More Ontario Realtors now have access to more data as the PropTx MLS database expands to include listings from most boards in the province. 

PropTx, a wholly-owned and for-profit subsidiary of the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB), promises members access to a centralized MLS, a long-standing priority among Realtors, according to TRREB CEO John DiMichele. 

“This has been a strategic focus, and through the creation of PropTx, was a key mandate for the organization,” says DiMichele. “The participating boards and associations were essential collaborators, recognizing that working together benefits all Realtors. A unified MLS database ensures consistency and continuity as it matures.”

Participating boards and associations currently have access to the PropTx MLS system, with the final stages of data transition underway. DiMichele explains several enhancements are expected in the first quarter of 2025, including expanded mandatory fields and the integration of pre-populated external data sets. These updates are based on feedback from participating boards and new users of the platform.

 

Participating boards and associations

 

The following boards and associations are part of the PropTx MLS collaboration:

• Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (including the former Brampton Real Estate Board)
• Central Lakes Association of Realtors (including Durham, Quinte, Northumberland, Peterborough, and Kawartha Lakes)
• London and St. Thomas Association of Realtors
• Niagara Association of Realtors (NAR)
• Kingston & Area Real Estate Association (KAREA)
• Timmins, Cochrane & Timiskaming District Association of Realtors
• Ottawa Real Estate Board
• Cornwall & District Real Estate Board
• Renfrew County Real Estate Board
• Rideau-St Lawrence Real Estate Board
• Oakville, Milton & District Real Estate Board (OMDREB)
• One Point Association of Realtors (formerly Lakelands, Guelph & District, Huron Perth, and Grey Bruce Owen Sound)
• Woodstock, Ingersoll Tillsonburg & Area Association of Realtors (WITAAR)
• North Bay & Area Realtors Association (NBARA)

DiMichele explains that through PropTx, members of these associations have access to more data than ever before, and that will expand as new features are introduced.

“The move towards a single MLS database creates incredible efficiencies for Realtors, both in the operation of their business as well as in the cost of operating their business,” DiMichele says. “The move towards a single MLS database reduces the need for interboarding MLS listings as well as paying for multiple real estate board and association memberships.”

TRREB’s CEO calls PropTx a for-Realtors-by-Realtors solution, “The long-term strategic goal of PropTx is to continue to offer a range of best-in-class tools, insights, and applications to improve the transaction experience for realtors and the clients they serve efficiently and effectively.”

 

Impact on ITSO

 

More boards transitioning to PropTx marks a shift for the Information Technology Systems of Ontario (ITSO), a not-for-profit corporation established in 2020 with the primary goal of creating a unified MLS.

Geoff Halford, ITSO chair, says the organization was initially created to increase access to MLS data through the operation of a regional MLS System when associations were not ready to amalgamate but wanted to share data. Halford says this purpose may no longer be relevant.

Member boards such as KAREA, NAR, OMDREB, NBARA, WITAAR, and OnePoint are leaving or have left ITSO in favour of PropTx.

Halford acknowledges the evolving landscape and its potential impact. “We are proud of the success we had creating a regional system that at its peak brought together 23 real estate associations and more than 24,000 users who had access to data from 29 of the real estate associations in the province, but we also understand that the landscape is quickly changing,” he said, adding  ITSO remains committed to supporting its current member associations, ensuring that the system continues to meet their needs.

 

“We are disappointed that a solution could not be arranged with TRREB that would have fostered competition in the MLS services market…” Geoff Halford, ITSO chair

 

ITSO will operate its MLS system for its remaining three member boards, the Barrie & District Association of Realtors (BDAR), Brantford Regional Real Estate Association (BRREA), and Cornerstone Association of Realtors, for the next two years under the current MLS Services Agreement.

“We will be reviewing what is in the best interests of our members and the future of ITSO over the course of the next two years,” says Halford.”There are other MLS Systems in Ontario and in other provinces that operate with far fewer users than ITSO, so we know such a system is viable, but we also understand the political pressure that our remaining members face to solve the problem of fragmented data access.

“We are disappointed that a solution could not be arranged with TRREB that would have fostered competition in the MLS services market and enabled all realtors in the province to access all the MLS data they need in the system of their choice.” 

Halford adds, “It is especially disheartening to see Realtors who formerly used the ITSO system complain on social media about the quality and quantity of listing content they now have access to in their new MLS System, as ITSO and its members prided themselves on building a comprehensive database of detailed and accurate MLS listing content.”

