CCI CondoVoice Fall07 · training; indeedveryself ... report(tothecondominiumcorpora-tion) ... HRTC-HomeRenovation Tax Credit and HST - Harmonized SalesTaxthatwillhaveanimpacton

www.ccitoronto.org VOL. 13, NO. 4 • SUMMER 2009

PM #40047055

PUBLICATION OF THE CANADIAN CONDOMINIUM INSTITUTE - TORONTO & AREA CHAPTERPUBLICATION DE L’ INSTITUT CANADIEN DES CONDOMINIUMS - CHAPITRE DE TORONTO ET RÉGION

Plus:� HRTC and HST� Shared Facilities Agreements: So Who’s in Charge?� Working Towards Common Goals� Condominium Mediation: Advantages and Benefits� Condo Design Trends … and Existing Condos

� Tips for Managing Your Condo in Poor Economic Times� Second-hand Smoke - How Many Laws can Dance on the

Head of a Cigarette?� Obligations & Liabilities of a Condominium Corporation and its

Board of Directors… and more

CCI-Toronto welcomes its1000th member - TSCC 1979

333Summer 2009 thecondovoice

Features

12 HRTC and HSTby John M. Warren

16 Shared Facilities Agreements: So Who’s in Charge?by Lou Natale

18 Working Towards Common Goalsby Robert Durko

20 Condo Design Trends … and Existing Condosby Stanley Kedzierski and Bev Moroz

24 Condominium Mediation: Advantages and Benefitsby Lavonne McCumber Eals

27 Tips for Managing Your Condominium in Poor Economic Timesby Scott Newhouse

37 Second-hand Smoke: How Many Laws can Dance on the Headof a Cigarette?by Brian Horlick

42 Duty to AccommodateBy Warren D. Kleiner

48 Obligations and Liabilities of a Condominium Corporation andits Board of Directorsby Michael H. Clifton

CCI News5 President’s Message

6 Contributors

8 Letters to the Editor

30 Condo of the Year

52 CCI Toronto Welcomes Its1000th Member

Canadian CondominiumInstitute / Institut canadien

des condominiumsToronto & Area Chapter

2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite 310, Toronto, ONM2J 1W8

Tel.: (416) 491-6216 Fax: (416) 491-1670E-mail: [email protected]

Website: www.ccitoronto.org

2008/2009 Board of DirectorsPRESIDENT

Armand Conant, B.Eng., LL.B., D.E.S.S.(Co-Chair, Legislative Committee,Chair, Conference Committee)

Heenan Blaikie LLP

VICE-PRESIDENTSMario Deo, LL.B.

(Chair, Public Relations CommitteeMember, Conference Committee)

Fine & Deo LLP

Bill Thompson, BA, RCM, ACCI(Vice -Chair Membership Committee and

Vice-Chair Education Committee)Malvern Condominium Property Management

SECRETARY/TREASURERBob Girard, B.Comm, RCM, ACCI

(Chair: Special Projects Committee, CAI Liaison)AA Property Management & Associates

PAST PRESIDENTJohn Warren, C.A.

(Member, Education CommitteeMember, Legislative Committee)

Adams & Miles LLP

BOARD MEMBERS

Gordon Chong, DDS(Member, Legislative Committee)

MTCC # 0620Gina Cody, P.Eng., M.Eng., Ph.D., ACCI, FCCI

(Chair, Education Committee,CCI-National Liaison)

Construction Control Inc.Brian Horlick, B.Comm., B.C.L., LL.B., ACCI

(Chair, Legislative Committee,Member, Conference Committee)Horlick Levitt Barristers & Solicitors

Lisa Kay(Member, Public Relations Committee,

Conference Committee, Website Committee)Maxium Condo Finance Group

Julian McNabb(Member, Public Relations Committee and

Membership Committee)Simerra Property Management Ltd.

Vic Persaud, BA(Chair, Membership Committee,Chair Website Committee)Suncorp Valuations Ltd.Sally Thompson, P.Eng.

(Member, Education CommitteeMember, Legislative Committee)

Halsall Associates Ltd.EX OFFICIO DIRECTOR

Jasmine Martirossian, B.A., M.A., PhD.

ADMINISTRATOR - Lynn MorrovatADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT - Josee Lefebvre

Contents

About our cover: CCI Toronto proudly recognized it's 1000th member - TSCC # 1979 with amemorative plaque. Featured on the front cover of this issue are: Left to Right – Ellen Shi,Brendan Murphy, Robert Iseman (Directors TSCC 1979), Julian McNabb (CCI Toronto MembershipCommittee), Tasso Eracles (Simerra), and GianPiero Di Rocco (Edilcan). Photo by Omid Morrovat.

55 In Memoriam – Mark Freedman

59 NewMembers

61 Upcoming Events

62 CCI National Semi-AnnualMeetings 2009

thecondovoice Summer 20094

Summer 2009 thecondovoice 5

President’s Message

It is with sadness that I start off my President’s message with news of the passing away of MarkFreedman – one of the condominium industry’s and community’s great names and contributors forover 25 years. As a condominium lawyer I have had the privilege of being on the opposite side of

the table from Mark. He was always a true professional in all our dealings – advocating his client’sposition with great intelligence and vigour – but always professionally and with great respect to allparties. His passing is a tremendous loss to us all. Please see our tribute to Mark on page 55.

On a happier note, by the time that most members are reading this message, they will likely havealready received membership renewal notices for the 2009-2010 year. We hope that you find con-tinued value in your CCI membership and will consider renewing your support of the Institute forthe coming year.

CCI Toronto reached a milestone this past year in welcoming its 1000th member – TSCC #1979. We have featured this mem-ber of the front cover of this issue and in the article on page 52. CCI’s continued growth is vital in remaining to be seen as theVoice of Condominiums.

The CCI Toronto Board of Directors, supported by a dedicated group of Committee members has worked hard this past yearin keeping the Chapter relevant, and in listening to and responding to the needs of our growing membership. We thank all ofthose members who took the time this year to provide us with feedback via our online member survey. If you have not yet respond-ed, it is not too late to do so. Visit the Members Only section of the website at www.ccitoronto.org.We’d love to hear your viewson how we’ve been doing, as well as your ideas and suggestions for new directions for CCI Toronto to pursue.

As a result of your feedback, our Education Committee has recently launched a new course for directors – ‘Condo 201’, whichfocuses on Meetings and Condominium Governance. The efforts of this Committee in the coming year will be geared towardturning our in-class course material into a training DVD format. We hope that this new format will allow for further educationwithin the industry and that corporations will purchase copies not only for Board members but that they will also make the DVD’savailable to all owners.

The Legislative Committee has also been hard at work. With the help of various sub-committees and through our partnershipwithACMO, work on the Legislative Brief containing many suggested amendments to the Condominium Act, 1998,which beganmore than three years ago, is now in the final stages of completion. We thank everyone for their input over the years.

Highlights of other accomplishments over the past year include – a continued improvement in the CondoVoicemagazine – nowoffering more articles and information for Condo Boards and Owners than ever before; the implementation of an internal searchfeature on our website – making the site easier to navigate; the launch of the Condo of the Year Contest – watch for the firstannual recipient to be named in the fall of 2009; and the switch in venues for the Annual CCI-T/ACMO CondominiumConference to the Hilton Markham Suites Hotel and Conference Centre – we will be back there in 2009 so mark your calen-dars now for November 6th and 7th, 2009; and, of course, the great inroads the Joint Government Relations Committee has madein its numerous meetings with politicians, policy advisers and various bureaucrats in developing a good working relationshipwith the Ontario government on any matters that concern the condominium industry.

So with a successful 2008-09 year now almost behind us – we are eagerly planning for an exciting 2009-10 year. The Boardand Committees cannot do it all alone though – we value the support and input of our members and want you to remember thatthis is YOUR Institute. Your feedback and suggestions are always welcomed and we can be reached at [email protected] or at (416) 491-6216.

I wish you all a happy and safe summer!

Cheers,Armand ConantPresident, CCI Toronto &Area Chapter

SCOTT NEWHOUSE, BA,RCM, (Tips for ManagingYour Condominium in PoorEconomic Times, page 27)currently manages the condo-minium division for Shiu

Pong Management and can be reached [email protected].

BRIAN HORLICK, (Second-hand Smoke, page 37), hasbeen successfully engaged inthe practice of law for 25years. He is a senior partnerwith the law firm of Horlick

Levitt and is an expert in the area of condo-minium law. He is a director of CCI, Chair ofthe CCI Legal & Governmental AffairsCommittee, Chair of the ACMO AssociatesExecutive Communications Committee and isa regular lecturer on condominium law to prop-erty managers seeking to obtain their RCMdesignation.

WARREN D. KLEINER, (Dutyto Accommodate, page 42). isa lawyer practicing condo-minium law with theCondominium Practice Groupat the law firm of Miller

Thomson LLP. Warren is also a member of theToronto Chapter of CCI andACMO. He is theeditor of the Condominium Practice Group’s“Let’s Talk Condo” newsletter.Warren’s goal isto provide his condominium clients with effi-cient and cost effective services, while findingpractical solutions to problems and keepingclients up to date with the evolving state of con-dominium law.

MICHAEL H. CLIFTON, MA, LLB, ACCI(Obligations and Liabilities of a CondominiumCorporation andits Board of Directors, page48) is a Condominium Management and LandDevelopment lawyer with the firm Clifton KokLLP inAyr, ON. He holds bachelor and masterdegrees in philosophy as well as a degree inlaw and he was called to the bar in 2000.Michael earned hisACCI designation from CCIin 2008 and has served on the GoldenHorseshoe CCI Board of Directors since 2006.Michael has co-authored two OntarioCondominium law books, “A Planners andMunicipalities Guide to the CondominiumAct,1998” and “Essential Issues for Realtors on theCondominium Act, 1998”


JOHN M. WARREN, C.A.,(HRTC and HST, page 12) isa partner with Adams &Miles LLP, CharteredAccountants who provideaudit and financial services

to over 200 condominiums. He is a Directorand immediate Past-President of the CCI –Toronto and Area Chapter and a past memberof several committees of ACMO. He writesregularly on financial matters in condomini-ums and is a frequent speaker at educationalprograms for managers and directors and atcondominium conferences and seminars.

LOU NATALE, BA, LL.B.,(Shared Facilities Agree-ments: So Who’s in Charge?on page 16) is the head of theCondo Law Group at FoglerRubinoff LLPwhich services

the condominium industry throughout theGreater Toronto Area, the Golden Horsehoeand Cottage Country.

ROBERT DURKO, (WorkingTowards Common Goals,page 18) is the President andCEO of Trustlink PropertyManagement Inc. focusing onsmall to large residential and

small to medium commercial/industrial condo-miniums within the GTA. Robert has a BA inPsychology and Economics, graduating withdistinction from the University of WesternOntario and also holds a RCM designation fromACMO. Robert has lived in a condo, has beenan active board member and a property manag-er for 15 years. Robert is a professional mem-ber of CCI and ACMO.

STANLEY KEDZIERSKI andBEVMOROZ, (Condo DesignTrends, page 20), are princi-pals of West 49 ParallelDesign Inc. in Toronto. West49 Parallel specializes in newand existing condo design,retail design and commercialdesign. Their work can be

viewed at www.west49parallel.com.

LAVONNEMCCUMBER EALSB.A., M.E.S., (CondominiumMediation, page 24) is amediator for the MandatoryMediation Program inOntario, Toronto Roster. She

has had over 26 years experience resolvingvarious conflicts in non-profit housing and iscurrently a Professional Member of CCI -Toronto &Area Chapter and an associate withA Place for Mediation.

Contributors


“TheCondoVoice” is published 4times per year – Spring, Summer,Fall and Winter, by the CanadianCondominium Institute - Toronto&Area Chapter.

EDITOR: Mario DeoMAGAZINE DIRECTORS:Lisa Kay and Julian McNabbADVERTISING: Marie McNameeCOPY EDITOR: Ruth MaxCOMPOSITION: E-Graphics

All advertising enquiries shouldbe directed to Marie McNamee at(905) 852-2802 or [email protected]

If you are interested in writing articles forTheCondoVoice magazine, please contactMarie McNamee at (905) 852-2802 or [email protected]. Article topics mustbe on issues of interest to CondominiumDirectors and must be informative ratherthan commercial in nature.

The author, the Canadian CondominiumInstitute and its representatives will not beheld liable in any respect whatsoever forany statement or advice contained herein.Articles should not be relied upon as aprofessional opinion or as an authoritativeor comprehensive answer in any case.Professional advice should be obtained afterdiscussing all particulars applicable in thespecific circumstances in order to obtain anopinion or report capable of absolvingcondominium directors from liability [unders. 37 (3) (b) of the Condominium Act, 1998].Authors’ views expressed in any article arenot necessarily those of the CanadianCondominium Institute. All contributors aredeemed to have consented to publication ofany information provided by them, includingbusiness or personal contact information.

Consider supporting the advertisersand service providers referred to inthis magazine, recognizing that they havebeen supporters of CCI.

Advertisements are paid advertising and donot imply endorsement of or any liabilitywhatsoever on the part of CCI with respectto any product, service or statement.

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

Proposed CondominiumClassification System

Dear Mario,

Many - if not all - who work in thisfield would applaud a system thatrewards well run communities andencourages those whose do not meetcertain standards to raise the bar or suf-fer the wrath of purchasers whowill be better informed.

I personally feel that consumer aware-ness (and market value) is ultimatelythe carrot at the end of the stick bywhich Boards that have strayed can beled back to the right path.

The advantage of a rating systembased on benchmarks is that it forcescondominiums to measure themselvesagainst the performance of othercondos – the drawback is that therewill always be condos at the low endof the spectrum and that makes itdifficult for older communities tocompete against newer condos.

The advantage of a rating system basedon targets set by industry experts is thatit allows those with knowledge of con-dominiums to set the goals and allowsall corporations to equally strive toattain them – the disadvantage is thedisputes that will inevitably follow overwhether the targets are fair or biased.Mario has presented a concept thatwould see the independent experts inthe field “certify” the performance ofthe community based on certaincriteria. That plan might include aseries of yes or no questions thatdo not place the burden of opinion onthe auditor, engineer, lawyer etc.I am very interested in participating inthe discussions and appreciate yourincluding me in any working group thatyou may form.

It should be noted thatACMO and CCIare looking to become part of thediscussions when the governmentopens the condo act for revisions. The

window may be opening for ideas suchas this to find support from thelaw-makers.

Dean McCabe RCM,Regional Manager,

Brookfield Residential Services Ltd.

Condominium Classification - theCondoVoice, Spring 2009

I read with interest Mario Deo’s pro-posal for a condominium classificationsystem. Having been actively involvedin condominium engineering since1985 and as President of the GoldenHorseshoe Chapter (GHC) of CCI since2001, I have seen my share of dis-tressed condominium corporations bothfrom a physical and financial health(reserve fund) aspect.

The absolute disasters that clearly needintervention by way of an administrator,fortunately are in the minority. Theyoften occur due to sheer ignorance ofboard members not understanding orworse, ignoring their fiduciary respon-sibilities, ignoring the advice given bytheir professionals, or as a result ofboards getting sacked by the ownerswho don’t want the necessary feeincreases. In the GHC there is aKitchener conversion condo under courtadministration (soon after occupancy)where clearly the declarant among oth-ers caused the downfall, through no faultof the owner board or residents.

