LLP he majority of residential real estate transactions in Ontario now involve the purchase and sale of condominium units. Many of these transactions are purchases of new condominium units from a declarant/developer. Under the Condominium Act, the person who registers a condominium corporation in the Land Registry Office is called the declarant.

T

The Condominium Act requires every declarant to deliver a copy of the current disclosure statement for the corporation of which the unit or proposed unit forms part to every person who purchases a unit or a proposed unit from the declarant.

In my experience working in the condominium industry, it is always surprising that people spend several hundreds of thousands of dollars on a condominium unit without understanding what they purchased and how living in a condominium is different from living in a house; it brings with it different rights, duties and obligations.

10-Day Cooling Off Period

A purchaser is not bound by an Agreement of Purchase and Sale entered into with the declarant until the purchaser has received a copy of the disclosure statement. A purchaser has a 10-day rescission period or “cooling off period”, which starts from the later of the date that the purchaser receives the 52

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

disclosure statement, and a copy of the Agreement of Purchase and Sale executed by the declarant and the purchaser. It is important for a purchaser to review the disclosure statement and accompanying documentation in detail within the ten-day rescission period. It should also be given to the purchaser’s lawyer for review. Disclosure statements are often long and complicated documents that can be hard, even for lawyers, to understand.

What is a Disclosure Statement?

A disclosure statement is a document that must be delivered to every purchaser of a new condominium unit in Ontario. It will explain the vision for the development and advise as to the type and number of units that the condominium project is intended to contain. It will also inform the purchaser if the development will include any retail units, the number of phases that are intended to form part of the development and whether there are to be any shared facilities, among other things.

It is important to ensure that the disclosure statement is complete. It often is not. The disclosure statement must include a table of contents and a brief description of the condominium project prepared in a form prescribed by the Condominium Act. The disclosure statement must also be accompanied by the

proposed declaration, by-laws and rules of the corporation. It must include a copy of the proposed budget for the corporation for the first year after registration and copies of or brief descriptions of the significant features of all agreements to be entered into between the corporation and another corporation. This includes shared facilities agreements, which are often referred to as easement and cost sharing or reciprocal agreements.

The requirement for developers to provide disclosure statements and give purchasers a 10-day cooling off period is, as a result of the unique aspects and substantial potential risks involved, a very important protection for purchasers. Nevertheless, not enough purchasers understand what they are buying and they do not seek legal advice during the 10-day cooling off period.

They should provide the disclosure documents to their lawyers for review and proper advice.

Additional Costs

Many purchasers think that the cost to the purchaser of closing the transaction will include the purchase price, any usual adjustments (common expenses, property taxes, etc…) the purchaser’s real estate lawyer’s legal fees and the monthly common expenses. Unfortunately, too often there are many hidden costs in these agreements. A disclosure statement will often disclose

the following matters that most purchasers would not think would be part of the transaction: • units to be purchased from the vendor including guest and superintendent suites, recreational facilities and visitor parking • ownership/lease of telecommunications infrastructure • ownership/lease of metering/submetering equipment • ownership/lease of mechanical equipment (HVAC) • ownership/lease of building automation system • ownership/lease of recycling and/or tri-sorter equipment • green loans in relation to energy efficient equipment, which are intended to off-set the declarant’s costs of installing energy efficient equipment It is very important to identify what other costs there may be. The above-

noted costs can often add significant amounts to the purchase price and/or common expenses payable for the unit, depending on how they are structured.

Leased Equipment

The first problem with leased equipment is that most purchasers are not aware that any equipment is being leased. A purchaser often believes that the purchase price for the unit provided for in the Agreement of Purchase and Sale covers the unit and the purchaser’s share of the common elements.

Buying a new car is a good analogy for leased equipment. It is like buying a car for the full price and then finding out that it does not come with the engine, which has to be leased separately from the dealership. When a purchaser determines if a price for a unit is a good value, these considerations are often not taken into account.

Another problem with leased equip-

ment is that the obligation to pay for the lease is usually to a third party financing company that must be paid regardless of whether the equipment is in working order.