 

Industry perspectives

 

Paul Czan, president of the Ottawa Real Estate Board, says the board joined PropTx last fall.

Czan explains, “This new platform promises a much better experience with more data readily available. Faster communication and smoother transactions, in a sense. Another thing is we’re able to have input on the system.”

OREB’s president has high hopes for PropTx’s impact.  “I think it’s going to be a platform that’s going to bring stability and consistency amongst a bit of a shifting landscape in our industry, meaning that Realtors can be assured that they can have access to the same quality data as their counterparts in all the other regions.”

 

Editor’s note: The original article stated that the Ottawa Real Estate Board had left ITSO for PropTx. The board was not an ITSO member and the article has been updated to reflect that.

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

OMDREB’s decision

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

Issues with adding exclusives to an MLS system

 

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

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

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

 

How the functionality would help the industry

 

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

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

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

 

The process and journey

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

Response from CREA

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Request to immediately suspend functionality implementation

 

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

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

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

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

 

ITSO’s response

 

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

 

Authority to interpret and apply Realtor Code as deemed appropriate

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

A matter of enforcement

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

Editor’s note:

On June 5, 2024, at the SGM, BRREA’s membership installed a new board of directors. Learn more here.

On May 14, 2024, LSTAR shared the following statement from Kathy Amess, LSTAR 2024 chair:

“LSTAR thanks everyone who joined us for the May 13 Special Meeting. Nearly 700 members attended, with another 244 members voting via proxy. It was the largest attendance recorded at an LSTAR event, with 937 voting delegates, and it was a very productive and respectful meeting.

During a question-and-answer open forum, the delegation received responses to 40 questions that had been submitted by members, with additional questions and comments shared throughout the forum. With respect to the proposed motions, the board of directors was pleased by the overwhelming vote of confidence, with 83 per cent voicing their opposition to removing the board. In addition, the proposed motion requesting the resignation of LSTAR CEO Bill Madder never even made it to the floor, because no one came forward to make the motion.

The LSTAR Board of Directors has a clear path forward and we look forward to continued engagement with the membership, to deliver what our members need and expect from us, to lead LSTAR into the future.”

 

Special general meetings (SGMs) are being held in the near future by the London and St. Thomas Association of Realtors as well as the Brantford Regional Real Estate Association to discuss how decisions are being made in those organizations.

The LSTAR meeting is scheduled for today, May 13, while the BRREA meeting is on June 5. 

“A Special Meeting of London and St. Thomas Association of Realtors (LSTAR) members has been called. LSTAR respects that this is a members’ only meeting, so details are reserved for the members of our association. We look forward to what we anticipate to be a well-attended, interactive meeting with our members,” says Kathy Amess, 2024 LSTAR chair, in a statement.

 

LSTAR meeting motions for consideration

 

In a document obtained by REM, the Notice of Meeting cites several motions to be considered, including that:

• All changes to MLS or LSTAR services/MLS or LSTAR providers/MLS systems be communicated to the membership and brokerages in an item-specific email and news alert outlining the benefits and disadvantages at least 30 days prior to any contracts signed, changes implemented or contracts terminated
• LSTAR revoke the notice of termination from the Information Technology Systems of Ontario (ITSO) (and) immediately take the required action to extend the service from ITSO to December 31, 2024
• The board strike a task force to review all the currently available MLS platforms in Ontario and the decision to move to the PropTx MLS System
• The board undertake a full governance review by a qualified independent third-party
• The board be immediately removed and an election of directors be held immediately with nominations of potential directors from the floor at this meeting
• Bill Madder CEO of LSTAR be requested to resign from his position with LSTAR

Last fall, LSTAR announced it was joining the PropTx MLS service along with other real estate boards, including the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board.

 

‘Ontario-wide MLS listing system is the way to go, but not by one board saying ‘our way or no way’’

 

Jim McCarvell, an associate broker with Re/Max Centre City Realty Inc. in London, has been a member of LSTAR since 1982. He says two main issues have raised concerns with fellow realtors.

“This is the second time, probably within 12 months, that the administration of LSTAR is trying to jam something down the throats of the members without any input and without any regard,” he explains. “The first one was an insurance program (the Ontario Realtor Wellness Program). Our board just says it’s going to cost you $500 a year and too bad, so sad. There was a big chunk of people that said, ‘My wife works as well and she’s got a good plan so we’re going to stay with that.’ They basically told you, ‘Who cares? It’s going to cost you if you like it or not.’”

The second issue McCarvell points out is about amalgamating with the Toronto system: “They had four people out of 1,500 test the system on a very time-limited basis and they got back all kinds of feedback. They already had one meeting and it was sort of forced on them.