I could not agree more with Mr. Deo’spremise that for newly registered con-dominiums, it starts with the develop-ers. May I be so bold to suggest thatone way to address the corporations’future physical and financial health is toensure the reserve fund gets off on theright foot by realistic first year reservetransfers being budgeted by the devel-opers.

We all know that the first year reservetransfer of 10% of the operating budg-et, per the Condominium Act is non-sense; especially for many conversion

Letters to the Editor


condominium corporations requiringhuge increases in the reserve transferto address often imminent major expen-ditures for elevators, roofing and park-ing garages etc. Unless of course thesetime bombs are part of the developers’“vision, marketing or branding” refer-enced in the article as needing protec-tion. Even at 20%, the Class I ReserveFund Studies my firm has completedindicate it is typically still not enough.

One approach that would fit very ele-gantly into the current requirement forthe declarant being responsible for thefirst year budget deficit would be toaccrue back to the first year, the reservefund shortfall determined after theClass I study.

Personally I don’t think a classificationsystem is necessary. It would be burden-some, and likely promote accountant andengineer/architect shopping if boardsdon’t like the rating. The annual cost ofthe common elements being inspectedevery year needs to be considered.

Of course there are corporations thatneed help.Agood start will be revisionsto the Condominium Act to betteraddress the initial reserve shortfall mostnewly registered condominium corpo-rations face. This has already been rec-ommended by the Legislative Comm-ittee of CCI on which I sit. Secondly,to address the often abysmal state of

conversions, make Section 9(4) of theCondominium Act, (third party inspec-tion of residential rental properties priorto conversion) mandatory and toinclude all types of conversions (officebuildings as an example). Thirdly,though no less important, I also seebizarre expenditures out of both theoperating and reserve funds being madeby uneducated boards. Accordingly,Section 29 of the Condominium Act(Board of Directors Qualifications)should be amended to include at a min-imum, CCI Level 200 or equivalenttraining; indeed very self-serving of megiven my well-paying job at GHC/CCI.

Kim Coulter, B.Tech.(Arch.Sc.), ACCI, FCCI

President, Coulter BuildingConsultants Ltd.

Mario, you’re on to something good.

A classification system that seeks torate or score condominium corpora-tions on such factors as financial health(operating and reserve), level of main-tenance, curb appeal, and quality ofgovernance (board and management)could be of huge value in improving theoverall quality of condominium com-munities in Ontario. It could assistprospective purchasers. It would helpowners and residents evaluate their

boards and management. It would giveBoards targets to which to aspire.

Speaking selfishly as a regional man-ager for Brookfield, I think a classifica-tion system that also helps to identifywhere a condominium corporation is inits lifecycle would help to ensure a bet-ter fit between management resourcesand the corporation’s expectations, inturn ensuring a solid, productive andlong-term relationship in which scarceand valuable resources are more effi-ciently allocated and allowed to ebband flow with the lifecycle needs of acorporation.

I think that a viable classification sys-tem can be achieved.

I wish you luck on your mission. If youneed some help, count me in!

Rudy Petershofer,Brookfield Residential Services Ltd.

Dear Mario,

I was most interested to read your edi-torial about a proposed condominiumclassification system (which wouldessentially be established by way ofprovisions in condominium declara-tions). I find your idea inspiring,because the goal is clear and simple:reliable maintenance and financial

Continued…


management for condominiums.

As you know, the whole purpose ofmandatory Reserve Fund Studies wasto increase consumer confidence (incondominiums) by reducing risks (forexample, risks of unexpected costs) inrelation to long term building perform-ance and durability. The resultingincrease in consumer confidence wasobviously beneficial to all condomini-um owners throughout the province.

It appears to me that your proposal isdesigned to take these concepts further– by requiring regular, professionalmonitoring of other aspects of condo-minium administration. This sort ofmandatory professional review of con-dominium activities might well takeconsumer confidence (in condomini-ums) to an even higher level. If so, thatcould only be a good thing.

Now, I do see a number of potentialobjections:• This will obviously increase the annu-al cost to own a condominium.Condominium owners don’t want tobe forced to spend more money onprofessionals. So, you will need topersuade condominium owners that

these costs will be worth spending –because of resulting savings or gainsin market value.

• This sort of “extra professional mon-itoring” is arguably only required incertain cases. Most condominiums inOntario are extremely well managed.For instance, I would say that the vastmajority of condominiums in EasternOntario are extremely well-managed.I understand that there are “horror sto-ries” in Toronto – but we haven’t seenthose sorts of critical situations inEastern Ontario.

• I’m not sure that a classification orrating system can really work unlessthere is a completely independent“rating body”. Can the rating reallybe done by persons hired by the con-dominium corporation?

• For a rating system to truly workeffectively, it would perhaps have tobe mandated province-wide (perhapsby way of regulation under theCondominium Act).

• The mandatory appointment of anadministrator (without any authoriz-ing Court process) is quite a dramat-ic remedy.

I don’t mean to suggest that the idea isnot a good one. Again, I feel that it hasconsiderable merit. However, I offerthe following alternative suggestion, forwhat it may be worth.

Just as you have suggested, provisionsin the Declaration could require regular,professional review of the corporation’songoing maintenance and financialadministration (for example, by archi-tects, engineers and/or auditors). Thoseprofessionals could then be required toreport (to the condominium corpora-tion) any steps which they feel arerequired to ensure that the condomini-um’s administration (in certain definedareas) is considered “reasonably accept-able”. [I think of it this way: Thesesteps would essentially be required forthe condominium to receive a “passinggrade” from those professionals.]

These professional reports (along withstatements of resulting steps taken bythe condominium corporation) wouldbe available to owners and to any per-sons who request a status certificatefrom the condominium corporation.

This process would be voluntary. Butany condominium corporation whichhas instituted the process might thenargue that consumers should havegreater confidence in the particular con-dominium because it has a system of“extra professional review” in place.

James Davidson,Nelligan O'Brien Payne LLP

Letters to the EditorContinued from page 11


Where would we be withoutacronyms? We may neverknow but there are two new

acronyms; HRTC - Home RenovationTax Credit and HST - HarmonizedSales Tax that will have an impact onresidential condominiums and their unitowners. Hopefully this summary willassist in planning for their effects.

Home Renovation Tax Credit

The HRTC is a 15% tax credit avail-able to individuals only for the 2009taxation year. It is available only forqualifying expenditures in excess of$1,000 but not for expenditures morethan $10,000, resulting in a maximumnon-refundable tax credit of $1,350($9,000 x 15%). Only expendituresincurred after January 27, 2009 andbefore February 1, 2010 will be eligiblefor the credit. The credit will not beavailable in respect of expendituresmade in that period if the agreement orcontract was entered into beforeJanuary 28, 2009.

Eligibility is family based such that eli-gible expenditures may be claimed byonly one member of a family composedof the individual claiming the credittogether with spouse and minor children.If two or more families share ownershipin an eligible dwelling, each family mayclaim their own credit based on theirshare of eligible expenditures incurred.A credit may be claimed only for expen-ditures made in respect of a principalresidence as defined under existing taxlaw. Renovations made to residentialrental or business use properties will notbe eligible and individuals who earnrental or business income from part of

their principal residence will be able toclaim the credit only for expendituresmade either wholly for the principal res-idence areas or prorated for eligibleexpenditures that benefit the housingunit as a whole.

Expenditures will be eligible only forrenovations or alterations that are of anenduring nature and which are integralto the building and would include thecost of materials, labour, professionalservices, fixtures, equipment rentalsand permits. Expenditures to a relatedperson are not eligible unless the relat-ed person is registered for GST.Examples of eligible expenditureswould include kitchen, bathroom orbasement renovations, new carpet orhardwood floors, building additions,decks, fences and retaining walls, a newfurnace or water heater, painting theinterior or exterior, re-roofing, resur-facing driveways and new sod or land-

scaping. Ineligible expenditures wouldinclude; routine repairs and mainte-nance, carpet cleaning, maintenancecontracts and such items as tools, furni-ture, appliances and draperies.

All claims must be supported by receiptsand whether expenditures are chargedto the operating or reserve fund is notrelevant to their eligibility. It is a rea-sonable assumption that eligible expen-ditures incurred by a condominiumshould be allocated to individual ownerson the basis used to calculate eachowner’s share of monthly condominiumfees. Invoices for eligible expendituresand the calculation of their allocationamongst owners should be accumulat-ed in a package and preserved so thatthey can be provided to the taxationauthorities should the need arise. Werecommend that condominiums be con-servative in the expenditures they deter-mine to be eligible as disallowance of

HRTC and HST

BY JOHN M. WARREN, C.A.


invoices to one owner may have animpact on all owners. The allocation ofexpenditures between owners who movein or out during the eligibility period hasnot been addressed and we recommendthat the corporation should not assumeresponsibility to make this allocation. Itshould inform owners that it will calcu-late the total amount of eligible expen-ditures made in respect of each unit;send it to the owner of record and that itis the responsibility of part-year ownersto sort out amongst themselves whoclaims what proportion of the expendi-tures.

Harmonized Sales Tax

It is likely that the HSTmay not be ter-ribly harmonious in condominiumsunless steps are taken to explain itsimpact. Not only are many condomini-um expenditures not previously subjectto the 8% Provincial Sales Tax (PST)going to be subject to HST, but the taxrelief promised by the Ontario govern-ment to compensate, at least partially,for the extra costs of the HST goes toindividuals while condominium corpo-rations will have to pay the higher HSTincluded costs. Fee increases in 2010and 2011 will be high and without clearexplanations owners will likely find itdifficult to separate that part of theseincreases due to imposition of the HSTfrom increases caused by inflation andother cost increases. Communicateearly and communicate often is alwaysimportant to ensure owners understandwhat it costs to operate their homes andwill be especially so because of the sig-nificant impact of the HST on condo-minium fees.

To confuse matters further, the 8% PSTpaid now by suppliers when they pur-chase materials included in their con-tracts will disappear as of July 1, 2010and owners may conclude that suppli-er invoices will go down 8% for elim-ination of the PST and then up 8% forthe increase from 5%GST to 13%HSTwith no impact on costs. This is not thecase because the HST applies to thetotal invoice amount including materi-als, labour, administration and supplierprofit while PST applies only to the

material component. The cost increaseshould be determined by the amount ofmaterials in the invoice - the greater thematerial component, the smaller theincrease caused by imposition of theHST. It is also probably a reasonableassumption that suppliers will not auto-matically pass on the savings fromelimination of the PST and that manycosts may well rise by close to 8%.

The impact on condominiums is two-fold. First, reserve fund study providersestimate that reserve fund expenditures,both those incurred and the estimatesof future expenditures will increase, onaverage, by 5% to 7% assuming mostof the PST savings on materials arepassed on. Condominiums shouldupdate their reserve fund studies in2009 so that increased reserve contri-butions due to implementation of theHST can be considered in their 2010budget. Second, operating costs willincrease. Current estimates are thatelectricity, gas, communications, cabletelevision and contracts for manage-

ment, concierge, elevator and mechan-ical equipment maintenance, profes-sional fees, landscaping, cleaning andsimilar services will increase by closeto 8% and repairs, supplies and officecosts from 5% to 7%, Water costsshould not change as they are notpresently subject to PST or GST norwill they be subject to HST and finally,insurance should not be affected as it ispresently subject only to PST, whichtax will continue, and will not be sub-ject to HST.

There are also other implications toaddress. The garbage levy in Torontois included in the water invoice forcondominiums that have chosenmunicipal collection and it is notpresently subject to HST while costsinvoiced by private contractors will besubject to HST after June 30, 2010,creating a cost differential in favour ofmunicipal collection.

Long-term contracts for such servicesas cable television and elevator and



mechanical maintenance that gobeyond June 30, 2010 should be rene-gotiated if possible, as their pricesinclude provision for PST on materialcosts that will disappear after that date.

Salaries and wages will not be subjectto HST while invoices for contractmanagement, concierge and cleaningwill include 13% HST and this maytempt Boards to hire employees direct-ly to avoid the HST. Contracts are thenorm in most condominiums with goodreason; hiring directly means work-place safety insurance premiums andemployer contributions to CPP and EI.To attract good employees it will beimportant to provide benefit packagesequal to those provided by contractorsand this may be difficult to do at thesame cost. There are also costs foradministration, supervision, schedul-ing, absenteeism, sickness, holiday and

vacation coverage and finally ifemployees do not work out there aretermination costs. Care should be takento consider all factors before a changeto direct hire is implemented.

It is early days for both the HRTC andthe HST and we will get a better handleon their effects as regulations and otherinformation become available. How-ever the impact, particularly of theHST, will be substantial and communi-cation is essential to avoid misunder-standing. I strongly recommend thatowners be informed early and oftenover the next year as events unfold.

Thanks to Glen MacMillan, C.A. tax partnerat Adams & Miles LLP, whose memoran-dum on the effects of the HRTC in condo-miniums has been summarized in thisarticle. �

News Flash …Updates on HST and OngoingWork on the Legislative BriefCCI members have been curious about CCI Toronto’s involvement overthe past while since the HST has been announced.

CCI has being working hard behind the scenes while the full impact of thetax on condominiums is being explored. In addition, CCI-Toronto PresidentArmand Conant had the opportunity to attend a recent town hall meeting atwhich condo owners and government officials gathered to discuss the HST.

As a result of government connections made at this meeting, we are pleasedto report that representatives of the joint CCI-T/ACMO GovernmentRelations Committee have now secured a meeting with a ParliamentaryAssistant to theMinister of Finance on June 15th to present ideas with a viewto seeing if there is any possibility of the Government easing the impact ofthe tax on Condominium owners. Stay tuned for further updates as theybecome available.

We are also pleased to advise that with respect to the legislative Brief, theGovernment Relations Committee, after considerable effort, has finallyarranged a meeting with the Minister of Small Business and ConsumerServices to discuss the Legislative Brief. This meeting will also take placeon June 15th – with outcomes and further information to follow.


Shared Facilities Agreements:So Who’s In Charge?BY LOU NATALE, BA, LL.B.FOGLER RUBINOFF LLP

One of the most contentious andproblematic areas of concernwithin the condominium indus-

try today relates to the management,operation and governance of sharedfacilities. Speak to any condominiumlawyer or property manager and theywill likely agree.

Disputes between condominium corpo-rations relating to shared facilities cancause serious division and clashes notonly between the representatives on theshared committee but also among themembers of the Board of Directors ofthe sister Corporations. Unfortunately,the residents are almost always draggedinto these disputes as unwilling partic-ipants. Many times these disputes areno different than the typical problemsencountered within individual Boardswhere there are personality clashes orstrong differences of opinions on fiscalmatters and priorities. The big differ-ence with disputes involving sharedfacilities is that these disputes are muchmore difficult and cumbersome toresolve simply because there are multi-ple Boards and Corporations involvedin the dispute resolution process.

One of the main reasonsthat these disputes arise inthe first place and are sodifficult to resolve is adirect result of the utterlack of legislative require-ments and regulationsgoverning shared facili-ties agreements (alsoknow as “reciprocal”,“mutual use” or “cost-sharing” agreements).Surprisingly, the Condo-minium Act barely recog-nizes the existence ofshared facilities. In fact, the phrase“shared facilities” is used only once inthe entire Act. As a result, the actualshared facilities agreement, and not theAct, plays a significant role in deter-mining the framework and relationshipbetween the sister Corporations. Thisis made more problematic because theshared facilities agreements are draft-ed and implemented in most cases bythe developers and their lawyers wellbefore the condominiums are even con-structed.