Often leased equipment is not energy efficient. A corporation that wants to replace new but inefficient leased equipment with more efficient equipment in order to reduce the common expenses of the corporation may nevertheless have to pay the balance of the lease for the original equipment.

Budget Deficiency and Costs not included in First Year Budget It is important to look for costs to the corporation that are not disclosed in the first year budget. The declarant is responsible to the corporation for any Continued on page 54

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

53

deficiency with respect to the first year budget. If the expenses of the corporation are greater than the revenue, the Condominium Act says that the declarant is responsible for the difference.

Developers will sometimes not require that leasing costs or even employee costs be payable until year 2 of the corporation’s operation. These costs that are not intended to be incurred in the first year do not form part of the first year and will have to be paid by the unit owners in the second year and every year thereafter. The declarant is not responsible for any deficiencies beyond what is disclosed in the first year budget.

Hidden Costs

When reviewing a disclosure statement attention should be given to any costsharing arrangements with a commercial or retail entity. Cost-sharing agreements are prepared by the declarant’s lawyer between the residential condominium and a commercial entity, which

may, or may not be, another condominium. Often they are drafted so that the residential corporation financially supports the commercial component.

For example, there are situations in which a cost-sharing agreement requires a commercial entity to pay a set percentage of the overall water bill to the residential condominium corporation; the percentage is based on a bulk meter that measures water consumption for both components. This may result in the residential condominium corporation subsidizing the commercial condominium corporation (or entity) if it uses a substantial volume of water because it houses a coffee shop, for example. Garbage collection can be another expense which is subsidized by the residential condominium corporation if the commercial condominium corporation creates large amounts of garbage.

Another example involves a disclosure statement I recently reviewed which

CLOTHES DRYER FIRE PREVENTION

“Serving the Condominium Community Since 1996” PROVIDING: • CLOTHES DRYER AND EXHAUST SYSTEM CLEANING as prescribed by the Fire Marshal and all Appliance Manufacturers • In suite and common area exhaust and ventilation ductwork cleaning • Fan coil preventative maintenance service • Washing machine flood prevention • Secondary dryer lint box conversions “Providing the most organized, cost effective service programs available”

Visit our website at www.dryerfighters.net to learn why clothes dryer fire prevention is required.

Dennis Monk: (647) 236-5643 Randy Mason: (647) 239-8787 Office: (905) 761-1761 Email: dryerfighters@hotmail.com 54

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

disclosed that the commercial entity on the ground level, which does not form part of the residential condominium corporation, will own parking units that will be available for commercial use during the day. These spaces are intended to, but may not necessarily be, available for residential visitors after business hours. The disclosure statement, however, provides that the residential condominium corporation will pay all of the maintenance fees for those parking units notwithstanding that they provide a clear benefit to the commercial entities.

I am not aware of any other situations, except for the purchase of new condominium units, in which one party can be made to pay for something which primarily or solely benefits another.

These matters are often disclosed; however, most purchasers either do not review the disclosure materials or cannot understand the implications of what is disclosed.

Continued on page 56

Amenities A disclosure statement will normally disclose the amenities that are to be provided by the declarant. However, many disclosure statements will provide that the quality of the items to be provided is at the sole discretion of the developer and that the developer may change, substitute or even delete any amenities.

This means that a purchaser may have agreed to a purchase assuming he or she will receive a value calculated on the basis of the value of the unit combined with the common elements and amenities. However, the developer retains the right to not provide any amenities without any corresponding obligation to compensate the purchaser for the reduction in value to be provided. I am not aware of any other product that is sold on that basis.

Purchase of Guest Suites and Superintendent Suites Many developers sell the superintendent suite and/or guest suite back to the corporation on the basis of a vendor take-back mortgage given to the corporation. The interest rates payable are often substantially higher than what could be obtained from a bank or other lending institution and are often closed terms. This means that the corporation is locked into those mortgage payments for the balance of the term. This can add substantial costs to the common expenses for the corporation.

The car analogy applies to this situation as well. A condominium corporation may be required to purchase units in the corporation which people would otherwise assume simply form part of the common residential areas of the corporation with the value for the units having been included in the purchase price for the units.