The microphones were just lined up. People were clapping for the resistance. Booing. They brought in a lawyer. They brought in an official MC and this sort of stuff. They knew it was backfiring on them — that there were just too many people ready to stand up and say ‘enough is enough.’”

McCarvell says an Ontario-wide MLS listing system is the way to go, but “not by one board jamming it down everybody’s throat saying, ‘It’s our way or no way.’”

 

BRREA meeting called to remove and install new board of directors

 

Ryan Campbell, real estate broker with The Crew Real Estate at Real Broker Ontario Ltd., in Paris, Ontario, says the BRREA meeting was called to remove the current board of directors and install a new board due to the current board’s handling of its MLS provider agreement. A two-thirds vote of those members in attendance plus proxy votes is needed to remove the board. 

“BRREA’s current contract with ITSO is expiring in August and rather than sign another contract, the current board decided that we should use PropTx, the current provider for TRREB. This would leave us without a data-sharing agreement with the boards that surround Brantford where our agents do a good deal of business as well, (like) Waterloo, Hamilton, Burlington and Simcoe,” he says.

Campbell explains that the surrounding boards decided to amalgamate into the Cornerstone Association of Realtors (CAR). “I hosted the presidents of these boards at my office for an information session for interested agents last month. They informed us that they have a data-sharing agreement with the ITSO boards but not with PropTx at this point.”

He says the primary issue for the agents that called for the SGM is data and the idea of needing a dual membership to access the boards surrounding them. “We are a one-member, one-vote board and the question was asked if the board needs the membership’s vote to change MLS providers. The answers given were unclear about whether this was required.” This is what led a group of members to call for the SGM and bring the issue to the membership.

“Since this issue has arisen, three members of the board have resigned and new members were appointed by current board members. A commitment was made to take another look at the PropTx agreement (it’s a 10-year commitment and some members were uneasy about the length) and a task force was to be formed regarding amalgamating with CAR.”

 

Response from BRREA

 

In an emailed statement, David DeDominicis, president of BRREA, says special meetings of the membership are available as an option to members who have an item they would like to see debated or an action they would like to see taken.

“In this instance, a minority of members have raised concerns with ongoing discussions between the board of BRREA and the board of PropTx. It is factual and well-known that the board is engaged in contract negotiations to transition to this platform; however, at this time, no contract has been signed with PropTx and BRREA continues to be in the process of negotiating the best deal for our members,” he says.

The statement goes on to say: “BRREA recognizes the MLS landscape in Ontario is changing and it is the board’s responsibility to ensure our members are best served by the platforms and services we use. After a lengthy review of the MLS platforms surrounding our regional jurisdiction, it was determined that PropTx, under the correct terms, is the best option for our members.

The volunteer board members of BRREA are informed in their evaluation not only by their expertise as local realtor members but also through the continuous conversations they have with the membership of our organization. The board’s highest priority is always finding the best value for our members and ensuring every decision made has the best interest in mind for the membership.”

 

Editor’s note:

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

 

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

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

 

Background

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

Original vision for amalgamating

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

MLS system decision extension

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

Missing pieces and a changed vision

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

Key concerns

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Advocacy and MREB’s role

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Transparency needed with partner boards

 

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

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

 

The SGM request

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

MREB’s response

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Last Tuesday, the Amalgamation Task Force (ATF) for the Cornerstone Association of Realtors (Cornerstone) announced the election of Julie Sergi as inaugural chair of its 2024/2025 board of directors. Sergi will begin her role on July 1, 2024.

With 9,000 members, Cornerstone is the second-largest real estate association in Ontario and includes realtors from the associations of Hamilton-Burlington, Mississauga, Simcoe and Waterloo regions.

Sergi, a broker with Royal LePage Burloak Real Estate Services, has been a member of the Realtors Association of Hamilton-Burlington (RAHB) for 19 years, first elected to its board of directors in 2018 and re-elected for two more terms before being elected president-elect in 2023.

The ATF will elect a chair-elect at its next meeting.

 

‘Our goal is to be a transformative force in the real estate sector, surpassing the sum of our individual parts’

 

“I am thrilled and honoured to have been elected as the chair of the Cornerstone Association of Realtors,” says Sergi. “Our goal is to be a transformative force in the real estate sector, surpassing the sum of our individual parts. The local realtor is our north star, and community will be everything for us. This is just the beginning of our exciting journey, and we can’t wait to evolve and grow with our members as we build a brighter future for realtors together.”