Although many shared facilities agree-

ments look the same, there can be somesignificant differences in the way inwhich these agreements are structuredand the degree of authority and dutiesdelegated to the members of the sharedcommittee (the “Committee”). Someversions of these agreements providethe Committee with full responsibilityto make all decisions relating to themaintenance, repair and operation ofthe shared facilities, and in which case,the Boards of each sister Corporationmust comply with those decisions. Inother versions of these agreements, theCommittee simply acts as an advisory


or “liaison” committee where all “rec-ommendations” of the Committee mustfirst be ratified by each Corporationbefore being implemented. In otherwords, each Board has a “veto” on alldecisions thereby requiring unanimityamong sister Corporations. In my view,these types of shared facilities agree-ments are a recipe for big problems,especially in cases where the “vetopower” is used by one Board to controlor frustrate the Committee.

In the 2006 decision of RupertsLanding (SCC No. 78 v. SCC No. 50, et.al.), the Ontario Superior Court upheldthe findings of an Arbitrator and con-firmed the validity of a shared facilitiesagreement which gave the Committeethe full power and responsibility tomake decisions relating to the sharedfacilities based on a majority vote ofthe Committee members. In the caseof Ruperts Landing, there are eightCorporations sharing a number of facil-ities. SCC No. 78 was unsuccessful in

arguing that the framework of the Actdid not permit the shared facilitiesagreement to “delegate” to the Commit-tee the decision-making authority ofeach Board and that all decisions of theCommittee must be ratified by eachBoard of the sister Corporations. TheJudge in the Ruperts Landing caseagreed with the Arbitrator who statedin his decision that “requiring the unan-imous approval of the Board ofDirectors of all eight corporations tomake decisions regarding the SharedFacilities would create an unworkable,if not chaotic environment” and that itwould be wrong, in this case, to allowone Board to have the “veto power overthe rest of the Ruperts LandingCommunity”.

There is no doubt that in those caseswhere shared facilities agreements referto “liaison committees” who merelymake “recommendations”, that there isa much greater possibility for disputesto arise between sister Corporations.

Although unanimous consensus amongCorporations who share facilities is amost desirable result, the reality is thatnot all issues can be decided through aunanimous vote. Furthermore, it isunclear how the arbitration process canbe effectively used to resolve a “dis-pute” between Corporations if the termsof the agreement allows each Board tochoose whether or not to ratify the rec-ommendations of the “liaison commit-tee”. What happens if one Boardchooses for its own good reason not toratify a “recommendation”? Is an arbi-trator expected or able to second guessthe Board?

One thing is for sure, and that is untilthe Act is amended to include somebase requirements and framework forshared facilities agreements, lawyerswill continue to be busy handling dis-putes involving shared facilities. �


BY ROBERT DURKO, B.A., R.C.M.

During my years of associationwith condominiums, I have beena property owner, a Director on

the Board and presently, a propertymanager. Having been on all sides ofthe table, I have experienced theresponsibilities, needs and demands ineach situation. Following are someobservations on aspects of managing,directing and living well within a con-dominium community.

ADirector of a corporation plays a vitalrole in ensuring that the condominiumestablishes responsible guidelines thathelp lower operating costs withoutjeopardizing the integrity, buildingcodes or by-laws of the condominium.Responsible guidelines encompass themain culture of the condominium,needs of residents and meets the eco-nomic demands of the corporation.Through these guidelines the propertymanager helps to facilitate and execute

projects to completion. Other profes-sionals such as the condominium’sengineer, lawyer, auditor and invest-ment advisor also play a critical role inthe development process.

When projects are being developed, it iswise to involve the property managerfrom the beginning as his/her input onthe process is vital. Addressing issuesand concerns together as they arise willhelp maintain a harmonious and healthyworking relationship.

The board of directors’ relationshipwith the property manager can be acomplex one when each offer differentideas on ways to accomplish a task. Ifthe task is executed respectfully andprofessionally by the parties involved,it can be mutually rewarding andincrease the value of the building. As aDirector, keeping maintenance fees lowand generating new ideas to reduce

operating costs is paramount, such asmoving towards new energy efficientprograms and technology. This is notalways easy especially if the reservefund is compromised when dealingwith a deficit budget.

Difficult situations in a manager’s jobcan arise when Board members stepdown or upon the institution of a newBoard. The most devastating situatio-nis being involved in a requisitionmeeting for the removal of a Board.This is a time where exceptional man-agers adapt and more inefficient onessuccumb to the anxiety of change.Change can be good, but it can be prob-lematic if a large scale project is termi-nated and/or the new Board does notagree with the project even after cor-poration money has already been spent.

Residents are often unaware of behind-the-scene problems or conflicts, and it

Working TowardsCommon Goals


can take a toll on the manager who hasbeen professional in the developmentof the requests of the Board. Trying toexplain this to the condo resident canalso be challenging. A good managerdoes not want to jeopardize relation-ships with the Board, managementcompany, other residents and the build-ing staff. There might also be a con-flict with contractors, or other profes-sionals that have put their time into aproject and are left in the dark by thechange. This could compromise thecorporation’s relationship with anestablished supplier in the future.

The day-to-day experience of a manag-er is unique in that many events canoccur in just one day. It is the respon-sibility of the manager to keep the envi-ronment positive, productive and at thesame time ensure the objectives of theguidelines from the Board are beingmet. Communication on a regularbasis, whether good or bad, is impor-tant as it helps give the Board perspec-tive on what is happening within thecorporation. As emergencies arise andnew problems occur, delays or changescan impact the initial process. The proj-ect may need to be revised and this canget confusing if there have been manychanges and the focus of the projectgets somewhat lost. If there is a lack ofconsistency with the approach it canjeopardize a Board’s reputation.

Residents can feel disconnected fromthe operations of the building and theongoing changes if there are poor lev-els of communication. Sometimes theonly information received is gatheredthrough a chance meeting with theSuperintendent, possibly leaving theresident confused and concerned aboutthe problems occurring within the com-munity. This type of communicationcan be extremely damaging to aProperty Manager or Board. Proactivemeasures need to be instilled andencouraged when it comes to commu-nicating with residents.

Wearing all the hats within a condo-minium setting has given me a greaterappreciation for what Board membersface when volunteering their time to

achieve the betterment of their homeand/or investment. As a Manager Irespect the professional involvementhe/she has to offer to help leverage theBoard’s time by facilitating and con-sulting during the process. As a resi-dent, I was eager to be informed onwhat was going on, and enjoyed read-ing the monthly newsletter. The rela-tionship that is developed between the

Directors, Property Manager andResidents is essential. What ultimate-ly makes a condominium communitysuccessful is having responsible guide-lines. Implemented correctly, commu-nication tools being used on a regularbasis, the Board of Directors are com-mitted to projects/guidelines and toeach other until completion. �


Condodesigntrends ...and existing condosBY STANLEY KEDZIERSKI AND BEV MOROZ

WEST 49 PARALLEL DESIGN INC.

Although the economy remainsunsettled with fewer buyers andthe condo building boom slow-

ing dramatically, it is even more impor-tant that the revitalization of the oldercondominium buildings continue tomaintain its investment value. Oldercondo buildings have a rare advantagein that they generally have larger suitesthan new condo product, however, persquare foot resale values are usuallylower on older unrenovated buildings.

In today’s new competitive condoresale market, it is to their advantagethat condominium boards keep the inte-rior design aesthetics of the commonareas such as entrances, lobbies, andcommon corridors new and refreshedto reflect current design standards. Thenew condo buyer is generally younger,much more knowledgeable, sophisti-cated, and very conscious of designtrends.

In the past few years, scores of new con-dominium buildings have been erectedin the Greater TorontoArea, second onlyto New York City in North America.New condo buildings and existingcondo retrofits have raised the bar whenit comes to common area interior design.There is a shift to more design impor-tance being given to key common areasof the building as far as aesthetics, func-tion and ‘the experience’.

There are many ways that an olderbuilding can apply the new condotrends to existing common area spaces.

TREND ELEMENTS

It’s not just window dressing, theENTRANCE is your first impressionof the building. It defines its personal-ity, the branding….the ‘curb appeal’.Key design features used successfullyin new condos that can transform adated entrance are as follows:

• PLANTERS and the PLANTINGtake on an architectural tone to com-pliment the building’s aesthetics.Planter trends are generally larger inscale, sculptural yet simple. Stainlesssteel planters, back lit planters orclassic orangerie planters addingvisual style. The new planting trends(no geraniums please), take on anarchitectural feeling, with tall stan-dards, dramatic oversize tropicalplanting, and layered contrasting leaftextures and colours to set the tone.

• ENTRANCE DOOR HARD-WARE such as door pulls are notonly functional, but sculptural andwill dramatically change a door. Newdoor pull finishes such as polished orbrushed stainless steel, nickel orbronze new hardware should com-plement existing materials.

• EXTERIOR SEATING such asclassic garden benches in natural teakor cedar finishes age to a beautifulpatina adding a sculptural element.

• ENTRANCELIGHTING – the lat-est inroads in new exterior lightingdesign and performance for wallsconces, flushmounts, pendants,whether contemporary or traditionaloffer exciting options and add animpressive personality to a buildingentrance.


• CANOPIES such as glass/steel andwell designed canvas awnings add adimensional focus to entrances.

LOBBY

Lobby stylization has taken on a newattitude — classic and mature; vibrantand youthful; artistic and funky —trending to the mixing of styles to speakto a broader audience. Lobby design,whether boutique style or grand scale,has become more hotel like, setting anew tone for the building interiordesign aesthetics. Lobby functions arebecoming more diversified, acting associal meeting spaces, waiting areas,and where business transactions withreal estate agents take place. Lobbiesare augmented by the following designfeatures:

• COLOUR palettes such as paints,wall finishes are softer colours, neu-tral, off whites, taupes, earth tones,and not the hot colours of the season.Hot colours can be incorporated intothe colour scheme in smaller ele-ments such as pillows, accessories,area carpets or artwork.

• FLOORING such as hard surfacestrend to natural stone, or porcelainsthat look like natural stone….rich,expensive and elegant looking.Larger tile sizes have become morepopular to visually expand the space.Durability and maintenance issuestake importance as much as aesthet-ics.

Wood still trends to mid to dark toneseven though the lighter wood speciesand the new self sustaining woodproducts are becoming more popularespecially in contemporary settings.

Soft surfaces such as carpeting trendto patterns either to compliment theinterior design or accent. There isalso a definite shift to cradle to cradlecarpet specification. Area carpets –traditional but classic and contempo-rary graphic and colourful anchorfurniture groupings.

• LIGHTING is the drama in interiorspaces with new technologies inlamp types and performance. Thereare now greater choices in functionand decorative fixture styles.

The trend is to focus accent lightingonto interior architectural features,and hang ornamental pendants overseating areas, entrances, conciergedesk, to define specific functions.Floor or table lighting add warmthgiving a residential touch. Lightcoves and ceiling coffers incorporat-ed into the interior design act as indi-rect soft general lighting.

• SEATING selection is based on def-inition of usage with small individ-ual within a larger communal area.Trends include the diversity of stylesusing more benches and ottomans,fewer oversized pieces, classic lineswith a few theatrical accent pieces.

• UPHOLSTERYwith sensory appealequals lush, rich and expensive fab-rics. Softer palettes or colours favourtraditional interiors with strongeraccents and brighter hue upholsteryfor contemporary seating. Texturalhand recognized fabrics add to theappeal with plain colours and sub-dued patterns that are not “trendy”that will date easily.

• INTERIOR ARCHITECTUREdetails contribute to the revamping,restyling and reinterpreting of abuilding interior. The trend is todefine feature focus accent wall(s)with new wood paneling, suchoptions as stone cladding, sculpturalwall systems or water feature walls.More linear versus the traditionalheavier grained wood veneers arebeing specified. The dramatic grain-ing found in sustainable reconstitut-ed veneers are finding their way intothe contemporary setting.

• CONCIERGE desks are scaleddown, becoming more hotel like.Back illuminated panels, stone/wood/slab materials, dramatic accentlighting fixtures are common details.

• ACCESSORIES focus on the‘punch’ accents. Elements such asfireplaces and water features speakto sensory appeal, comfort and zen.Furniture such as breakfronts,armoires add to the investment.Commissioned artwork and sculptureare becoming more common and addto the investment value of the build-ing.

CORRIDOR

Interior design such as elevator lobbies,residential common corridors, suiteentrances, and lighting have taken on anew importance.

• ELEVATOR LOBBY detailing haveincluded special elevator door cas-ing, special finishes to elevator doors.Stone or porcelain tiled floors areoften used in these high trafficked


areas giving a visual separation to therest of the corridors. Framed mirrors,artwork, and furniture (code permit-ting) add to the special feeling andfirst impression when leaving the ele-vator cab.

• WALLCOVERING finishes are insofter palettes, neutrals, earth tones,textured and tone on tone rather thanheavily patterned which add longevi-ty. Today’s vinyl wallcoveringsmimic silks, linens and grassclothsand like carpets are responding to theLEED requirements established bysome condo buildings.

• CORRIDOR CARPETING, tradi-tional or contemporary are patternedand are sometimes mixed with solidaccents and inserts. Nylons and evenwools (budget permitting), looped,sculptured loop or loop tip sheeredcarpets hide traffic patterns and addlongevity.

• SUITE ENTRANCE door detailingsuch as the door and millwork sur-round, door hardware, suite numbers,and lighting are given special impor-tance. Rich wood finishes or shopsprayed millwork, brushed stainlesssteel or polished nickel lever handleswith backplates and locksets, jetlaser-cut out suite numbers, suitelighting wall sconces add visualattention and focus.

• LIGHTING fixtures complementingthe corridor style must meet newlighting code standards for footcan-dle calculations and beADAcompli-ant. �


CondominiumMediationAdvantages and Benefits

BY LAVONNE MCCUMBER Eals, B.A., M.E.S.

Condominium corporations, owners, renters, management and possibly somecontractors have advanced beyond the general population in their under-standing of how mediation can and does work for them. Many of you under-

stand Mediation as a process overseen by an interested neutral third party wherebytwo or more parties in dispute can hear each other out, discuss interests and optionsand potentially come to a mutually agreeable solution. Interests involved can be sub-stantive (having to do with money, resources or control); procedural (the processused to resolve the dispute); and/or psychological (feelings, emotional needs aris-ing from the issue).

MEDIATION BENEFITS:

Given that all involved parties participate in crafting the solution with the Mediator’sguidance, it generally follows that the parties reach a higher understanding of the

situation that led to the conflict, the dec-larations, rules and by-laws affectingthe matter and the personal situationsthat came into action with respect to thefriction. Experienced condo folks knowthis increased understanding of the var-ious components leads to the craftingof an acceptable solution which alsoincreases the likelihood the interperson-al relationships will reestablish in a pos-itive way.

People like things being fixed, tidiedup and finished with. This is a particu-larly significant outcome when dealingwith peoples’ home base, their condo-minium, their safe place to relax.Diminishing negative aftermathencourages people to approach poten-tial conflicts before they fester beyondthe individuals involved and grow tonegatively affect their neighbors aswell.