Because of the complexity involved in purchasing a new condominium unit, including the complexity of the disclosure documents to be provided and the potential risks that are associated with the purchase of a new condominium

56

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

unit, it is important for purchasers to get advice from a lawyer who is familiar with disclosure statements, declarations, by-laws and rules and who has experience acting on the purchase of new condominium units. Most real estate lawyers do not review the disclosure documents in detail and, as a result, cannot provide appropriate advice.

Unfortunately, most purchasers should, but do not, pay their lawyers to conduct a proper review of the disclosure documents. The cost of a proper review of the documents is negligible when taking into account the cost of the investment which is, for most people, the greatest they will ever make. â–

HST and Residential Condominium Corporations

BY GLEN MACMILLAN, CA ADAMS & MILES LLP

N

otwithstanding that the GST has been around for about 20 years, we regularly find in our practice that residential condominium directors and their management companies continue to be perplexed by how the GST, and now the HST in Ontario, applies to various sources of condominium revenues. This article provides a summary of the application of HST to the more common sources of revenues earned by non-profit residential condominium corporations.

I. Revenues exempt from HST Common area expense contributions Commonly referred to as “condo fees”, these charges are in respect of expenses incurred in the operation of the condominium that are not paid directly by unit owners. Expenses such as utilities, superintendent’s remuneration; snow removal; maintenance of hallways, elevators, swimming pools; landscaping of grounds; etc., are by necessity apportioned and recovered from unit owners.

Condo fees are exempt from HST. Lockers The sale or rental of lockers by a residential condominium corporation to owners or tenants is considered to be a supply of property related to the occupancy or use of a unit and therefore exempt from HST. Even if a particular unit may already have its own locker, the supply of a supplemental locker to

an owner or tenant should not alter the status of the supply as exempt from HST. If additional locker space were not made available to a resident with significant personal effects, the use of the unit would be negatively affected.

Parking spaces rented to owners and tenants Rents from the supply of parking spaces to owners and tenants are exempt from HST if the parking space is within the legal boundaries of the residential condominium complex and the space is leased for a period of at least one month.

Bicycle spaces Rents from the supply of bicycle spaces to owners and tenants should be considered to relate to the occupancy or use of a unit since it is reasonable to conclude that the use of a unit would be negatively affected if a resident were required to store a bicycle in the unit.

These revenues are, therefore, exempt from HST. Rents from commercial tenants Some residential condominium corporations collect rents from long-term commercial tenants within the common areas, such as tuck shops and coffee shops. Rents from leases of real property by a non-profit organization for a month or more are exempt from HST unless an election is filed to make the rents subject to HST. This election permits the residential condominium cor-

poration to claim input tax credits with respect to HST paid on expenses attributable to the commercial area. If the commercial tenant is engaged in a commercial activity and entitled to full input tax credits, the tenant should generally be indifferent to being charged HST. NSF and late payment penalties NSF and late payment penalty charges are exempt from HST.

II. Revenues subject to HST Guest suites An overnight guest suite for visiting family and friends of owners and tenants is not a supply that relates to the occupancy or use of an owner’s unit.

Daily or weekly rents from the shortterm rental of guest suites are subject to HST unless the daily charge does not exceed $20.

Parking spaces provided on a shortterm basis Revenue from the supply of parking spaces provided to owners and tenants on an hourly, daily, weekly or other short-term basis is subject to HST. Parking spaces provided to non-residents of the building Revenue from the supply of parking spaces provided to non-residents of the condominium is subject to HST, Continued on page 58

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

57

regardless of whether the spaces are rented on a short or long-term basis.

annual gross revenue subject to HST is $50,000 or less.

Party and meeting rooms The rental of a party or meeting room does not relate to occupancy or use of a unit. These revenues are subject to HST.

Input tax credits A residential condominium that is registered for and collects HST on various revenues may be entitled to recover a portion of the HST it pays on its own expenses to the extent the expenses, or a portion thereof, can reasonably be considered attributable to the condominium’s taxable revenues. Since most expenses incurred by a condominium relate to the overall maintenance and operation of the building, it is generally necessary to determine a reasonable allocation of the expenses between taxable and exempt revenues.

