In May 2025, just 42 new condominium apartments were sold in the City of Toronto. That’s a 69 per cent drop year-over-year, and a staggering 97 per cent below May 2021. Across the entire GTA, only 345 new homes sold: 208 single-family and 137 condos.
According to Altus Group, this ongoing sales collapse threatens to stall Toronto’s housing pipeline and wipe out over 40,000 construction-related jobs if conditions don’t improve.
Released in late June by Altus Group and BILD, the May figures represent the most current full-month snapshot of new home sales (and one of the most seasonally significant periods in the housing calendar).
That’s the story. But if you looked to organized real estate for answers, you’d never know it.
Instead of urgency, members got optics. Boards that were built to support Realtors through difficult markets have become fixated on protecting their own narrative.
In the middle of the worst new home sales slump in decades, some boards offered commentary on crime and bail reform (yes, in a housing update) while others painted a sunshine-and-rainbows picture of a market building momentum when, in fact, it barely regained its footing amidst trade tensions and election uncertainty.
While Realtors were trying to explain to clients why nothing was moving, their representative bodies were preserving image instead of delivering insight.
The quieter the market gets, the louder some boards become. Because when your value proposition fades, overreach starts to look like relevance.
What boards could have said (but didn’t)
A board serious about member service would have used this moment to speak directly to the economic fundamentals reshaping the market:
Canadians need to deleverage. Household debt is still hovering at 173.9 per cent of disposable income. According to the Bank of Canada’s May 2025 Financial Stability Report, 60 per cent of mortgages in Canada will renew in 2025 or 2026. Even after seven rate cuts, most borrowers will face payment increases. OSFI continues to warn that structural debt exposure remains high.
Boards could have helped members prepare their clients and themselves for that reality. They didn’t.
Cap rates are flashing yellow. Altus Group’s Q1 2025 Investment Trends Survey shows capitalization rates trending upward across several asset classes. Suburban multi-unit residential rose to 4.65 per cent. Single-tenant industrial reached 5.93 per cent. On paper, these shifts may seem small. But they translate into five to 15 per cent headline valuation losses; enough to reset investment expectations and weaken the price floor in residential markets.
It should have been the front-page story of every board update. Instead, we got distraction.
And the consequences? Builders can’t make projects pencil. Equity partners are waiting. Lenders are cautious. Land deals are stalling. The risk-free rate is no longer a rounding error. Realtors are in the middle of this. Boards could have helped them understand it. They didn’t.
But the warning signs weren’t limited to cap rates and debt loads. Purpose-built rental completions may be near record highs, but new starts have cratered, down 60 per cent year-over-year, and the pipeline is thinning fast. Vacancy is rising, incentives are back, and investor confidence is softening. Still, boards said nothing.
They also stayed quiet on Ontario’s growing outmigration, on OSFI’s proposed replacement for the mortgage stress test, and on CMHC’s quiet retreat from its affordability benchmark. These aren’t footnotes. They’re flashing signals. The story is playing out across every part of the housing system and boards could have helped members make sense of it.
They didn’t.
Whether it was neglect, confusion, or incapacity, the result is the same: silence when members needed clarity.
The agency problem, made personal
And the silence isn’t accidental. It’s structural.
Boards didn’t just miss these signals. They were never required to address them. Because when power becomes insulated, accountability fades. The problem isn’t just what wasn’t said. It’s why no one had to say it. And that brings us to how real estate governance actually works, and who it works for.
The agency problem happens when people who are supposed to act in your best interest start acting in their own. It creeps in slowly. In governance, it happens when directors and executives stop speaking for members and start managing around them.
This isn’t another article about disengagement. It’s about representation.
Directors begin to equate dissent with disloyalty. Executives start to believe that continuity equals leadership. And over time, boards stop responding to members and start protecting themselves.
That’s how we end up with multi-year tech contracts. Education programs launched without regulator or even stakeholder input. Conduct policies applied retroactively. And when challenged, the response is always procedural: “We followed the process.”
Disenfranchisement by design
Of course they followed the process, because the process was built to protect them from you.
Quorum thresholds are alarmingly low. At some boards, just a handful of votes in an organization of thousands, or even tens of thousands, are enough to pass sweeping by-law changes. As REM has previously published, TRREB’s most recent AGM saw a record turnout. Just over 1,000 members voted, including proxies, out of a membership of more than 70,000. One of the most controversial votes in years failed by fewer than 250 ballots.
This isn’t oversight. It’s insulation.
Through proxy stacking, a handful of insiders can quietly collect voting rights from disengaged members and consolidate control without resistance. Floor motions are ruled out of order. Consultations happen after decisions are finalized. Procedural legitimacy is performed, not earned.
Members don’t just feel shut out. They are.
What Realtors get instead
While agents are trying to keep deals alive and guide uncertain clients through turbulent financing, their boards are delivering generic talking points and irrelevant press releases.
They need data. Insight. Perspective.
Instead, they get messaging. Crime commentary. Boilerplate optimism. Statements no one asked for, released on their behalf.
You can’t fix this with a vote
This isn’t about better personalities. It’s about power.