PRACTICALLY SPEAKING:

Additional benefits from mediationinclude the potential for reaching amutually agreeable solution morequickly than the court solutions withthe tendency to impose a win/ lose solu-tion where one party is simply deemedright and the other wrong. This oftenresults in one party carrying the burdenof the solution which can leave unre-solved feelings of unfairness.

Often disputes have aspects where each


party has valid points worthy of con-sideration. Mediation can assist the dis-puting parties to explore the variouspositions to consider the appropriate-ness of including these considerationsin the settlement. Although mediationopens the opportunity for consideringa broader range of issues it tends to beless costly than the litigation processand extends the range of possible satis-factory resolution.

REGULATED PROCESS:

The Condominium Act, Sec. 132 laysout the provision to submit a disagree-ment between the parties to mediationand/ or arbitration. Members of theADR Institute of Canada Inc. follow aModel Code of Conduct for Mediatorswhich includes commitment to the prin-ciple of self-determination whichmeans the participants together willdetermine the settlement; the Mediatorshall remain impartial and independentthroughout the process and shall iden-tify any conflict of interest arising. The

process is inherently confidential unlessboth/ all parties make a written agree-ment otherwise, or when legal issuessupersede, or there is an actual orpotential threat to human life, requiredMediator’s report, unidentified data forresearch or educational procedures,mediator shall identify any limitationsto confidentiality during individual ses-sions and shall maintain confidentiali-ty regarding storage and disposal of anynotes or files. The mediator is respon-sible to ensure that parties understandthe Mediation process prior to com-mencing and are responsible to ensurea quality process, allowing and encour-aging respectful participation.

CONFLICTS RESOLVED:

Potential conflicts run the gamete fromreserve fund issues: a current definingissue is what falls under repair vs. gen-eral maintenance which raises thefinancial responsibility issue: is itreplacement reserve or owner costs?

Such matters could better be resolved inthe mediation arena since it is unclearby definition and therefore unpre-dictable in the Legal arena, which isresponsible for building deficiencies,contractor, service and warranty issues?

Mediation can facilitate communica-tion between corporation and owners,owner and owner, corporation and man-agement staff, management staff andowners, corporation’s insurance andowner/ renter insurance companies toname significant stakeholders. Manyareas of concern can disturb the condo-minium’s peace. For instance: HumanRights concerns, duty to accommodate,constructive discrimination and occu-pancy standards, financial issues, alter-ations to common elements such assatellite dishes, parking spaces, noiselevels or pet concerns.

Coming to mutual agreement with theneutral, third party facilitator can be aworthwhile saving both in long termcosts and aggravation. �



Tips for ManagingYour Condominiumin Poor EconomicTimesBY SCOTT NEWHOUSE, BA, RCMSHIU PONG MANAGEMENT

Acondominium community isdesigned to last for an infiniteperiod (likely 100+ years).

During the life of these communities,we will inevitably see good and badtimes, over and over again. Our job asproperty managers is to ensure that thecommunity is well managed for the lifeof the community, not just year to year.Here are some tips of managing yourcondominium community throughtough economic times.

We are not Cities – EvenThough it Feels Like it

I have heard from a number of man-agers, and I tend to agree, that manag-ing condominiums is compared tobeing the mayor of a small city.Although this is true in many regards,we must not confuse the reality when it

comes to fiscal responsibilities for thosecommunities we are managing. We arenot small cities, nor are we small gov-ernments, and therefore it is not ourobligation to help pull our economy outof the recession by increasing majorproject spending at our sites.

I have recently heard from one boardmember who said he would like torepave a roadway to help create jobsand take advantage of cheaper labor.After the Board reviewed the roadwaywith an Engineer, it was noted that theroad does not need to be replaced foranother 15 years!

My recommendation is to continue tomanage the major project spending foryour site the same as you have in thepast, as per the reserve fund plan andas your site inspections require.

Keep an Eye on the Arrears

One of the harshest realities of a pooreconomy is the ever-increasing unem-ployment rate. I have personally wit-nessed many of my friends lose theirjobs recently and they are finding thatthe once hot job market no longerexists. Faced with high competition foravailable positions, they are inevitablytaking less pay for the same work theydid in years past, if they are fortunate toeven be offered a position. Even withmodest savings, when a person findsthemselves without the same level ofincome (if any) as they had anticipated,they will find themselves in precariouscash positions at the end of each month.One of the first items people will delayis payment of common expenses.

Although the Condominium Act has



given us the ability to ensure collec-tions for any arrears, we must be waryof the fact that should a higher % ofownerships fall into arrears for 30-60days, this will have an impact on thecash flow.

The best way to combat growingarrears is to ensure prompt lien place-ment. I know this does not sound verycompassionate to those in difficulttimes, however by placing a lien youhave secured the arrears and are now ina position to negotiate with the mort-gage firm for that property. Nine timesout of ten the Bank will pay the arrearsand simply add the arrears onto the out-standing mortgage.

What the Government Budgets

One trend that seems to happen withpoor economic times is that the govern-ment comes out with unusual budgets.The most recent provincial budgetincludes a harmonized sales tax that

basically increases the sales tax from5% to 13%. This means that any prod-uct or service (utilities included) willincrease by 8%. This is something thatwill affect every condominium (exclud-ing commercial) in Ontario.

My recommendation is that we increasethe amount of communication withowners of the community. We need toensure they are aware of any issue thatcan impact their community and theirpocket book.

Be Fair to Your Trades

I have heard many managers recentlyasking trades to reduce their costs to thecondominium for the same services thatthey were providing in years past – dueto hard economic times. I am not infavor of this tactic, as I believe thatmanaging the property is a team effort,between the trades and us. We are onlyas good as the trades that we employ

and if we try to grind down their costs,they will inevitably need to cut servic-es for our sites. This will make thebuilding look less appealing and even-tually impact owners re-sales of theirunits. If you insist on renegotiating withtrades, I recommend either freezing anyincreases or revisiting the servicesoffered.Any reductions/freezes need tobe mutually acceptable by both condo-minium and trade.

Conclusion

The conclusion is that we cannotreverse the economic situation we arein and we cannot help to get us out of it,we can only work within the situationand make adjustments to ensure thecommunity comes out of the poor timesin the best position possible. �


Jane Jacobs famously said:“Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because,and only when, they are created by everybody.”1

Although not as big as a city, thirty-year-old HarbourSide, one of Toronto’s firstwaterfront condominiums, is a full-fledged community with a population of about2,000, making it the size of the village of Grand Bend on Lake Huron.

Our ‘village’ has long held the belief expressed so aptly by Ms Jacobs. We haveencapsulated it in this guiding principle: What our Condominium will be dependson its owners and residents.

The beauty of this principle—which headlines the “President’s Message” in everyissue of our newsletter—is that it encourages both vision and inclusion. It is the keyto our success in “providing something for everybody”.

CONDO OF THE YEAR - fourth quarter finalist

Harbourside, YCC #510

BY MICHELLE RAMSAY-BORG

CCI Toronto is thrilled toannounce that HarbourSquare (HarbourSide) hasbeen announced as the fourthquarter finalist of the newlylaunched Condo of the YearAward. The following articlewas written as part of thecorporation’s submission forentry to the contest. Ourcongratulations are extendedto YCC #510!

Further details on this contestmay be found on page 32 oron the CCI-T website atwww.ccitoronto.org. The 2009annual grand prize winner willbe selected from amongst thefour quarter finalists in theearly fall of 2009 and will beannounced at CCI TorontoAnnual General Meeting inNovember 2009..

Something for Everybody, Created By Everybody!


Introducing HarbourSide

Near the foot of Bay Street; steps fromthe financial and entertainment dis-tricts; and minutes from access totrains, planes, ferries and highways;HarbourSide combines the best ofmany worlds.

Completed in 1979, the 37-storey HarbourSide complexcontains 602 suites that rangefrom efficiency studios topenthouses and terrace homes.

Amenities include the:• comfortable HarbourSideLounge and elegant TiffanyRoom, both wonderful ven-ues for events;

• south-side 7th floor land-scaped terrace with patiofurniture, BBQs and a deckoverlooking the lake;

• quiet north-side garden ter-race;

• billiards room and library-conferenceroom;

• 6O-foot saltwater pool;• fully-equipped gym with changerooms, saunas, a squash court and afitness classroom; and,

• a car wash bay and free visitor park-ing in the garage.

We also appreciate a 24/7 concierge,well-lit enclosed parking—accessible only by people withsecurity fobs—and excellentround-the-clock security serv-ices, including parking garagepatrols.

What We Are andWill Be

‘All-in’ GovernanceClose to 50 residents, includ-ing owners and tenants, con-tribute their time and efforts tothe Board of Directors andseven Board committees,which in total hold 100 ormore meetings a year.

Our Directors have always shared twohighly prized skills: professionalexpertise and governance experience.As a result, their commitment to meet-ing or exceeding all legislated, fiduci-ary and ethical expectations has always

been exemplary.One of the Board's key responsibilitiesis providing direction and oversight toBrookfield Residential Services Ltd.,with whom we share a relationshipcharacterized by trust and respect.The Board also oversees the work ofseven committees, including:

1. Communications: which has

published our award-winning2UPDATE newsletter ten times ayear for 28 years, and sponsorsseveral popular events such as theannual photo contest.

2. Energy: responsible for the recent-ly-completed Phase I EnergyRetrofit which is expected toreduce our natural gas con-sumption by 40%, representingan annual saving of $216,500and a carbon footprint decreaseof 700 tons per year.

3. Finance: whose goalsinclude keeping the annualmaintenance rate below thecost of living and handlingmajor expenses withoutdepleting the reserve fund.

4. Human Resources:whose responsibilitiesinclude matters related toour 35 full- and part-timestaff, and our IS contract-ed security and cleaningstaff.

5. Property: whose projects-such asthe Lounge and Tiffany Room ren-ovation, slated for 2009, are close-ly followed by residents.

6. Security: which is responsible forour recognized leadership in adopt-ing new safety and security tech-

nologies; putting in placeeffective emergency prepared-ness measures; and, settinghigh standards for security andcrime prevention.

7. Waste Management: adhoc sub-committee plan-ning the implementation ofthe ‘Best Practices’ recom-mendations that resultedfrom a site-wide wastemanagement audit con-ducted by SpinnakerRecycling Corp. consult-ants.

The Harbour Square JointCommittee-which includes the

A mandatory annual maintenance inspection of each suite includesverifying the condition of balcony railings and checking for potential

fire hazards.

A comprehensive resident survey resulted in a number of newamenities, including a large deck that overlooks Lake Ontario, and

BBQs and additional furniture on the terrace.

CCI is pleased to announce the condo of the year award, open to all CCI Toronto & Area

Chapter corporate members. The contest will open July 1st, 2008 and will run until June

30th, 2009. Quarterly finalists will be selected by the CCI-Toronto Membership Committee

and the winner of each quarter will be featured an upcoming quarterly issue of the CCI

CondoVoice magazine. The Grand Prize winner will be selected from amongst the four

quarterly finalists by the Public Relations Committee and will be announced in the fall of

2009. The grand prize winner will be announced at the 2009 Annual General Meeting and

will receive a street entry sign for their corporation – a prize worth up to $5,000.

Judging Criteria for this award will include any or all of the following:

• Good Governance

• Social Fabric of the Community

• Energy Initiatives

• Effective Use of Committees

• Communications

Interested applicants should forward their submission, including photos and an articleoutlining why they feel their corporation is worthy of this award to:

CCI Toronto and Area Chapter, 2175 Sheppard Ave. East, Suite #306, Toronto, ON M2J 1W8or email to [email protected]

Do you think your condominium has what it takes to be named as the

CCI Toronto Chapter

Condo of the Year?

• Forward 'Thinkingness'

• Consistency

• Environmental Concerns

• Any other unique approach or program

For further information, please visit the CCI Toronto website at www.ccitoronto.org


president and one director fromeach of three condo corporations:YCC 288 at 33 Harbour Square;YCC 510 at 55/65; and MTCC 949at 77/99-completes our governancestructure.

The Joint Committee meets everyquarter to discuss services andexpenses in common to all threecorporations, including the popu-lar transportation service providedby our fleet of four buses.

A Tradition of Forward Thinkingand Open Communication

The Board's forward thinking ledit to purchase defibrillators. As aresult of that purchase, and the sub-sequent in-house training, two staffmembers recently saved a resi-dent's life, for which they receiveda Toronto Emergency MedicalServices Citizen Award.

Additionally:• The Board reviews its prioritiesregularly, adjusting its spending totake into account urgency, cost,and government requirements.

• Committee Chairs stay informedon upcoming legislation in areassuch as waste management, ener-gy consumption, privacy, etc. toensure that our condo is preparedto make the transition to changedrequirements at a minimum cost.

• The Board continuously encour-ages residents to offer suggestions,many of which have been imple-mented.

• Additionally, the Board holds reg-ular resident update meetings,chaired by the President.

• Day-to-day, we post operationsand special event notices in eleva-tors and high-traffic areas.

• Month-to-month, residents areinformed of the business of the

Many get-togethers, like our Canada Day picnic and kids'Christmas party, are powered by volunteers who set up,cook, serve, cleau up and make sure that Santa drops in.


SUMMA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC.PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT & CONSULTING

“Your condominium deservespersonal attention and service.”

Over 24 years experience!

We provide Professional Condominium PropertyManagement with attention to detail. Your propertyis important to us! Regular on-site visits andinspections, attendance at all meetings. We areavailable to be personally contacted by BoardMembers at almost any time – not just ‘businesshours’.

We provide Superior Service and a commitmentto quality property management no matter whatsize your condominium is!

At Summa we take pride in managing yourproperty!

416.913.7990416.728.2429 (Cell)

[email protected]

When experience and quality counts!

PROVIDINGEXCEPTIONAL SERVICETOTHECONDOMINIUM INDUSTRY FOR OVER 25 YEARS

SPECIALIZING INCOMPLETEPROPERTYMANAGEMENTSERVICES:

Residential High-rise & Townhouse CondominiumsIndustrial & Commercial Condominiums

Hands-On Management Individually Designed andTailored To Meet And Exceed Your Communities Needs

For more information, please contact:Gary Atkin, RCM, ACCI

MatthewAtkin, RCM, CMOC, ARM, CPM orNathan Atkin, B.A., RCM

G.S. Atkin Property Management Specialist Inc.One Shady Lawn Court

Mississauga, Ontario L5N1H224-Hour Emergency Line (905)-567-6820

Direct Line: (416)-258-6011Fax: (905)-567-6930

Website: www.gsa-pm.com Email: [email protected]


• Attend and participate in consulta-tion sessions and meetings hosted byelected officials, the City, TorontoPort Authority, Waterfront Toronto,Commun-ity Air and others; and,

• Turn out for neighbourhood eventssuch as the Giant CommunityFundraising Garage Sale.

As you can see, leading and nurturingour ‘village’ requires commitment andtime and thanks to a large corps of greatvolunteers. We are gifted with both inabundance. Add the dedicated staff-including a few who have celebrated25 years of service with us-and youhave HarbourSide: a vibrant communi-ty worthy of CCI’s Condo of the YearAward.