Valet and car wash It is our view these revenues cannot reasonably be considered to relate to the occupancy or use of a unit. These revenues should be considered subject to HST. Condo fees charged to owners of commercial units In some cases a unit within a residential condominium complex may be unitized, zoned as a commercial unit and sold to an owner who either uses the unit in a commercial business or rents the unit to a commercial tenant. Condo fees charged to owners of commercial units are subject to HST.

III. Other considerations Small supplier exemption The “small supplier exemption” relieves a non-profit residential condominium corporation from having to register for and collect HST if the total

58

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

There is no legislated rule that determines the method of allocation, only that the method used must be “fair and reasonable”. A de minimus rule provides that, unless at least 10% of an expense can reasonably be apportioned to taxable revenues, no amount of HST paid on the expense is recoverable.

If a residential condominium’s total annual gross revenue that is subject to HST, including the amount of HST collected on that revenue, is $200,000 or less, the condominium may elect to use a “quick method” of calculating the

amount of HST to remit to CRA. Using the quick method, the amount of HST a condominium in Ontario would remit to CRA is calculated simply as 7.8% of the first $30,000 of revenue and 8.8% of the remainder. The quick method eliminates the need to allocate HST paid between exempt and taxable revenues for purposes of claiming input tax credits and can potentially give rise to net HST revenue for the condominium of up to $5,700 annually.

Liability of individual directors for failure to collect HST If a residential condominium corporation fails to collect HST on its taxable revenues, the Excise Tax Act gives CRA the authority to assess individual directors of the condominium for the amount of HST the condominium fails to collect while the individual is a director and for up to two years after the individual ceases to be a director.

Even though a due diligence defense may be argued, this process is costly, stressful and not always successful.

Directors of condominiums should always ensure proper compliance with the HST rules. ■

You’ve Bought A Condo...Now What?

BY JULIAN MCNABB, BA SIMERRA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC.

A

s the City of Toronto and the G.T.A. continue to expand, finding an affordable home in a desirable location can certainly be a challenge. Along comes the condominium. Often found in sought-after locations, condominiums are usually more affordable than detached freehold living, making them extremely appealing to homebuyers.

So, you have purchased your first condominium. Congratulations! Buying a condominium is an exciting venture.

However, sifting through all the information regarding your new home can be a daunting task. You may, in fact, be wondering what it is that you have invested in…

This two-part article will help guide new condominium owners through the post-purchase process, briefly explain some of the condominium terminology you may encounter and provide insight into how to make the most out of condominium living.

What is a Status Certificate?

During the many stages that purchasers go through when buying a condominium, it becomes apparent that the process of buying a condo seems far more complex than purchasing a freehold home. When purchasing a condominium, the lawyer or real estate agent who assisted you with the transaction likely requested a Status Certificate. So, what is a Status Certificate? A Status

Certificate is a package, normally produced by property management on behalf of the condominium corporation, which contains the financial “status” of the unit you are purchasing, to ensure that the seller is up-to-date with their Common Element Fees. It also provides a snapshot of the condominium corporation’s financial health pertaining to the reserve fund and future anticipated expenses, any outstanding insurance claims, legal claims, any changes to the unit in question and other pertinent information regarding the condominium corporation.

The Status Certificate will also contain all of the condominium corporation’s registered documents, such as the Declaration, any By-Laws that have been passed, a copy of the Rules and perhaps a Home Owner’s Manual or Welcome Package. These documents outline the legal governance of the condominium corporation. The Status Certificate may also contain forms, such as elevator booking forms, owner information forms and other site-specific forms that are required to efficiently run the condominium. The other item of importance is a copy of the condominium corporation’s insurance certificate. Often, your mortgage broker or bank requests a copy of this certificate to ensure that the condominium corporation holds up-to-date insurance. It is important to read your status certificate before you purchase your unit and is also useful to refer back to after you first move in.

Common Element Fees

For a purchaser, a main area of focus in the above-mentioned Status Certificate is confirmation of the monthly common element fees associated with the purchased unit and any storage lockers or parking spaces attached to the sale of the unit. This “Maintenance Fee”, otherwise known as the Common Element Fee or Common Element Assessment as it is referred to in the Condominium Act, is one of the first things that new purchasers of a condominium notice.