 

Collaboration with ITSO

 

Cornerstone is collaborating with Information Technology Systems Ontario (ITSO) to provide enhanced MLS services and professional standards to its members. The new organization believes that all Ontario realtors must have access to all Ontario MLS information to fulfill their fiduciary duty of care to their clients.

Cornerstone says it welcomes data share agreements with any Ontario real estate board/association or listing platform and is committed to working collaboratively to deploy essential protections and security.

 

Photo source: rlpburloak.ca

 

Information Technology Systems Ontario (ITSO) held its second province-wide meeting on November 26 to discuss a few options for increasing access to MLS data. The organization warns that a data divide is hurting Ontario realtors.

ITSO, a not-for-profit corporation, was established in 2020 to provide Ontario realtors with seamless access to complete and accurate MLS listing data and technology. 

Allison McLure, executive director of ITSO, says it was a really great meeting. Co-facilitated by Trevor Koot, CEO of the British Columbia Real Estate Associate and Alan Tennant, CEO of the Calgary Real Estate Board, the meeting began with brokers beginning the session by explaining the problem.

 

The data issue

 

“The reason we were there is because they’ve been really frustrated having to manage multiple sets of MLS rules and data input forms and different professional standards processes. Also, they don’t have the data they need all in one system,” she mentions. “And it’s hurting them.”

McLure indicated there was concern expressed about it also affecting the reputation of realtors. “Consumers see all information on realtor.ca and VOWs and they can’t understand why realtors don’t have the data they need. That was the problem. And that’s what we’re trying to solve.”

 

Proposed solutions

 

Proposed solutions were made through presentations by Corelogic and PropTx. The meeting was held in Toronto with 23 boards from the province represented.

ITSO operates a regional MLS system for 15 of its member real estate associations in the province. McLure says its members have wanted ITSO and the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board to share data for years now. 

“We have had task forces in the past that negotiated with TRREB but those resulted in concerns about a lack of transparency. ITSO hosted the meeting (on Sunday) so that the conversations had by the leaders of the associations would be out in the open and heard by everyone in attendance.”

She says the Corelogic solution would be to make a shared pool of data and centralized database, and then push all that data back into the various MLS systems. So, no one would have to change MLS systems — they would just have all the data in their native system.

McLure added that the PropTx option was for all the boards in the province to start using its blockchain-enabled MLS platform and adopt its rules.

 

A divide across boards

 

“Those are the two solutions on the table. We went around the room and had some very honest and open conversations. TRREB made it very clear that they will not share their MLS data with any of the other boards in the province, as they feel that puts their data at risk,” she explains.

“We didn’t necessarily all agree because we feel our MLS systems have protection as well, but we at least now know TRREB’s stance. I don’t think they’ve ever clearly said that before. So, with the Corelogic solution off the table for TRREB that only leaves one viable option if we really want to solve this problem … and that’s everyone switching to PropTx.”

McLure said some of the boards expressed interest in learning more about PropTx while others raised concerns about the platform’s governance. 

“So, I think there was clearly a divide in the room … Each of those boards now has to go back to their board table and have this discussion and see if they want to move to PropTx or if they want to continue kind of status quo and focus on other problems,” she says.

“I think definitely there will be some more people that will move to PropTx if they feel that’s the way the future is going, and I think there’s going to be others that won’t.”

 

Impact on consumers

 

For consumers, McLure indicates the current situation is inefficient as it’s forcing some realtors to put listings in three different systems. This ends up costing the real estate industry time and money, which is passed on to consumers.

“There’s also a sense of people wanting to get past the politics that exist and to solve the problem,” she adds.

There are seven MLS systems in Ontario and different data in all of these systems. McLure says realtors need access to all of this MLS data to fulfill their fiduciary duties to their clients, to do their jobs and to appear professional in the eyes of consumers. 

 

On November 26, Information Technology Systems Ontario (ITSO) is holding a second Ontario-wide meeting for Ontario real estate association leaders to discuss options for increasing access to MLS data.

The organization believes “realtors should have access to all data (from the province’s seven MLS systems) so that they can do their jobs and appear professional in the eyes of consumers.” Allison McClure, executive director, feels this access will improve professionalism in the industry along with the profession’s public image.

 

Options for increased data access

 

A solution for access to province-wide data will be presented by Corelogic. PropTx will also present its MLS services as another solution.

These options include allowing each association to maintain its own corporate identity, local presence and ownership of its data. ITSO believes there’s no need for associations to be forced into or rush into amalgamations simply to gain access to data.