1 Jacobs, J. The Death and Life of GreatAmerican Cities. Random House, New York,NY, USA, 1962.2 UPDATE won the 2007 CCI Award forMost Outstanding CondominiumNewsletter. �

Board and its committees via reportspublished in our newsletter and, ofcourse, Board Meeting Minutes areavailable for viewing at any time.

Something for Everybody

HarbourSide Community

No week goes by at HarbourSide with-out several opportunities for interactionand sharing in a social setting:

• Our Communications Committeestages special events throughout theyear including the Annual PhotoContest.

• The 7th Floor Lounge Steward plansfrequent social get-togethers and par-ties.

• Volunteers organize our Annual Artsand Craft Show.

• Dozens of residents and owners,ranging in age from teens to seniorsand singles and couples alike, initi-ate, lead or help out with clubs, class-es, hobby groups, parties, fundrais-ers and outings.

• A succession of devoted volunteerlibrarians have, over the past threedecades, built and maintained ourlibrary of thousands of books – all ofwhich were donated by residents.

• Volunteers organize affordable bustrips to the Orillia and Niagara Fallscasinos.

• A group of our volunteers, nick-named the ‘HarbourSide Grannies’,supports the global organization,Grannies in Lesotho.

• Residents have our pick of severalfree fitness classes sponsored by ourCondo Corporation.

Waterfront Community

HarbourSide has long been a hatchingground for community-builders.A largegroup of our residents is very active inorganizations along the CentralWaterfront, notably the York QuayNeighbourhood Association and theQueens Quay Harbourfront BIA(Business ImprovementArea). One res-ident, Ulla Colgrass—who was thefounding Chair of the YQNA—wasrecognized by the Toronto Star for hercommunity service.

HarbourSide residents are amongst the water-front's most dependable supporters of eventssuch as the Mayor's 20-Minute Clean-Up.

YCC 510 residents make up a large contingent ofvolunteers who have worked tirelessly to builda community along the Central Waterfront

over the past three decades.

DONNASWANSONACCI, FRIReal EstateBrokerage

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

• Real Estate Broker of Record - speci al i zi ng in CondominiumSal es since 1982

• Current condominiumOwner, 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 current

Directo r of Toronto Chapter of REICEmail: [email protected]

Among their results are improvementsof parks and monuments, removal ofillegal posters, recognition of historyand landmarks, and plans for new parksand connections to the city.

In addition, HarbourSide residents:• Support Harbourfront Centre and theHarbourfront Community Centre;



Second-hand SmokeHow Many Laws can Dance on theHead of a Cigarette?

BY BRIAN HORLICKHORLICK LEVITT BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS

Smoking, and the dangers posedby exposure to second-handsmoke, is a very contentious

issue in modern society. This issue iscontentious, in part, because smokingis not only a matter of personal choicebut also a matter of public health andwell-being. It is a social issue fraughtwith legal implications, and, in thisregard, it is instructive to examine thelegal treatment of smoking and of sec-ond-hand smoke.

Legislative Treatment

An argument often made by smokersor advocates of smokers’ rights is thatsmokers have a right to smoke if theychoose to do so. While this is true inthe abstract, it is also subject to ever-increasing limitations. Thanks to avariety of federal, provincial andmunicipal laws and by-laws, smokingis now prohibited in most public places,most workplaces and office buildings,and motor vehicles in which childrenunder 16 are riding, to name a few. Onesuch law is the Smoke Free OntarioAct, which prohibits smoking in any

enclosed public place. “Enclosed pub-lic place” is defined as the inside of anybuilding, structure or vehicle that iscovered by a roof, and to which thepublic is ordinarily invited or permit-ted access. The Ontario Government,in a bulletin which accompanied theSmoke Free Ontario Act, specificallystated that smoking is now prohibited inelevators, stairwells, hallways, parkinggarages, laundry facilities, lobbies,exercise areas and party or entertain-ment rooms, among other commonareas of condominium corporations. Assuch, in addition to any provision in thedeclaration, by-laws or rules which mayprohibit smoking on certain commonelements, Ontario provincial law alsoprohibits smoking in these places.

The Law of Nuisance

But what of those people who wish tosmoke in their own units, and not in thecorridors or lobby? A fundamentalprinciple of property ownership inCanadian law is that owners of realproperty are entitled to the quiet enjoy-ment of their property. As such, any

person who is held to be responsible foran act indirectly causing physical injuryto property or substantially interferingwith the use or enjoyment of property,where this injury or interference is heldto be unreasonable, is liable for a claimin the tort or civil wrong of nuisance.This claim can arise whether the inter-ference takes the form of excessivenoise, offensive odours, drifting smoke,or any other form, and can arise even ifthe interference emanates from anotherproperty owner’s activity on his ownproperty, if the interference that suchactivity causes is unreasonable. It is acliché, but true nonetheless, that a per-son’s right to swing his fist ends at hisneighbour’s nose.

Cartwright v. Gray, an 1866 UpperCanada (later Ontario) Court ofChancery case, dealt with a claim innuisance for drifting smoke.

The plaintiff, Richard Cartwright, hadsold a part of his land near his residenceto Mr. Gray, who subsequently set up acarpenter’s shop on that land. As partof the operation of the carpenter’s shop,


Mr. Gray burned the wood shavingsand other refuse of his business, and theprevailing winds tended to carry thesmoke toward Mr. Cartwright’s house.Mr. Cartwright and his family foundthat the smoke was sufficiently thick soas to interfere with their use and enjoy-ment of their land, and independentwitness accounts at trial supported this.The court in that case held that Mr.Gray was entitled to operate his shopon his land, but not in a way that inter-fered with Mr. Cartwright’s reasonableenjoyment, stating that “Aman may notuse his own property so as to injure hisneighbour.

When he sends on the property of hisneighbour noxious smells, smokes, etc.,then he is not doing an act on his ownproperty only, but he is doing an act onhis neighbour’s property also...”.

This issue of drifting smoke that was

addressed by the court in this case, bynecessity, factors significantly in manydiscussions regarding second-handsmoke. How does a smoker’s right todo as he chooses balance with hisneighbours’ rights to not be subjected tohis second-hand smoke?

Smoking in Condominiums andApartments

The court has had reason, on one occa-sion at least, to consider the issue ofsmoking in a condominium context.Raith v. Coles, a 1984 British Columbiacase, concerned owners of two abuttingcondominium units. John and GloriaRaith, an elderly couple, owned a con-dominium unit that was above anotherunit owned by George and Lydia Coles.Mr. Coles (and possibly Mrs. Coles,although neither the applicants nor thecourt were sure of this) was a cigar-


smoker who frequently smoked in hisunit. The cigar smoke drifted upwardand into the Raiths’ unit, despite theRaiths’ efforts to prevent it from doingso. These efforts included installingfans and keeping their doors and win-dows closed. Unfortunately, the Raithswere unable to stop the cigar smokefrom drifting into their unit.

As a result of the constant infiltration ofsmoke, Mr. and Mrs. Raith stated thatthey both had suffered emotional strainand health problems. They finally feltthat they had no option but to bring acourt application for an injunction pre-venting Mr. Coles from smoking in hisunit.

The very idea of such an action mayseem far-fetched at first blush, and thecourt acknowledged as much, statingthat one might initially wonder“whether such an application was bor-dering on the frivolous...”. However,the court treated the matter seriously,and thoroughly examined the evidencethat Mr. and Mrs. Raith brought beforeit. The court found that the Raiths haddone everything that they reasonablycould have done to prevent the smokefrom entering their unit, but that theirattempts had not been successful. Ofgreat importance, the court found, wasthe fact that Mr. and Mrs. Raith’s com-plaint was based on health problemsthat both had suffered as a result of thecigar smoke, and not merely on “a sim-ple dislike of the smell”.

In the end, the court granted the injunc-tion, with County Court Judge Selbiestating that he “consider[ed] it to beunreasonable if a person, knowing thatthe smell is deleterious to others, per-sists, unless, of course, it can be shownthat he has no control over its presence.There is no such suggestion here.” Thejudge went on to say that “There aremany things a person may not do in hishouse or castle – in the case of theserespondents, one of these things now isthat he may not allow there to be emit-ted or discharged a noxious substance,in this case, cigar smoke and odour,from his premises...”.

Second-hand smoke in a rental housingsetting has also been considered, atleast at the Ontario Rental HousingTribunal. In Feaver v. Davidson, a2003 tribunal case, Aimee Feaverapplied for an order terminating the ten-ancy of Kenneth Davidson because hehad substantially interfered with herreasonable enjoyment of her living

premises. Ms. Feaver lived on the mainfloor of a house and rented the base-ment to Mr. Davidson. The house hadpreviously been owned by Mr.Davidson’s parents, who sold it to Ms.Feaver and her husband, and Mr.Davidson continued to live in the base-ment after the sale.


Ms. Feaver and her husband knew atthe time that they purchased the housethat Mr. Davidson smoked in the base-ment, but did not object as they hadpurchased the house as an investmentand did not plan to live there them-selves. However, Ms. Feaver and herhusband subsequently separated, andshe moved into the house and lived onthe main floor.

From the beginning of her residence inthe house, Ms. Feaver could smell Mr.Davidson’s smoke, and she took a vari-ety of measures in an effort to reduce oreliminate the smell. Mr. Davidson wasentirely cooperative with these meas-ures, except that he refused Ms.Feaver’s requests that he stop smokingin his unit. Unfortunately for Ms.Feaver, the lease between she and Mr.Davidson was silent on the issue ofsmoking. Ms. Feaver eventuallybrought this application.

The Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal

found that the tenant had a prima facieright to smoke in his unit, but that hisright to smoke had to be balancedagainst the landlord’s reasonable enjoy-ment of her home.

Accordingly, the tribunal declined togrant an order terminating the tenancy,but did order the tenant to stop smokingin his unit and stated that the landlordwould be able to apply for an order ter-minating the tenancy if the tenant didnot comply.

Smokers’ Rights

Smokers are subject to a variety ofrestrictions on where they may smoke,as set out above. One argument thathas been raised from time to time is thatcertain of these restrictions on smokingviolate the equality rights of smokers.The Canadian Charter of Rights andFreedoms guarantees certain funda-mental rights of Canadians. Section

15(1) of the Charter states that “Everyindividual is equal before and under thelaw and has the right to the equal pro-tection and equal benefit of the lawwithout discrimination and, in particu-lar, without discrimination based onrace, national or ethnic origin, colour,religion, sex, age or mental or physicaldisability.”

The equality rights violation argumentstates that smokers smoke because theyare addicted to nicotine, and that nico-tine addiction should be considered tobe a physical disability. As such,according to this equality rights viola-tion argument, prohibitions on smok-ing discriminate against smokers basedon their disability, and in so doing vio-late the Charter.

This argument was advanced inMcNeill v. Ontario (Ministry ofSolicitor General & CorrectionalServices), a 1998 decision. In that case,Peter McNeill was a prison inmate


who, the court noted, made “frequentattendances at theWellington DetentionCentre.” Mr. McNeill brought thisapplication in response to a smokingban imposed by the prison. The prisonimposed the ban in accordance with aCity of Guelph by-law which prohibit-ed smoking in public places, and inorder to protect the health of inmatesand staff. Mr. McNeill felt that this banwas discriminatory; he claimed thatnicotine addiction was a disabilityincluded under s. 15 of theCharter and,as such, the prison was violating hisCharter rights.

In response to this claim, the court stat-ed that “Nicotine addiction and thesymptoms of withdrawal that resultwhen one discontinues smoking are nota mental or physical disability withinthe meaning of s.15(1) of the Charter.”It further stated that smokers make up“a significant segment of society whohave not been discriminated againsthistorically based on their addiction.”Accordingly, Mr. McNeill’s applicationwas dismissed.

The Condominium Act

Given that the body of case law (suchas it is) seems to weigh in favour of therights of non-smokers, one might ask

how a condominium corporation thatwishes to do so might prohibit smok-ing in its units. The answer seems rela-tively simple: by amending the corpo-ration’s declaration or by passing a rule.

Section 58 of the Act states that a boardof directors may make rules respect-ing the use of the common elementsand of units to promote the safety, secu-rity or welfare of the owners and of theproperty and assets of the corporation,or to prevent unreasonable interferencewith the use and enjoyment of the units.These rules must be reasonable andconsistent with the Act as well as thecorporation’s declaration and by-laws.

There is nothing in the Actwith respectto smoking, and it is not typically a sub-ject that is addressed in a declaration orin by-laws. As well, a board that wish-es to make or alter any rules can onlydo so after giving notice to the ownersand giving those owners an opportuni-ty, if requested, to approve those rulesat a meeting of the owners. As such,the passage of a no-smoking rule in anexisting condominium may requiremajority support of the owners.

Although a non-smoking provision isnot typically found within a condomini-um corporation’s declaration, one cer-tainly could be inserted. If the condo-

minium wished to amend its declara-tion, it would require the support, inwriting, of the owners of 80% of theunits in order to do so.

The Future?

What of new condominiums? Section7 of the Act states that a condominiumdeclaration may contain conditions orrestrictions with respect to the use ofthe units. As such, a declarant whowished to develop and market a smoke-free condominium corporation could doso by including a blanket no smokingrule in the declaration.

Such an idea has already gained trac-tion in British Columbia, where, in2006, a condominium developmentcalled Envy was announced asCanada’s first entirely smoke-free con-dominium, where no person would beallowed to smoke anywhere on condo-minium property. Given the populari-ty of this development — in October2006, half of the units in Envy hadalready pre-sold for February 2008occupancy— it seems likely that it willnot be the last to butt out. �


Duty to AccommodateBY WARREN D. KLEINER

Everyone in Ontario has the rightto be free from discriminationbecause of handicap or perceived

handicap in the areas of employment,services, goods, facilities, housing, con-tracts and memberships in trade andvocational associations. This is provid-ed for under the OntarioHuman RightsCode (the “Code”).

This article discusses issues involvingdisabilities and a condominium corpo-ration’s obligation to accommodatesuch disabilities.

Condominiums need to be primarilyconcerned with discrimination becauseof handicap or perceived handicap inthe area of housing. Persons with dis-abilities have the right to equal treat-ment. This right includes the right toaccessible housing.

The Code defines “handicap” inSection 10(1). It includes any degree ofphysical disability, infirmity, malfor-mation or disfigurement that is causedby bodily injury, birth defect or illness.It includes diabetes, epilepsy, anydegree of paralysis, amputation, lack ofphysical coordination, blindness orvisual impediment, deafness or hearingimpediment, muteness or speechimpediment, or physical reliance on aguide dog or on a wheelchair or otherremedial appliance or device. It also

includes a condition of mental retarda-tion or impairment, a learning disabili-ty or a function in one or more of theprocesses involved in the understand-ing or using symbols or spoken lan-guage, a mental disorder, or an injury ordisability for which benefits wereclaimed or received under an insuranceplan established under the WorkplaceSafety & Insurance Act, 1997.Disability includes both present andpast conditions, and includes a subjec-tive component, specifically, one basedon perception of disability.

Inaccessible buildings and non-inclu-sive housing designs are one of theobstacles often encountered by personswith disabilities and the Code requiresthat there is a duty to accommodate per-sons with disabilities.

Accommodations can take many forms,including but not limited to, physical

modifications, visual fire alarms anddoorbells for the hearing impaired,automatic door openers and closures,lower counters, etc. In some circum-stances it can require waiving or chang-ing a rule that is otherwise applicable tothe residents in a condominium. Thismay require, for example, the waivingof a rule prohibiting dogs in a buildingto allow for guide dogs.