Common element assessments are each unit owner’s share of the costs required to run and maintain the condominium corporation and its common areas for the duration of a year. Fees are collected from unit owners on a monthly basis, typically on the first day of each month.

Budgets are generally 12 months in duration, are prepared by the Board of Directors often with the assistance of property management, then approved by the Board and delivered to each owner before the end of each fiscal year.

How is this monthly fee calculated?

Contrary to popular belief, common element fees are not always based on square footage. In the documentation you received from your lawyer, you will see a document called the Declaration.

In the Declaration, there is a section called Schedule “D”. Schedule “D” sets out all units in the corporation including lockers and parking and allocates a percentage contribution to common Continued on page 60

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

59

‘Simply put, when you purchase a unit in a condominium, you also purchase an interest in the condominium corporation, which is governed by the Declaration, Rules and By-Laws of the corporation.’ expenses for each unit. This percentage is used to calculate each unit’s share of the total budget.

What is a Condominium Corporation?

Understanding what a condominium is and how it operates certainly helps to resolve many questions surrounding the common element fee and what this fee essentially pays.

A condominium is essentially made up of two fundamental components: individual units (such as residential units, parking and locker units) and common elements (such as hallways, the lobby, the fitness room, etc.). Together they form the condominium. The condominium is governed by a condominium corporation. Control over the condominium corporation is held by the ‘shareholders’, who are simply the owners of the individual units. These owners then elect a Board of Directors who are tasked with overseeing the affairs of the corporation.

Simply put, when you purchase a unit in a condominium, you also purchase an interest in the condominium corporation, which is governed by the Declaration, Rules and By-Laws of the corporation. In Ontario, condominiums are also governed by the Condominium Act. In many ways this Act is consumer protection as it spells out what can and cannot be done in a legal sense and gives direction to the Board of Directors. An example of the protection The Act offers is in the collection of monthly common element fees.

Hypothetically, if half of your neighbours did not pay their fees, then the condominium may not be able to function because of cash flow problems.

The Act is very clear on the steps that the Board of Directors, who make deci60

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

sions on behalf of the unit owners who make up the condominium corporation, may take to ensure that any outstanding monies owed to the corporation is collected and even allows for legal intervention and liens to be applied, if needed, in order to protect the condominium corporation.

To view an electronic copy of the Act or to purchase an pocket sized version of the Act to to CCI Toronto's website at www.ccitoronto.org

Insurance

Although the corporation will have an insurance policy, it is strongly recommended that owners take out individual condominium unit insurance to cover any personal possessions, upgrades and betterments such as hardwood flooring, deductible insurance in the event that you cause damage to the common elements where you may be required to cover the deductible and insurance to cover any relocation expenses such as hotel stays if your condominium unit becomes uninhabitable. When looking to purchase insurance, contact property management or check the corporation insurance certificate to see who the corporation’s broker is and contact them, as savings may be had by using the same insurer, and it will ensure that you are 100% covered by either the corporation’s or your unit’s insurance policy. For all insurance-based questions, it is always best to contact a certified broker who specializes in condominium for additional information.

I’ve heard of the word Tarion a few times. What does it mean?

Like any new construction in Ontario, condominiums are covered under Ontario New Home Warranties Plan

Act. The Act outlines the warranty coverage that builders are required to provide to their customers. The Tarion Warranty Corporation is responsible for administering the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act. If you purchased your condominium unit brand new from a builder or if you purchased a unit from another owner who had occupied the unit for less than a year, the unit may be covered under this warranty. Tarion offers protection for individual purchasers and includes deposit protection, protection against defects in work and materials, protection against unauthorized substitutions and protection against delayed closings or delayed occupancies without proper notice. For condominiums, warranty coverage also includes common/shared areas of the building. For more information, please visit the Tarion website at http://www.tarion.com. If your condominium unit is covered under the Ontario New Homes Warranty Plan, it is important that you visit this website in order to take advantage of this service.