 

The call to action

 

The organization is seeking support from the leaders of Ontario’s realtor associations. Its hope, as a result of the meeting, is for the industry to have an action plan that will provide all Ontario realtors with the MLS data access they need.

 

Representation so far

 

The meeting will be co-facilitated by Trevor Koot, CEO of the British Columbia Real Estate Association, and Alan Tennant, CEO of the Calgary Real Estate Board. Trevor brings a deep perspective on navigating several amalgamations in B.C. Alan has great insight from the work he has done in moving Alberta towards a mostly province-wide MLS system.

Currently, 100 people will be attending, representing 23 out of the 29 boards and associations in Ontario. As well, several brokers of record and broker-owners from large brokerages will share their perspectives on how multiple MLS systems with different rules, fields and input forms affect their operations.

 

Did you know there is more than one MLS System in Ontario? There are actually seven MLS Systems in the province — more than in any other jurisdiction in Canada — and there is different data in each system. 

Realtors tend to like statistics, so let’s look at some more important numbers.

Consumers viewed MLS listings in the ITSO client portal more than 4 million times in the last month alone. From Jan. 1 to Sept. 30, there were nearly 120,000 new listings on the ITSO MLS System and close to 60,000 sales. These listings and sales come from the more than 23,000 users of the ITSO MLS System — 18,500 of which are realtors.

Now, let’s look at the statistics found in the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board’s (TRREB) Market Watch report. In the same time period, there were more than 112,000 new listings on the TRREB MLS System and close to 54,000 sales. According to CREA’s 2023 Q2 Membership statistics, there were 76,000 realtors that belong to TRREB and TRREB’s partner boards, all contributing to these listings and sales. 

As you can see, access to both ITSO’s MLS data and TRREB’s MLS data is essential for realtors trading in areas covered by these two systems — and these aren’t the only ones in Ontario. 

 

Fragmented MLS systems in Ontario

 

Ontario realtors need access to all the data in the province so that they can do their jobs and appear professional in the eyes of consumers. Consumers have access to Realtor.ca and VOWs. They know what listings are out there, and they notice when properties are missing from searches provided by their realtors. Realtors need access to the comprehensive listings found only in MLS, and they need that information to provide comprehensive comparables and relevant guidance to their clients.

ITSO and its member associations are willing to share their data. The 15 member associations of ITSO share their data with each other, as well as with the Realtors Association of Hamilton-Burlington, Sudbury Real Estate Board, Ottawa Real Estate Board, Cornwall and District Real Estate Board, Rideau-St. Lawrence Real Estate Board and Renfrew County Real Estate Board. The bad news is that there are a handful of real estate associations in Ontario that appear unwilling to reciprocally share their data.

Realtors created these listings and put them in the various MLS Systems across the province. Now, the associations they belong to, formed to act in the best interest of their members, are capitalizing off that data and forcing realtors to pay dual memberships or subscriber fees — just to access their own collective data. This is a tax on realtors that could stop. 

 

Collaborative data sharing

 

ITSO found a solution that can give realtors access to all the data from the various MLS Systems in Ontario — while each association maintains their own corporate identity, local presence, and ownership of their data. Associations do not need to be forced or rush into amalgamations simply to gain access to data. However, this solution will only work if the leaders of the associations in the province support this direction. 

ITSO is not, and will not be, a barrier to increasing access to MLS data because we are only custodians of the data for the real estate associations we serve. This is where ITSO and your local real estate association need to hear from you. 

This has been a year of monumental change in the real estate industry, and there are realtors in Ontario who feel they have not been adequately consulted or heard when they voiced opinions. This is your chance to let your association know if you want them to embrace this opportunity to be pro-competitive and reduce artificial geographical boundaries that currently prevent realtors from accessing all MLS data.

The call for action

 

ITSO is hosting a second province-wide meeting for the leaders of Ontario real estate associations on Nov. 26 to discuss this solution for increasing access to MLS data. We trust that the industry will come out of this meeting with a plan to provide all Ontario realtors with access to the MLS data they need, which will increase professionalism in the real estate industry and raise the public image of the profession. 

We have heard a plethora of reasons as to why increasing access to data can’t or shouldn’t be done. Some associations claim there would be data security concerns, others point to issues regarding the uniqueness of specific markets, and competition is brought up at almost every meeting. 

But these are simply excuses. 

Realtor associations could change to provide services their members want and need instead of just acting as gatekeepers to data. Isn’t it time that the Ontario real estate industry takes this bold step forward?