[AMAC SUBGROUP MEETING Approved MINUTES] / June 23, 2017 /

Approved July 26, 2017

PARTICIPANTS [apologies in advance if a name has been erroneously omitted]

BOARD / KELLY TRIANTAFILOU
GEORGIA TRIFONIDIS
DIRK VANDERBENT
PAUL MULDOON
REPRESENTATIVE FIRM / DAVID POUPARD / ALTUS
TOM CARAMBELAS / YEOMAN
EVAN PRENDERGAST / AEC PROPERTY TAX
GARY CARR / AEC PROPERTY TAX
SUZANNE IBARRA / AEC PROPERTY TAX
MUNICIPALITY / CONNIE MESIH / MISSISSAUGA
SARAH BAXTER / CITY OF TORONTO
GRACE MARSH / NEWMARKET
MPAC / GEORGIA RIBEIRO
TIM HARRISON
GREG BAXTER
GAYELYN HENDERSON
LAW FIRMS / KATHLEEN POOLE / NIXON, FLEET, & POOLE

DISCUSSION / DECISIONS/AGREEMENTS

Agenda

The agenda for the meeting in attached to these Minutes

AMAC membership:

  • Grace Marsh submitted a request that Municipal representation on AMAC include three persons from the OMTRA Executive be members of OMTRA. She explained that the reason for expanding the number of members from 1 to 3, is simply to reflect the fact that, due the time and workload demands,onepersonwould not be able to attend all AMAC meetings. All workgroup members agreed to this request.

Report on Board Activities

Disclosure Sub Work Group:

  • Dirk VanderBent advised the Workgroup members that the Disclosure Sub Work Group has made considerable progress in identifying the issues typically raised in appeals and the standard items of disclosure pertaining to each issue. Georgia Ribeiro advised the group, that a number of members of the Disclosure Sub Work Group had met recently, and resolved some issues. It appears, therefore, that the work of the Disclosure Sub Work Group is substantially completed.

Municipal Outreach:

  • Dirk VanderBent explained that, at the Board’s request, MPAC, through its Municipal Liaison Group, had organized a Joint Education Initiative with representatives from MPAC, OMTRA, and MFOA, to reach out to every municipality to educate them regarding their rights and obligations under the Board’s new Rules. Dirk described that several webinar presentations have been conducted where between 200 to 300 municipal representatives participated, and satisfaction surveys have indicated a high degree of satisfaction with the webinar presentations.

Group Discussion of General Issues regarding scheduling of commencement dates

  • The Group discussed these issues for a full day and reached consensus on all issues. The Group agreed that Dirk VanderBent would prepare a draft appeal scheduling protocol which reflects the outcome of the Group’s discussion. This draft has since been prepared and is attached to these meeting minutes. The draft is intended to be comprehensive, so it includes some information not discussed at the June 23rd meeting, but discussed at other meetings. Consequently Work Group members are asked to carefully review the draft.
  • In the Group’s discussion, there were two major changes from the initial proposal tabled by the Board as the platform for the Group’s discussion.
  1. The initial proposal suggested an iterative process for scheduling appeals. For example, appeals would be scheduled for the first year of the cycle, and the process would then be repeated for the second year, and so forth. The Group decided, instead, that all appealsin the current year (including outstanding appeals from previous cycles) should all be scheduled.
  1. For previous cycle appeals, the Group initially indicated that the Board, for each appeal, should conduct an enquiry of the status of the exchange of disclosure and pleadings. The reason for this approach was to identify those appeals that may be ready to be scheduled for a settlement conference, rather than “starting all over” by assigning a Commencement Day and Schedule of Events. The concern is that “starting over” would create delay in the completion of such appeals. However, the Group Members subsequently identified that the amount of time and effort to consult with the parties on each appeal to ascertain their status, would also significantly delay completion of the scheduling process. So this approach was abandoned. Instead, the Group agreed that the Board should set a Commencement Day and Schedule of Events for all appeals. If the parties to a previous cycle appeal decide they are ready to proceed to a hearing, they may apply to the Board to vary the Schedule of Events to provide for earlier scheduling of a settlement conference.
  • As shown in the draft protocol, the Group agreed to an implementation procedure. As the draft protocol will apply in the future, it generically provides that the Board will set the due dates for completion of the implementation procedure. However, Dirk VanderBent pointed out that time is of the essence, so the Board requires that Commencement Days be set commencing Nov. 15, 2017. Based on this performance standard, the Group agreed to the following dates for completion of the implementation procedure:
  • JULY 7, 2017: The Board will prepare list of all appeals which have not been assigned a Commencement Day (including outstanding appeals from previous assessment cycles), which it will then provide to MPAC, Appellant Representative Firms, and Municipalities;
  • AUG. 1, 2017: MPAC will then complete the template to include its proposal for scheduling all appeals in accordance with this Scheduling Protocol, which it will then deliver to the Board;
  • AUG. 1, 2017: The Board will then circulate the applicable appeals from MPAC’s proposed schedule to each Appellant Representative Firm and Municipality;
  • SEPT. 1, 2017: Each Appellant Representative Firm will then complete its template to show proposed alteration of the Commencement Day for any of the appeals, and the Municipality to complete its template to identify its properties of interest, and return their templates to the Board
  • SEPT. 1, 2017: The Board will then compile the responses from the Appellant Representative Firms and Municipalities, and forward this to MPAC;
  • OCT. 1, 2017: MPAC will then review the responses and endeavour to accommodate proposed alterations to any of the Commencement Day for any appeals, and provide the Board with an updated proposalfor scheduling all appeals;
  • Kelly Triantafilou reported that the implementation process for scheduling Commencement Days for appeals heard by way of summary proceeding has been completed, and individual notices of the Commencement Days would be emailed to the parties shortly.

Next Meeting:

The Group agrees that the implementation schedule for general proceeding appeals is ambitious, and, therefore, there was consensus that we schedule another 1 hour meeting to be held by telephone conference call on July 26, 2017 at 9 a.m. An agenda will be circulated, but the main purpose of this meeting is to obtain an update from MPAC on its progress in completing step 2 of the implementation procedure.

1 | Page