In the next installment of “You’ve Bought a Condo...Now What?” we will be discussing some of the lifestyle benefits as well as challenges of condominium living, to help condominium owners get the most out of their experiences. Whether your condominium is a townhouse or a high-rise condominium, the lifestyle involves living in much closer proximity to your neighbours and for some this higher population density can require some lifestyle adjustments.

For further information on condominium living, CCI Toronto offers education courses and seminars and information can be accessed via their website at www.ccitoronto.org ■

Have you renewed your CCI-T Membership for 2010-11?

If not, call our membership department at 416-491-6216 Ext. 241

DONNA SWANSON ACCI, FRI

Real Estate Brokerage

For your Real Estate Needs call: 416-515-2121

• Real Estate Broker of Record - s peci al i zi ng i n Co ndo mi ni um Sal es since 1982 • Current condominium Owner, Pas t Pres i dent and Di recto r • ACCI - An Associate of the Canadian Condominium Institute • Pas t Di recto r of Toronto Chapter of CCI • FRI - Fellow of the Real Estate Institute of Canada and past

Director of Toronto Chapter of REIC

Email: donnaswanson@sympatico.ca

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

61

Membership Committee: Chair: Vic Persaud Members: Henry Jansen, Doug King, Lavonne McCumberEals, Julian McNabb and Bill Thompson.

Charged with a mandate to both attract new members and implement retention strategies for existing members, as well as overseeing the CCI Toronto website, this committee has always got something on its plate. Pleased with feedback on the first ever CCI Toronto Calendar distributed in the fall of 2010, the committee is already looking ahead to the 2012 calendar, and is investigating the possibility of offering for sale customized CCI-T calendars for Property Management or other firms. The committee is also looking at the possibility of creating an avenue for trade members to offer discounts directly to condo unit owners for their products and services. The hope is that this will be a win-win opportunity for both categories of membership. Trade members who regularly deal directly with condo owners (as opposed to the corporation) are encouraged to provide us with feedback — positive or negative — on this idea.

Condo owners can also contact CCI with any ideas on which types of home-related services they might utilize. CCI will also be looking for feedback from new CCI members via a New Member survey expected to be circulate in early June 2011.

Recognizing that the CCI Toronto website visitor traffic stats have remained somewhat consistent over the past few years, the committee has engaged the services of a professional website consulting firm to analyze the site and suggest ways to make the site more visible within the condominium community.

Watch for website improvements coming soon! The committee continues to receive Condo of the Year applications and encourages all corporations to consider applying.

Education Committee: Chair: John Warren Members: Pamela Boyce, Robert Buckler, Bob Girard, Jeff Jeffcoatt, Michael Pascu, Donna Swanson, Bill Thompson and Sally Thompson

The CCI Toronto Education Committee oversees all director courses – including the Condo 101, Level 200, Level 201 and Level 300 courses. Having just completed a complete re-write of the Level 300 course material, the committee is now having the Condo 101, which requires relatively fewer updates, reviewed. Next in line will be a major update of the Level 200 62

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

materials within the next year. By far, the biggest initiative of this very busy committee has been the launch of course delivery via webinar format. The Level 201 course was presented by webinar in January of 2011 and the Condo 101 course will be presented in a two-part webinar running on April 5th and 12th, 2011 over the lunch hour. The committee also oversees the development and presentation of topical seminars throughout the year and is currently planning a “Rapid Fire Legal Update” session to run at Springfest on April 6th, 2011.

Special Projects Committee: Chair: Bob Girard Members: Lisa Kay and Vic Persaud

The mandate of the Special Projects Committee is to oversee and present information to the membership relating to issues of specific interest, special value, and/or educational empowerment for the benefit of condominium corporations. Recent initiatives have focused primarily to ongoing changes within the City of Toronto relating to Waste Levy Fees. This committee is also responsible for organizing and presenting Networking Dinners for Condo Boards – usually twice annually. The next Networking Dinner will take place on Wednesday, March 30th and will be presented as an ‘Ask the Legal Experts’ with Armand Conant, Patricia Elia, Jonathan Fine, Chris Jaglowitz, Brian Horlick and Stephen Karr. We expect this one to be a sell-out event!