Boards of directors are increasingly fac-ing the question of how to respond torequests from disabled residents tomake common areas and facilitiesaccessible at the corporation’s cost.

It is clear that condominium corpora-tions have a duty to take steps toaccommodate people with disabilities.A condominium corporation cannotavoid taking reasonable steps to makethe property accessible to people withdisabilities on the basis of cost, unless


the cost would result in undue hardshipto the corporation and the owners.

Three considerations are prescribed inthe Code to assess whether an accom-modation would cause undue hardship.These considerations are:1. cost;2. outside sources of funding, if

any; and3. health and safety requirements,

if any.

No other considerations, other thanthose that can be brought into the threestandards set out above can be proper-ly considered under Ontario Law. For abusiness, it would normally have to beshown that the costs of accommodationwould risk putting the corporation intobankruptcy. Although a condominiumcorporation is not a business, it is pos-sible that a similar threshold would beapplied to a condominium corporationwith respect to its obligation to accom-modate in determining whether anaccommodation amounts to unduehardship.

Undue hardship is a high standard. Theguidelines under the Ontario HumanRights Code contemplate that the unduehardship standard is necessary to ensureequality. In this sense it is reasonable,and accommodation to the point ofundue hardship is therefore considered

to be reasonable accommodation.Individual accommodation has alsogrown in significance as a central prin-cipal of human rights law.

Once a prima-facie case of discrimina-tion is found to exist, the legal burdenshifts to the person responsible foraccommodation to show the discrimi-nation is justifiable. A prima facie caseis found to exist if, on first appearance,the evidence leads to the conclusionthat there was discrimination. Thismeans that the burden shifts to the con-dominium corporation if a case of dis-crimination is found to exist on its face.Therefore, if there is a prima-facie caseof discrimination, based on a complaintfrom a resident in a condominium, thelegal burden will shift to the condo-minium corporation to show that dis-crimination is justifiable.

Often it is clear whether discriminationhas occurred. In others, an assessmentmust be undertaken. Three broadinquiries to be undertaken have beensuggested by the Supreme Court ofCanada in Law v. Canada (Minister ofEmployment and Immigration), [1999]1 S.C.R. 497. The inquiries are basedon:

1. differential treatment;2. an enumerated ground under the

Code; and

3. discrimination in a substantivesense.

The questions to ask include:

1. Was there substantively differentialtreatment either because of a dis-tinction, exclusion or preference, orbecause of a failure to take intoaccount the complainant’s alreadydisadvantaged position withinCanadian society?

2. Was the differential treatment basedon an enumerated ground?

3. Does the different treatment dis-criminate by imposing a burdenupon, or withholding a benefit froman individual? and

4. Does the differential treatmentamount to discrimination becauseit makes distinctions that are offen-sive to human dignity?

Section 17 of the Code creates an obli-gation to accommodate individualsspecifically under the ground of disabil-ity. The defence of undue hardship isonly available if it can be shown thatthe needs of the person cannot beaccommodated without undue hard-ship.With respect to disability, it shouldbe noted that section 17 recognizes thatdiscrimination against persons with dis-


abilities is not always grounded in neg-ative stereo-types. It can be based on afailure to accommodate actual differ-ences. Various sections of the Codeoperate to prohibit discrimination thatresults from requirements, qualifica-tions or factors that may appear neutralbut would have an adverse effect onpersons with disabilities. Section 17also emphasizes the need for individu-alized accommodation because theground of disability can mean differentthings depending on the individual andthe context.

The practical result is that in most casesof discrimination on the grounds of dis-ability, individualized accommodationwill be necessary.

This means that although a corporationmay take steps to make a property gen-erally accessible to comply with arequest of a specific individual, addi-tional accommodation that is particu-larized for a specific individual may benecessary in the event of a request,notwithstanding the steps taken previ-ously to make the property more acces-sible.

In most cases, our advice to clients is totake the necessary reasonable steps tocomply with the request of the disabledresident to make the property accessible.

A board of directors could be facedwith many different choices to accom-modate an individual. Some of thosechoices may provide full, better, ormore appropriate accommodation,however, often that course of action ismore costly. The duty to accommodaterequires however that the most appro-priate accommodation be determinedand then undertaken. This obligationagain is subject to the defence of unduehardship. Meeting the needs andrespecting the dignity of the individualand promoting the best integration andfull participation while ensuring confi-dentiality are factors to be taken intoaccount when determining the mostappropriate accommodation.

As our population ages, boards of direc-tors will increasingly face these types of

requests from residents. There is rarelyany advantage to be gained by attempt-ing to avoid making the property acces-sible. As well, this avoidance mayresult in the corporation having todefend its actions at the Human RightsTribunal.

Every condominium corporationshould be taking accessibility intoaccount when carrying out any renova-tion or refurbishment of the property.For example, the installation of rampsand/or elevators or other lifts, should

be considered when renovating a lobby,recreation facility, or any common area.The costs to a corporation are inherent-ly greater when steps have to be takento retrofit an area pursuant to a specif-ic request for accommodation asopposed to having to take proactivesteps as part of a major renovation orrefurbishment. It is also important toconsider that expending funds to makea property accessible can increase themarket value of the units.

In our view, boards should be proactiveon the issue of accessibility both as acost saving measure and as a marketpositioning strategy.

Taking into account accessibility whencarrying out renovations and refurbish-ments of common areas in the condo-minium corporation is rarely consid-ered unless an individual has raised theissue. When corporation’s carry outreserve fund studies, we have foundthat various expenditures are not takeninto consideration. These costs includedesign costs, project management costs,as well as added costs associated withensuring that the renovation or refur-bishment is done in such a way as toprovide accessibility to those withdisabilities. Many corporations try to

Every condominium

corporation should

be taking accessibility into

account when carrying

out any renovation or

refurbishment of the

property.


“Quotable Quote”

The issue related to a special assessment for majorrepairs to an aging building:

“A special assessment for major repairs to anaging building is a little like a slow moving freighttrain travelling across the Prairies, you can see itcoming from miles and miles away, but are usuallyasleep and suitably surprised by the time itarrives.”

Joe Ryan, BA, LL.B.Fine & Deo LLP


avoid incurring costs to make commonareas accessible. This would not be anissue if the costs were incorporated intothe initial estimates calculated by thereserve fund study engineers and incor-porated into the reserve fund study andplan for the future funding of thereserve fund. Not taking these mattersinto account at the time that the reservefund study is being undertaken, is inour view, a mistake.

Boards often try to balance the addedcost of making a part of the propertyfully accessible against the fact that thevast majority of unit owners and/or res-idents will not benefit from those coststhat are to be incurred. The humanrights regime in Ontario, however, doesnot allow a board to choose not to makean area accessible on this basis. Theonly basis to refuse the request of a dis-abled individual is on the basis ofundue hardship, which unfortunately isa very high standard to meet. Althoughboards of directors have a fiduciaryobligation to the unit owners, and aresponsibility to always act in the best

interests of the unit owners, the boardalso has an obligation to comply withOntario Human Rights Legislation. Itis not in the best interests of unit own-ers to try and save money by avoidingmaking a property accessible. Doing so

can result in the corporation beingrequired, by order of the Human RightsTribunal, to nevertheless incur the costin the future and face the possibility ofbeing responsible for the corporation’sand residents’ legal costs.

In summary condominium corporationshave a duty to accommodate individu-als with disabilities. Condominium cor-porations must deal effectively, quick-ly and fairly with claims of discrimina-tion. Corporations should considerdeveloping anti-discrimination policiesand procedures to resolve complaints.Dealing promptly with issues of dis-crimination save time and money. Thebest defence against a human rightscomplaint is to be fully informed andaware of the responsibilities and pro-tections under the Code. This can beachieved by condominiums developingdisability accommodation policies andprocedures and by conducting an acces-sibility review of the corporation’sproperty. �

Boards often try tobalance the added costof making a part of theproperty fully accessibleagainst the fact that thevast majority of unit

owners and/or residentswill not benefit fromthose costs that are to

be incurred.


Obligations & Liabilitiesof a Condominium Corporationand its Board of DirectorsBY MICHAEL H. CLIFTON, MA, LLB, ACCICLIFTONKOK LEGAL COUNSEL

The duties and obligations of con-dominium corporations and theirboards of directors are real and

serious legal obligations. Unit ownerselecting, or seeking to be elected to, aboard of directors, may benefit from anunderstanding of those basic duties andobligations. Recently, we were askedto prepare a brief outline of the samefor the general information of unit own-ers of one of our clients at the time ofelection of directors. This memoran-dum is adapted from that document.

This memorandum is not an extensiveanalysis of condominium or board obli-gations or the relevant provisions of theCondominiumAct, 1998. It sets out thebasics that every director and unitowner should understand about theessential duties and liabilities that hangover every condominium corporation.For detailed analysis of particular casesor concerns, the reader should consultlegal counsel directly.

Condominium Corporations

Condominium corporations are legalentities that are ‘creatures of statute’.Assuch, they have only those legal objects,rights, duties and powers that are grant-ed to them by their governing statute,which, for condominiums in Ontario, isthe Condominium Act, 1998.1

The condominium corporation (as wellas every director and unit owner andresident) is required to comply with theAct, and the declaration, by-laws andrules of the corporation (s. 119(1)).

The condominium corporation has astatutory duty to “control, manage andadminister the common elements andassets of the corporation” (s. 17(2)). Inconjunction with this, the condominiumcorporation is required to repair all reg-ular common elements of the corpora-tion after damage (s. 89(1)). In addition,subject to the provisions of the declara-tion of the condominium, the condo-minium corporation is responsible formaintenance and repair of the commonelements and repair after damage of theunits (s. 89(1), 90(1) and 91).2

The corporation cannot neglect its dutyto care for the property of the condo-minium without being in breach of itsgoverning law.

Condominium Boards ofDirectors

GeneralThe powers, duties and functions of theboard of directors (“board”) of a condo-minium corporation are also set out inand governed by the Condominium Act,1998.

The board of directors is to manage theaffairs of the corporation (s. 27(1)).Accordingly, the duties of the board areto the corporation as a whole and notto the individual unit owners. The boardmust ensure that the corporation carriesout its duties in accordance with itsobjects that are defined by the Act.The majority of work performed by theboard of directors is to be done with-out necessity of seeking direction fromor approval by the unit owners.3

This does not mean that the board is notultimately accountable to the unit own-ers (they always have the power ofremove and replace the directors, andthat statutory right to demand that theboard comply with the CondominiumAct, 1998, and other governing docu-ments, by court order if necessary), butit does mean that the board is expectedto carry out its obligations in an inde-pendent and authoritative manner inaccordance with applicable law defin-ing the scope and purposes of the same.The board is ultimately responsible forits decisions and should neither fetternor derogate from its responsibility.Likewise, while in the best condomini-ums unit owners take active interest inthe goings-on and operation of the cor-poration, they should not seek to micro-manage or assume or undermine theauthority of the board that is seeking to


carry out its duties in accordance withapplicable law.

All business of the corporation is to beconducted through board meetings atwhich a quorum of the board is present(s. 32(1)).

Standard of Care

A corporate director is a “fiduciary”.Fiduciary obligations import require-ments to loyal and honest fulfillment ofduties and compliance with relevant law.

Pursuant to the Act, each director of acondominium corporation in Ontariomust carry out his or her duties inaccordance with the statutory standardof care (in addition to applicable prin-ciples of common law); namely, to (s.37(3)):(a) act honestly and in good faith;

and(b) exercise the care, diligence and

skill that a reasonably prudentperson would exercise in compa-

rable circumstances. Consciousfailure to take reasonable stepsto ensure the corporation carriesout its objects and performs itsduties in accordance with theAct, would violate such standardof care.

Conflict of Interest

In addition to the foregoing comments,acting in “good faith” means that theintentions, as well as the actions, ofboard members must be focused on thegood of the corporation as a whole andnot, for example, on such director’s oranother unit owner’s personal issues orinterests. In conjunction with this, adirector must disclose any materialdirect or indirect interest he or she hasin an actual or proposed contract ortransaction of the corporation (s. 40(1)).Subject to limited exceptions, the direc-tor having such conflict of interest shallnot take part in discussions about norvote in respect of the contract or trans-action, and the director shall not be

counted toward quorum in the meetingat which it is discussed (s. 40(6)).

Where a director complies with theserequirements and acted in good faith inrespect of the contract or transaction inquestion, the director will not beresponsible to report the amount of hisor her profit or gain from the contract ortransaction, and the contract or trans-action is not voidable solely because ofthe conflict of interest (s. 40(7)). Also,in certain circumstances, even if adirector has not fully complied with thedisclosure requirements of the Act, theunit owners may approve a contract ortransaction in respect of which a direc-tor has a conflict of interest (s. 40(8)).

Treatment of Corporation Funds

Unit owners are obligated to pay com-mon expenses, including contributionsto the reserve funds of the corporation(s 84(1) and 84(3)).

Whoever receives money paid to the


corporation as contributions to the com-mon expenses, including reserve fundcontributions, is trustee of the same andmust keep and use such funds strictlyfor the performance by the corporationof its duties and obligations (s. 115(1)).Improper handling of corporation fundscan result in fines to the perpetrators ofup to $100,000 for corporations (i.e.,property management companies) andup to $25,000 for individuals (i.e.,directors) (s. 137(1)).

Use of corporation funds for improperpurposes is a violation of the Act.Similarly, the failure to use corporationfunds for proper and necessary purpos-es (i.e., for performance of the dutiesof the corporation) would also violatethe Act, in so far as the same wouldlikely involve neglect of the corpora-tion’s obligations.

Each condominium corporation musthave at least two bank accounts in itsown name: a general account for oper-ating expenses and a reserve fund(s. 115(2)). The operating funds andreserve funds of the corporation mustnot be co-mingled (s. 115(4)).

Operating funds are used to fulfill thegeneral obligations of the corporation,including regular maintenance costs.The reserve funds of the corporationmust be used only for the “major repairand replacement” of the common ele-ments and assets of the corporation(s. 93(2) and s. 95(1)).

The board does not require the consentof the unit owners to make expendituresout of the reserve fund of the corpora-tion (s. 95(2)).4

The board would require approval fromthe owners, in the form of a condomini-um by-law, for any borrowing. Thisshould include a standing by-law thatauthorizes general borrowing for bud-geted expenses (s. 56(1)(d)) and sepa-rate by-laws authorizing any specificborrowing that is over and above theexpenditures listed in the condomini-um’s budget (s. 58(3)).

There are many other provisions of theAct that detail obligations of the board

relating to finances and financial report-ing for the corporation. It may be notedthere is no specific obligation in theActto prepare annual budgets for the corpo-ration, but there are many provisions(such as the aforementioned relating toborrowing by-laws) that do not makesense, or cannot be properly compliedwith, unless the board prepares anannual budget.

Record Keeping and Confidentiality

There are numerous records of the cor-poration that the board is required toensure the corporation maintains (s. 55and others). In addition, the board isoften privy to confidential informationof the unit owners and residents and theemployees of the corporation.

The corporation is subject of thePersonal Information Protection andElectronic Documents Act as well asother privacy laws. In addition to com-plying with other requirements of suchlegislation, the board must thereforeensure that all personal information col-lected is stored and treated with signif-icant care and the board must not dis-close anything without careful consid-eration of what is being disclosed, towhom and for what purposes.