Public Relations Committee: Chair: Julian McNabb and Lisa Kay Members: Gordon Chong and Mario Deo

The primary function of this committee is to oversee the production of the quarterly publication, the ‘CondoVoice’. The committee meets regularly to review editorial content and plan for upcoming issues. In an effort to continually promote and expand the visibility of CCI within the community the Committee undertook an initiative this past year to look at engaging the services of a professional public relations consultant. RFPs were prepared and several qualified parties were interviewed. Although a final decision on this effort has not yet been made, the committee does expect to revisit this idea again in the coming year. The use of social media is also being looked at and the community should expect to hear more about CCI Toronto in the coming months!

CCI-T Committee Update Cont’d.

Legislative Committee: Co-Chairs: Armand Conant and Brian Horlick

The work of the Legislative Committee has focused over the past several years on putting together a Legislative Brief containing recommended changes to the Condominium Act, 1998.

This has been a long-term joint effort with the Association of Condominium Managers (ACMO) and has involved the efforts of many sub-groups including unit owners, property managers, lawyers, engineers, accountants, developers and others. CCI presented a draft copy of the Brief containing recommended changes to Sections 1 through 92 of the Act to the Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Consumer and Business Services in November of 2010. The final version of the Brief is expected soon and CCI was thrilled to received a letter recently from Minister John Gerretson thanking CCI and ACMO for the initial draft copy and indicating that Ministry staff is eager to receive and review our final submission. Further updates to follow!

Government Relations Committee: Co-Chairs: Armand Conant and Chris Antipas Members: Brian Horlick, Dean McCabe and Gordon Chong

The Government Relations Committee formed jointly with representatives from ACMO works alongside Global Public Affairs, a professional Government Relations firm retained by both organizations. The goal of this committee is to work proactively with all levels of governments with respect to any legislation concerning condominiums. The committee has been extremely successful over the two years developing relationships with key government officials and is now considered a major industry stakeholder.

Most recently, the committee met with the new Minister of Consumer and Business Services, Minister John Gerretson.

The meeting was most successful, and as reported above, the Ministry is now eagerly awaiting the final version of the CCI/ACMO Legislative Brief.

Continued on page 64

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

63

CCI-T Committee Update Cont’d.

Conference Committee: Chair: Bill Thompson Members: Chris Antipas, Mario Deo, Brian Horlick, Lisa Kay, Dean McCabe, Karen Reynolds, Robert Thackeray and John Warren

The ACMO/CCI Conference Committee is established for the sole purpose of organizing the annual condominium conference promoted by ACMO and CCI Toronto during November of each year. The Conference provides seminars addressed to condominium directors and property managers, although other target audiences may be included. The Conference Committee organizes session topics, speakers, the conference format, location, budget, trade show, sponsors, attendees, networking opportunities and all aspects relating to promotion of the event. Plans are well under way for the 2011 conference, which will take place at our new venue – the Toronto Congress Centre. The 2011 conference theme of Living in Balance – Condo Corporation & Community will be sure to offer something for everyone! ■

64

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

President’s Message Cont’d.

We have struck a committee to investigate better ways for Condominiums to get returns on their stagnant funds that are regulated to be held in the Reserve Funds of the thousands of Condominiums across this province. Social housing, which is in many ways a parallel to the funding requirements of Condominiums, have been given better investment options than Condominiums. Gordon Chong and his committee are trying to get those rights for Condominiums. Better returns on the invested money will ultimately result in lower maintenance fees for all Owners.

CCI Toronto is pioneering a new delivery method for our educational courses. Our Condo 201 course on condominium Governance was delivered as a Webinar in January 2011. It is thought that this delivery will end up being cheaper for participants and more readily available to all of our members because location is not a factor. Our members will be able sit in the comfort of their own homes (or Boardrooms) and participate in the educational offerings.

This is a great way for the unit Owners who live in our member condominiums to receive impartial information about how a condominium should operate and who is responsible for what. CCI Toronto represents more than 600 Condominiums and more than 110,000 units contained within those condominiums. All of those units are entitled to receive member pricing for any of the services that we offer! Look for our next webinar “Condo 101” as a two part series delivered at lunch time on April 5th and April 12th. The Condo 101 course is designed to introduce all of the main areas in the operation of a Condominium.

Participants will get a basic understanding of how a condominium operates and why it operates that way. This is a must attend for anyone who needs to know more about the condominium they live in or are thinking of living in.

CCI Toronto is dedicated to addressing issues that face Condominiums. We strive to anticipate and position ourselves to influence issues that will affect Condominium Ownership and Condominium Living. We represent all of our members with experts who give freely of their time and knowledge and resources for the betterment of the condominium living experience for all owners. We thank our Members for having the faith in CCI to continue its mission and encourage all Condominiums to help make our position stronger by joining us.

Bill Thompson, BA, RCM, ACCI, FCCI President, CCI Toronto and Area Chapter

66

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

From the Editor Cont’d.

Anyone who is reading this and knows a little bit about condominiums is going wild with the possibilities. Separate budgets are presently always applied to facilities shared between condominium corporations and the concept is exactly the same, except that separate budgets would be applied within the same condominium.

The problem and reality is that a developer, while initially concerned about the proper apportioning of common expenses, cannot be concerned about the long-term fairness and viability of the apportionment. For example, we all know of certain older projects in the city where the parking units are paying approximately $10.00 to $15.00 in common expenses per unit, whereas the real cost ought to be in the order of $50.00-$100.00, given the more realis-

tic repair and maintenance costs of most parking garages. This would be fine where every owner owned the same number of parking units, but this is not the reality in most condominium corporations.

In effect, the unit owners who own fewer parking spaces per unit are subsidizing the owners who own more than one parking space per unit. The multibudget arrangement is a fair way of dealing with this inequity where the initial split in common expenses cannot be fairly estimated for the life of the condominium and, as we all know, it cannot be. However, the only way to implement this is at the development stage of the project because a declaration amendment post registration for such a change would be highly unlikely to achieve from a practical perspective.

Mario Deo, LL.B.

Check Out the CCI Bookstore at www.ccitoronto.org

Resource material for Condominium Owners, Managers and Boards of Directors

Spring 2011

thecondovoice

67

List of Advertisers A.R. Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 ACMO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Adams & Miles LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 AME Materials Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Atrens Management Group Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Baird Roofing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 Brady & Seidner Associates Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Brookfield Residential Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35 Brown & Beattie Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Carma Industries Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 Construction Control Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72 Coulter Building Consultants Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 CPL Connoisseur Painting Limited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 CPL Condominium Design Interiors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 D-Tech (Nexus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 D&D Party Tent Rentals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 Davroc Consulting Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28, 37, 70 Donna Swanson Real Estate Brokerage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Dryerfighters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Elia Associates Barristers and Solicitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 EnerCare Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Enerplan Building Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Fine & Deo Barristers & Solicitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Firenza Plumbing & Heating Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 Fogler, Rubinoff LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Gardiner Miller Arnold LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Genivar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Geofocus Mould Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Green Leaf Landscaping and Maintenance Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 GRG Building Consultants Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 GSA Property Management Specialists Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Gulfstar Emergency Services Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 Heenan Blaikie LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Horlick Levitt Di Lella LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 ICC Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 LAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 Larlyn Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 M & E Consulting Engineers Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 Maple Ridge Community Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63 Mediate.ca Resolution Services (Colm Brannigan) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Metro Compactor Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 Miller Thomson LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 Morrison Financial Services Limited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 Morrison Hershfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 Nadlan-Harris Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Ontario Screen Systems Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Percel Professional Property Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 Pillar Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Pro-House Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 Provident Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Regal Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69 Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Royal Grande Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 Samuel Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 SmithValeriote Law Firm LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 SR Wise Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 Stratacon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 Summa Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Suncorp Valuations Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 TowerWise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68 Waste Solutions Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Whiterose Janitorial Service Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Wilson Blanchard Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71 YARDI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

68

thecondovoice

Spring 2011

EMERGENCY SERVICES INC. CONDOMINIUM • RESIDENTIAL • COMMERCIAL

Your Condominium Emergency Specialist Servicing the GTA 24 / 7

1-800-461-5007 www.gulfstar.ca

70

thecondovoice

Spring 2011