Notwithstanding this, in certain circum-stances most (but not all) of the recordsof the corporation are to be accessibleto unit owners for examination (s.55(3)). However, the Act requires thatsuch examination must be for purposes“reasonably related” to the purposes ofthe Condominium Act, 1998.

Pursuant to section 55(4), unit ownersare not entitled to examine any of thefollowing records:(a) records relating to employees of

the corporation (other thanemployment contracts);

(b) records relating to actual or pend-ing litigation or insurance inves-tigations involving the corpora-tion; or

(c) records relating to specific unitsand owners (except where therequesting party has a permittedinterest in such unit under section55(5)).


Furthermore, where the corporation hasspecifically entered into a confidential-ity agreement with any party, suchagreement should not be breached bydisclosure to a unit owner without cer-tainty from legal counsel as to the pos-sible consequences of such disclosure.Aboard granting access to records con-trary to the provisions of theAct wouldbe in breach of its statutory obligationsas well as general legal obligationsrelating to privacy and confidentiality.

Liability and Indemnification

Subject to the Condominium Act, 1998and the by-laws of the condominiumcorporation, the board is personallyliable for its management of the affairsof the corporation. Failure to complywith the Act, governing documents ofthe corporation and other applicablelaw,5 could result in significant liabili-ties for the condominium corporationand/or individual directors.

However, pursuant to section 37(3) ofthe Act, a director shall not be foundliable for a breach of his or her duties,if relying in good faith upon:(a) the financial statements of the

corporation’s auditor (or certainother persons), or

(b) “the report or opinion of alawyer, public accountant, engi-neer, appraiser or other personwhose profession lends credibil-ity to the report or opinion”.

In addition, the corporation mustpurchase and maintain directors andofficers liability insurance if it isreasonably available (s. 39).

Further, the by-laws of a condominiumcorporation may provide for the indem-nification of a director for liabilitiesarising as a result of carrying out theduties of the board or corporation (s.38(1)); however, note that pursuant tosection 38(2):

No director or officer of a corpora-tion shall be indemnified by the cor-poration in respect of any liability,costs, charges or expenses that theperson sustains or incurs in or aboutan action, suit or other proceeding

as a result of which the person isadjudged to be in breach of the dutyto act honestly and in good faith.

1 All statutory references in this memoran-dum are to the Condominium Act, 1998unless otherwise indicated. All referencesto “the Act” mean the Condominium Act,1998.2 The declaration of the corporation mayalter these obligations. The obligation torepair the common elements after damage,however, cannot be changed.3 This is the point most commonly misun-derstood by unit owners and which oftenleads to acrimonious arguments in annualgeneral meetings. Often unit owners wantmore information and more involvementthan is appropriate or required by law.Their demands are often accompanied byunwarranted suspicious and aspersions asto the intentions and ambitions of the board.The obvious solution for such unit owners issimple: stand for election to the board your-selves; be volunteers and helpers, ratherthan thorns in the sides of board memberswho, typically, are already giving far moretime, energy and concern to the welfare of

the condominium than the measure of grat-itude or support they receive from its own-ers and residents.4 The use of the reserve fund without unitowner approval is consistent with theexpress duty of the condominium corpora-tion for “repair after damage” of the com-mon elements and assets of the corporation(s. 89(1)). In short, the board has no option,pursuant to its statutory obligations andthose of the condominium corporation, tocarry out the repairs for which the reservefund is kept, and therefore does not requirefurther approval for the use of such fund.This is another sometimes “sticky” pointfor many unit owners. The reserve fund isobviously an important component of theirinvestment in the property, and many own-ers like to be certain about its use. Whilethere is nothing wrong with this intention, itis nevertheless not a requirement for theboard to get unit owner approval for appro-priate expenditures from the reserve fund,nor can unit owners’ express approval jus-tify any improper use of such funds.5 Which includes diligently fulfilling thesometimes uncomfortable duty of requiringthe same compliance by unit owners andresidents of the condominium. �

• 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 Toll-free(905) 832-6614 (877) 253-364849 Elm Street, Suite 201, Toronto, Ontario www.whiterosejanitorial.com


Member News

CCI Toronto Welcomes Its 1000th Member!BY JULIAN MCNABB,SIMERRA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

The Canadian CondominiumInstitute was formed in 1982 asan independent, non-profit

organization to encourage and promotea strong condominium marketplace inCanada. The CCI Toronto Chapter isthe largest of the fifteen CCI Chapters,representing over 100,000 condomini-um units within the GTA. CCI mem-bers consist mostly of condominiumcorporations but also include individ-ual unit owner, trades and profession-als.

Since the inception of the CCI TorontoChapter in 1989, the number of mem-bers has grown to over 1000. In recog-nition of this CCI Toronto chapterachievement, I thought I would relay

some experiences from the 1000thmember, a relatively new corporationin Toronto.

Encore Condos at the Met, TSCC 1979,is located in the heart of downtownToronto at 25 Carlton Street. It is aunique building in that it houses bothhigh-rise condominium units as well astwo types of townhouses which aremade up of multi-story condominiumunits and Granby Street Maisonettesthat include a Granby Street address,all in one complex. Residents of Encoreare made up of young professionalswho take advantage of the location andit’s proximity to downtown Toronto,and students who attend both Ryersonand Toronto Universities. Located ahalf a block from Yonge and CarltonStreets, and a ‘stone’s throw’ fromCollege subway station, make Encore avery desirable location in which to live.

Like any new condominium in Torontothat has recently been registered andturned over to the owners to form anelected Board of Directors, Encore hasfaced its fair share of learning curves.The three Directors that were electedwere essentially thrown into the deep-end and quickly realized that they hada lot of questions, as most newDirectors do.

Upon recommendation from PropertyManagement, it was suggested the newDirectors enroll in upcoming CCIToronto Chapter educational courses.

Robert Iseman, President TSCC 1979says, “Being elected to the Board of

Directors by my condominium commu-nity was quite an honour and I certain-ly hope to perform to the best of myability. As a new Director, I knew thatthe learning curve would be steep andthat I had to accelerate from zero to 100in nothing flat.”

“The recommendation from ourProperty Manager was to enroll in theCCI Condo Level 200 course, whichlasted 5 weeks, and, incidentally, start-ed only 2 days after I was elected. Nothaving much time to research thecourse, I wasn’t sure exactly what toexpect, but after the first class, I was onfire with excitement.”

“For the most part, the classroom con-tained other Directors (to my relief bothnovice and experienced) with a few realestate professionals and property man-agers in the mix. The informationshared was up-to-date and the instruc-tors provided a relevant overview of thecondominium industry. Over the firstcouple of weeks, I found that theinstructors provided a valuable intro-duction to Directors’ roles and respon-sibilities, by-laws and declarations, anda solid introduction to the inner work-ings of condominium corporations.”

“I was able to put my new knowledgeto work right away: shortly after myappointment, I was approached or con-tacted by several of the owners & resi-dents, and, happily, I was able to pro-vide well-informed direction for eachof the issues raised.”

“There is so much information related


to condominiums, and I’m not sure thatI’ll ever know it all, but I’m committedto continuous learning. I am also happyto serve as an integral component of mycommunity, and to contribute to the wel-fare of my fellow condo owners and res-idents. Thanks to the CCI Condo Level200 course, I feel better prepared towork towards creating a successful con-dominium community.”

Brendan Murphy, Treasurer, TSCC1979 writes, “Being an AssistantFacility Manager in the commercialproperty management field, I have aunique appreciation for the work thatis involved with maintaining a facilityand keeping its occupants happy. In myposition, I represent CBC Real Estate(my client) and manage the buildingaccording to the mandates they set outfor me.”

“CCI has helped me understand I am(in a sense) now in the “client” role andthat I have a different set of responsibil-ities. The course I took back in April

provided me with invaluable informa-tion on the condo corporation structureand my role within it. The speakerswere all very informative and at times,even entertaining. (An achievementwhen the material itself can be some-what dry).”

Says, manager Julian McNabb; “Havingattended the Condo 201 course myself,it was terrific to see the large turnout ofDirectors and residents from a varietyof different condominiums fromMississauga, Scarborough, North York,Etobicoke and of course Toronto. Condo201 is a 3 hour course designed to coverGovernance and the roles of theBoard/Management in a Corporation,the Financial aspects of a CondominiumCorporation and the financial responsi-bility of the Board, and finally the BoardMeetings themselves and some helpfulinformation and suggestions. Each par-ticipant who attended the course wasprovided with a useful binder with notesfrom the course, which they could takeback to their Condominium Corporation

as well as a copy of Gerry Hyman’sCondominium Handbook. At the end ofeach of the three topics, each speakerwas able to take questions, which pro-vided useful clarification and site-spe-cific answers. I can see that CCI is amuch-needed resource in the Torontocondominium community as a source ofanswers or direction on where to getanswers.” Anyone interested in attend-ing any of CCI Toronto’s courses, areadvised to register early to avoid disap-pointment. For more information, pleasecontact CCI Toronto at 416-491-6216.

Certainly the Board from CCIToronto’s 1000th member has benefit-ed so far from the resources and educa-tion that has be made available to them,and hopefully other Condominiumslooking to take advantage of the vastamount of information available fromCCI, will also be able to add value totheir respective boards and condomini-ums too. �


In Memoriam

The Canadian CondominiumInstitute has lost a great friendand the condominium communi-

ty at large has lost an industry giant, apillar, an icon, with the tragic anduntimely passing of Mark Freedman, aprominent Toronto condominiumlawyer on May 9, 2009, from Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. He was 55years old.

Mark was one of those rare and specialindividuals who was not only a brilliantlawyer but a dear friend, a warm andcaring individual and a true inspiration.To everyone who knew him, workedwith him, admired and respected him,he was an individual who embodieddecency, integrity, leadership and pro-fessionalism. Mark lived each day toits fullest, devoted to his clients, to hispartners and colleagues and to CCI. Hegave generously of his time to CCI andhis impact with this organization con-tinues to be felt to this day.

Mark Freedman was a founding mem-

ber of CCI and served on its nationalboard of directors from 1986 to 1997.He also served first as President andthen as Chairman of the CCI NationalBoard of Directors from 1993 to 1997and received the FCCI designation in1998.

Freedman began his legal career atMacauley, Lipson, moving to Gordon,Traub & Rotenberg in 1982, where heestablished himself as a leading expertin condominium matters and quickly

became one of the primary “go to” con-dominium lawyers in the City ofToronto. He caught the eye of “TheCondominium Magazine” in itsFebruary, 1984 edition, where it pro-filed Mark as “fast, rising, smart andambitious. A lawyer to watch for.”Four years later, the same magazinenamed Mark Freedman its“CondominiumMan of theYear”, call-ing him “one of this country’s top

Mark Freedman, LL.B, ACCI, FCCIOur thanks to Stephen Karr, Harris, Sheaffer LLP for preparing this tribute

Mark Freedman was one of thebrightest and most innovative condo-minium lawyers in Canada.

For over 20 years, I had the pleas-ure of working with Mark on newcondominium developments, sittingacross the table from Mark when wewere on opposite sides representingour respective clients in resolvingbuilding deficiency issues and work-ing together in volunteer organiza-tions like the Canadian Condomin-ium Institute (CCI). In all instances,Mark was the consummate profes-sional, focused on the job at handand getting things done.

During his tenure as CCI NationalPresident, Mark was the first to sug-gest and implement the annualSpring Meeting for CCI at one of itschapter locations. This helped tosolidify CCI as a true national organ-ization.

Mark was a tremendous colleagueand friend and I will dearly miss him.

Peter Leong, P.Eng.Manager, Building Sciences,

Genivar

It is my privilege to pay tribute to Mark Freedman. I am honoured to have knownhim for the past 25 years. Mark was the consummate professional and the ultimategentleman. He was brilliant, creative and caring. He was my teacher, my mentor,my friend. He was a pillar of strength for the condominium concept.

Among Mark’s greatest gifts were his engaging smile, his calm demeanour, hisinnate ability to foster simple resolutions to complex conundrums and the time thathe always generated in his busy life for everyone who required his wise counsel.

On behalf of my colleagues at DEL and throughout the condominium property man-agement profession, I wish to express our sincere and heartfelt condolences toMark’s dear wife Judy. We share your loss and we will all miss Mark deeply anddearly.

Saul YorkPresident & CEO

DEL Property Management

Continued…


condominium lawyers, an innovativethinker, who, time and time again, hasproved to be one step ahead of theindustry”.

In 1992, Mark Freedman was instru-mental in founding the law firm ofHarris, Sheaffer. Over time, Mark,together with his partners and staff,helped establish Harris, Sheaffer as oneof the leading law firms specializing incondominium development and condo-minium law.

Mark had numerous legal achieve-ments. He was certified as a specialistin real estate law by the Law Societyof Upper Canada and was qualified asan expert witness in the area of condo-minium law in proceedings before theOntario courts. He was qualified as anarbitrator and mediator and wasinvolved in the registration of over 500Condominium Corporations. He, withothers, contributed greatly to the leg-islative process amending the Condo-

minium Act. Mark co-wrote with hisfriend and colleague, HarryHerskowitz, the seminal textbook onthe CondominiumAct, in Ontario, enti-tled Condominiums in Ontario – APractical Analysis of the NewLegislation. He wrote numerous arti-cles, presented papers and lecturedextensively for the Law Society ofUpper Canada, the Canadian BarAssociation and was also a well knownspeaker and panellist at numerous CCI/ACMO conferences, including chair-ing numerous case law sessions onSaturday mornings with equal doses ofhumour and gems of legal knowledge.He was a great teacher and mentor tocountless lawyers and other profession-als who would call him seeking his sageadvice on their condominium issues,which he would always deliver thatadvice professionally and without hes-itation.

His endeavours were not limited sole-ly to professional pursuits. Mark suf-

Mark and I were good friends for thepast 30 years, but we became espe-cially close during the year we co-authored the book on the new condo-minium act published by the LawSociety, and throughout the yearsthereafter. Mark was a great lawyerand a well-respected colleague andmentor, and an even better humanbeing, who always helped others, andconstantly contributed to worthycauses on behalf of those less fortu-nate. What distinguished Mark fromothers was his caring nature, com-bined with a tremendous positive atti-tude and “can do” approach thatpervaded everything he set out to do.This explains, in large measure, whyhe was so successful and accom-plished in life, both in the realm oflaw and business, and in the devel-opment of great personal relation-ships with others. Our friendshipnever had the “highs” and “lows”endured by most friendships, justonly “highs”, because Mark was themost accommodating and genuinelygood-natured person that I knew...always respectful of others, andexceedingly loyal. I feel truly blessedto have been Mark’s friend, and I,along with countless others who hadthe good fortune of knowing Mark,are most-assuredly the better for it.Words really can’t express just howmuch Mark will be missed by hisfriends and family, and by the con-dominium community at large that hewas so proud to serve, but I assureyou that Mark will never ever be for-gotten!

Harry HerskowitzDelzotto Zorzi

Those who knew Mark found in hima man who was measured and per-sistent, passionate yet progressive.He loved his work, but not as muchas he loved his wife, Judy.

I was privileged that he consideredme a friend.

Don Kramer

Mark was a wonderful person whose knowledge of the Condominium Act, OntarioHome Warranty Plan Act and the condominium industry as a whole was immensewhich combined with his ability to clearly and fairly present an issue made him apopular and busy lawyer.

Despite poor health, he had an abundance of energy which flowed over into his vol-unteer work with the condominium industry. Mark co-authored a definitive book onthe condominium law, which is widely utilized in the industry. His enthusiasm forthe aims and objectives of CCI in the early years, helped CCI to become the greatand relevant institution it is today.

It was clear to all who knew him that Mark believed in what he did. He defendedthose beliefs passionately and would fight vigorously for them.

Mark was truly a “great guy”. He will be missed by the condominium industry, thelegal profession and by countless other people whose lives he touched.

Gina CodyConstruction Control Inc.

Mark Freedman was one of CCI’s great gentlemen. He validated how CCI enablesus to develop professional relationships and friends across the country. Althoughwe often reconnected only annually, Mark was always warm and encouraging. I,along with others, will miss his smile and his involvement in the condominiumworld.

Deborah Howes, FCCIPast President CCI


fered from Gaucher Disease, a rare anddevastating genetic disease that affects1 in 60,000 people worldwide. GaucherDisease, caused by an enzyme deficien-cy, affects the blood system and bones.Excruciating pain is a common compli-cation. When Mark realized that therewere no resource centres or organiza-tions for Canadian Gaucher patients, hecreated one and established theNational Gaucher Foundation forCanada and became a leading advocatefor Gaucher patients. Mark was instru-mental in successfully lobbying vari-ous levels of government for approvalof enzyme replacement therapy, a veryeffective, but expensive treatment forGaucher Disease, which can stop theprogression of the disease thereby sig-nificantly improving the quality of lifefor all patients. He also successfullylobbied the government to fund thedrug so that patients could obtain thisprohibitively expensive life savingtreatment. Mark also continuously lob-

Mark Freedman was on the NationalBoard of Directors of CCI in myearly days as a National Directorand I remember him with fondness.He was warm and gracious in wel-coming me as a newcomer to theNational Board, and very soon there-after, to the Executive, and he was agreat help to me. Mark never failedto apply his calm reason and formi-dable intellect to the CCI issues ofthe day and his retirement from theBoard left a gap that was difficult tofill. He will be missed.

Rob GiesbrechtPitblado LLP

bied other provincial governments forfunding of other lesser known diseases.

Freedman was to be honoured in lateMay, by the Ontario Bar Associationwhere he was to receive an “Award ofExcellence in Real Estate” for his enor-mous contribution in serving the legalcommunity.

Mark is survived by his beloved wifeJudy, and by his parents, brothers, sis-ter-in-laws, nephews and nieces.

All of us in the condominium commu-nity and the CCI family are diminishedby his tragic departure, but his legacywill be enduring. He was certainly oneof the leading lights in the condomini-um industry and has left a lastingimprint on many people who had theprivilege of knowing him. He will beremembered fondly.

� � �


CONDOMINIUM DIVISION

Concierge, Gatehouse and Patrol ServicesValet Parking ServicesMobile Patrol ServicesBy-Law Enforcement ServicesAfter Hours Call Centre

INTEGRATED ELECTRONIC SECURITY SYSTEMS

In-Suite Security SystemsCard Entry SystemsUnderground Parking Lot Duress/Panic SystemsVideo Surveillance Systems

G4S Security Services (Canada) Ltd.65 Overlea Blvd. Toronto, ON M4H 1P1 5770 Hurontario Street, Suite 503, Mississauga, ON L5R 3G5

Telephone: (416) 421-2900 Telephone: (905) 270-7032Serv ing ov er 200 propert ies in the GTA. . . and growing!

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 ApplianceManufacturers

• In suite and common area exhaust and ventilation ductworkcleaning

• 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 clothesdryer fire prevention is required.

Dennis Monk: (647) 236-5643 Randy Mason: (647) 239-8787

Office: (905) 761-1761

Email: [email protected]


New Trade MembersSandro VelocciAt Your Service JanitorialProfessionals Inc.

Graham LintonInterior Care Ltd.

Dianne NeaimiJDM Plumbing Services, ADivision of 1773983 ON Inc.

Anthony RomaninLidio Romanin ConstructionCompany Limited (LAR)

Dennis LucianiOverhead Door Company ofToronto

CCI Toronto Welcomes the Following New Members

New Members

Paul LealPLC

Andrea ShewchukRegal Security Inc.

Lawrence VrbanekRoyal Locksmith &SecurityHardware Inc.

Vilma GarrigaSure Green Landscaping &Snow Removal Inc.

Vic ArambamoorthyVic's Plumbing & HeatingCo. Ltd.

Individual MembersJ. OsborneR. Aiken

Professional MembersBob AyklerAykler Real Estate Inc.

Dante A. CapannelliCapannelli LawProfessional Corporation

Elizabeth RubyCityzen PropertyManagement Inc.

Michael GwynneMiller Thomson LLP

Corporate MembersDSCC # 0224MTCC # 0585MTCC # 0788MTCC # 1121PCC # 0197PSCC # 0843PSCC # 0850TSCC # 1442TSCC # 1708TSCC # 1802TSCC # 1963TSCC # 1976TSCC # 1980TSCC # 1989TSCC # 1990TSCC # 1997YRSCC # 1133YRSCC # 1138YRSCC #1144



Upcoming Events

Mark Your Calendars

13th Annual CCI/ACMOCondominium Conference:Building Better Communities –From the Foundation UpDates: Friday November 6th and

Saturday November 7th, 2009Times: 8:00 to 6:00 on November 6th and

8:00 to 3:00 on November 7thLocation: Hilton Markham Suites Hotel and

Conference Center – 8500Warden Ave.

Cost: Early Bird rate for members reg-istering before Sept 30th is $ 275.Non-member fee is $400.

This popular two day conference and trade showdesigned for condominiummanagers, directors, own-ers and others interested in ‘everything condomini-um’ will focus this year on ‘From the Foundation Up”.The spectacular line up of speakers and topics to becovered this year are sure to offer information andsolutions to managers and directors alike. Sessiontopics this year will include: Keep the Cash Flowing,Holistic Branding, Aging In Place, Condo Rapid Fire,The ABC’s of Tarion, Working with ChallengingPeople, Insurance is NOT Boring, Protecting YourAssets, Motivating the Unmotivated, Aging Buildingsand Condo Governance.

Sponsorship and exhibit opportunities are stillavailable – visit www.condoconference.ca for fullconference details.

PM ExpoDate: December 2nd – 4th, 2009Location: Metro Toronto Convention

Centre – South Building

CCI-Toronto is proud to present an educational ses-sion to be presented at this year’s PM Expo show.

Check the PM Expo website atwww.pmexpo.com for further details

as they become available.

Condo 101 CourseDates & Times: Saturday, September 17th, 2009 from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm, or

Saturday, January 16th, 2010 from 9:00 am to 12:00 pm, orThursday, June 3rd, 2010 from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm

Location: Novotel North York Hotel

Cost: $60 for CCI Members and $95 for Non Members

This half-day seminar will focus on the topics that every Director should be aware of and will pro-vide participants with a basic knowledge of the condominium Act. The course is an excellentmeans to find out what you need to know to be effective as a condominium owner or director. Theinformation presentedwill be of interest to those purchasing a condominium or to thosewhowantto know what a condominium is and what it means to live in one.

Level 200 CourseDates & Times: Tuesday, September 30th, October 7th, 14th and 21st

from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm or,Saturday, February 20th and 27thfrom 10:00 am to 4:00 pm



This informative four night or two day course is a must attend for all new Directors orCondominium Residents whowant a better understanding of the way Condominiums function andshould operate. Topics covered include: The Directors' Role, Insurance, Property Management,Budgets and Finance, Reserve Funds, Physical Building Management and Effective Meetings.

Level 201 CourseDates & Times: Saturday, November 21st, 2009 from 9:00 am to 12:00 pm, or

Saturday, April 10th, 2010 from 9:00 am to 12:00 pm, or



This half-day coursewill teach Directors all they need to know about proper Governance and howto ensure a well functioning Board. The course will also provide valuable information on how torun effective condominiummeetings. Topics covered will include: Board Confidentiality, Conflictof Interest, Notice of Meetings, Proxies, Nominations and Elections, Role of the Board andManagement, By-laws and Rules, Directors Code of Ethics and more!

Level 300 CourseDates & Times: Tuesday, May 4th, 11th, 18th and 25th, 2010

from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm



Designed for the dedicated condominium director, the CCI Level 300 course will run for four con-secutive Tuesday evenings from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. beginning May 4th, 2010 through May25th, 2010. Upon completion of the course, participants should understand all aspects of reservefunds, major repairs and replacement, financial management, common problems and solutions,legal responsibilities… and in the last session, learn about mediation/arbitration and the newenforcement remedies available under the Condominium Act, 1998.

To register for these CCI Toronto courses and/or to obtain further information,please visit the website at www.ccitoronto.org or call the office at (416) 491-6216.


Member News

CCI National Semi-Annual Meetings 2009BY BIL THOMPSON, MALVERN CONDOMINIUM MANAGEMENT

On May 21 and May 22, 2009, the National Board ofthe Canadian Condominium Institute held its semiannual meeting in Hamilton, Ontario. The meetings

and activities were graciously and professionally hosted by theGolden Horseshoe Chapter. The Golden Horseshoe Chapteralso held a conference, aptly named “CondosAre For People”on Saturday May 23rd. The meetings were held in theHamilton Sheraton Hotel. The conference was directly acrossthe street in the Hamilton Convention Centre. Both facilitieswere well prepared to handle the needs of CCI. Many chap-ter Board members attended this National event in addition tothe National Directors. Their invaluable perspectives werewelcomed in all of the sessions and helped to create the atmos-phere of cooperation and understanding that was prevalentthroughout the event.

The National Board met at 8:00 a.m. on May 21st to update theBoard on the progress of each of the committees and get somevaluable feedback from the members who represent each chap-ter across Canada. The clear focus of the meeting was on thefuture. Great discussion and direction was carried out on top-ics like membership, education, and chapter training. A taskforce was struck to investigate theACCI designation and mem-bership barriers to report back to the Executive Board.

By far, the focus of the day was to get a better understanding

and clear direction for moving forward on the new structureof the National Council and Executive Council which willreplace the existing Board of Directors at the fall annual gen-eral meeting. Discussion ensued regarding the best methodsof transition and continuity, together with the respective rolesof the Councils. Each chapter will now be required to pass arule regarding the election or appointment of a representativeto the National Council, which will have to be completed byno later than September 2009. It is certainly an exciting timein the history of the Canadian Condominium Institute. Itappears that CCI has grown out of its infancy and is now achallenging teenager, with all that that entails. Thank you toRob Giesbrecht and John Peart for leading the session.

All afternoon was spent in committee meetings. Every com-mittee met and some very lively discussions and decisionswere made to help move CCI into the future. It should beremembered that most of the decisions of CCI are actuallyplanted, grown and harvested at the committee level. Thenew Executive Council will be charged with the responsibil-ity to give those committees mandates and direction andreview their progress on a regular basis. I guess you couldsay that they want to make sure we aren’t planting corn, whenwe really need tomatoes! The new structure of CCI should bemore successful at achieving that.

On Friday May 22nd, a Chapter Clinic was held. The focuswas on being an effective Board for a Not-for-profit organi-

CCI National and Toronto Directors attend a dinner at theHeritage War Planes Museum in Hamilton. Left to Right: John Warren,

Armand Conant, Jackie Conant, Denise Lash, Janice Pynn,Jeff Moses and Beatrice Warren.

The Condos are for People conference featured a line up of terrificspeakers. Left to right: MPP Sophia Aggelonitis at podium,

seated: Kim Coulter, Ray Wilson, Armand Conant, Janice Pynn,Gina Cody, John Warren and Pat Cassidy.


hosted and organized by the Golden Horseshoe Chapter. Therewere many hours of concurrent sessions featuring more thanforty speakers from across Canada. There was a trade showthat ran all day. The sell out crowd was treated to lunch, cof-fee breaks and even a close out wine and cheese reception.

Thank you to all for the hard work put out by all of the vol-unteers to make the National event and the Conference andTrade Show a great success. It is this volunteer effort thathelps to make a better living environment for millions ofCondominium and Strata owners across the country. �

zation. Although it would appear that this would be a topicthat most of our condo professionals would be well versedin, there are aspects that are not always considered. JamieBleay, Ron Danks and Deborah Howes did an excellent jobof making us all sit back and rethink our approach and re-evaluate our responsibilities. We thank them for telling usall about what we already knew, yet tend to forget. The entireaudience left with a renewed focus on the goals of CCI andthe responsibilities of its Directors.

Saturday May 23rd was a day of great activity which was

The “Condos are for People” tradeshow wasanother highlight of the week.

Dinner at the Cave Springs Cellar was a highlight of the week!Seated are l to r: Don Peter, Denise Lash and Lisa Kay

Standing l to r are: Helen Neville, Bob Girard, Armand Conant,Jackie Conant and Jon Juffs.


Total Security Solutions for Condominiums• Visitor entry phones• Access control• Video surveillance• Hands-free parking control• 24/7 alarm monitoring

Lorne MiddletonManager, Sales & Operations, Central Ontario5201 Explorer DriveMississauga, OntarioL4W 4H1

Phone: 905-206-8458Fax: 905-206-8486

[email protected]

Check out the “Members Only”section on the CCI Toronto Website!

www.ccitoronto.org

CLASSIFIED


List of AdvertisersA.R. Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34ACMO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50Adams & Miles LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64Atrens Counsel Insurance Brokers Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46Atrens Management Group Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15Ben Engineering Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Brady & Seidner Associates Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26Brokers Trust Insurance Group Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Brookfield Residential Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33Brown & Beattie Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34Carma Industries Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39Certified Clean Air Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63Chubb Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64Condominium Living Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Construction Control Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68Coulter Building Consultants Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17CPL Condominium Design Interiors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56CPL Connoisseur Painting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Criterium Jansen Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60D-Tech (Nexus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23Davroc Consulting Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9Donna Swanson Real Estate Brokerage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35Dryerfighters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58Enbridge Electric Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22Enerplan Building Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60Enhanced Management Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47Esquire Management Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45Fine & Deo Barristers & Solicitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Firenza Plumbing & Heating Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64Fogler, Rubinoff LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Four Season Duct Cleaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41G4S Security Services Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58Galaxy Fire Protection Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64Gardiner Miller Arnold LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7Genivar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Gerald R. Genge Building Consultants Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66GSA Property Mana gement Specialists Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34Gulesserian Associates Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64Heenan Blaikie LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Horlick Levitt Barristers & Solicitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26ICC Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59J. Edick & Sons Landscape Contractors Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64J.J. Molnar Realty Advisors Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23LAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29Larlyn Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36M & E Consulting Engineers Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38Maple Ridge Community Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25Mareka Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46Markham Garage Doors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60Maxium Condo Finance Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Metro Group of Companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43Miller Thomson LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Morrison Hershfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Nadlan-Harris Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36Ontario Screen Systems Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36Professional Choice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Pro-House Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66Provident Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19Rainbow International . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60Rikos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67Royal Grande Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Samuel Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36ScotiaMcLeod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58Simerra Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65SR Wise Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60Stratacon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49Summa Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34Suncorp Valuations Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64Training Wheel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26Trustlink Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Vertical Network Solutions Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10Waste Solutions Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26Whiterose Janitorial Service Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51Wilson Blanchard Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38YARDI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44