Major by-law changes and dues increases should require a referendum. Programs introduced without a vote should sunset unless reaffirmed. Governance audits should be routine, not radical. And a national standard for board transparency and accountability should already exist.
In every other sector, these are baseline expectations.
In real estate, they’re treated as revolutionary.
The bottom line
Boards are not regulators. They are service providers. Their power flows from Realtors, not to them. If they’ve forgotten that, remind them.
As I argued in a previous article, the problem isn’t disengagement. It’s disenfranchisement.
You’re not just a member. You’re the owner. Act like it. Ask harder questions. Demand transparency. Refuse silence as an answer.
Brandon Reay brings a multifaceted background in real estate practice, policy, and governance. Before stepping into brokerage leadership, Brandon spent several years in organized real estate, contributing to strategic initiatives and advocacy efforts with CREA and OREA, and various Chambers of Commerce. His work has included shaping housing policy, supporting regulatory reform, and improving REALTOR® engagement across the country.
Brandon’s approach blends hands-on brokerage experience with a systems-level understanding of how policy, market forces, and professional standards intersect. He is known for helping professionals navigate evolving market conditions and advocating for higher standards within the industry. In addition to his leadership role at RE/MAX Hallmark Realty Group, he remains an active REALTOR® focused on agent development, business strategy, and client service.
Brandon regularly contributes commentary on market trends to media outlets and industry publications and has served as a spokesperson on housing issues in Ottawa. He is also a frequent speaker at real estate events, offering data-driven insights on brokerage strategy, professionalism, and the future of the industry.
He holds a Master of Business Administration from the Sprott School of Business. Brandon lives in Ottawa, where he remains closely involved in local policy discussions on housing affordability and real estate governance.
I will shout this from the roof tops. Thank you for articulating how I feel.
Very refreshing article to read. Truth hurts sometimes, glad that you have the space, clarity and insight to write this.
It is an RE board’s role to provide MLS services to their Realtor members, to ensure agents’ compliance, and to offer statistical data to their members.
Unless REM can show instances of inaccurate data provided to their members this article doesn’t seem to have much merit.
Yes, we are at the nadir of the real estate cycle. From Trudeau to Trump to the BoC, there are many contributing factors. But always remember, the best cure for high prices, is high prices. You’re seeing it at work.
Very honest and brave Brandon. Well done and well written.
Well put, Brandon, about time the truth be told!
Boards could care less about reality. All they care about are bloating membership numbers that pay monthly dues. The bottom line they care about is THEIR bottom line.
Thanks for a very insightful article Brandon. Governance is indeed the issue. The Carver Governance model used by many boards, Not for Profit organizations and even some corporations is seriously broken. This is because the model lacks real accountability. Even when compensation plans and checklists and dashboards are used, these generally serve the interests of the CEO and occasionally the board members, but rarely the actual members. Everything is tilted towards the organization rather than the members it is meant to serve. Under this model, a forward looking organization can only evolve and properly serve its members under the leadership of an insightful, generous, non-power-seeking and enlightened CEO who truly has the membership’s interests at heart. This is not impossible but certainly very rare.
I do fear I may be hearing the rustle of cease and desist letters being generated by the farm as these opinion pieces shining light on the insulation practices of some boards, increase in frequency.
It’s clear though that many of the membership is waking up. About time!
The cavernous space between members and Board CEO’s is a void that cannot be crossed over under the current system.
I witnessed the member disenfranchisement first hand at TRREBS last AGM. Nothing was achieved except even more dissension. A 100% reflection on how badly relations between the Board and members have become.
I was personally embarrassed to witness the manner in which the Board responded. That said, it is a common problem across almost all corporations, to deflect and erect obstacles between those they serve and their own interest. It’s not isolated it’s common culture now. Members need to consistently demand better and not fear legal retributions for demanding better more accountable service.
If the best we can do is to be subjected to listening about Toronto traffic congestion,
then we have completely lost the plot.
I have been saying this for you years. Boards associations, brokers, real estate franchises ALL don’t give a shit. They just want their money AND POWER well, guess what? That money is going to be slowly disappearing. It started with the mandatory insurance, and it’s going to continue. The cards are going to start to fall. And it looks good on them.
The sad part is realtors have been paying and paying and paying and now guess what? There’s nothing left to pay with
Our government Surprise Surprise caused this ENTIRE mess, and will sit back AND blame it on somebody else as per usual.
LET THE SHIT SHOW BEGIN
Excellent article and totally on point. One only has to look at how long the same group of directors, presidents, chairs of the various Boards, alternate roles and keep showing up to vote for each other pushing outdated by-laws, policies and technology. Support for the membership base is down to zero. And to your point, if someone does object or offers a critique they are vilified, threatened and sometimes even fined an outrageous amount. Leadership at these associations seems more interested in being recognized by one of the numerous US businesses courting the members hard earned dollars as the # 1 such and such person of the year. Well done Brandon!
Sir, your voice as the BofR of the largest brokerage in Ontario, premiere condo brokerages and proptech systems that set the industry standard, can carry much weight.
You have to manage almost 9% of the largest board’s membership, billions of dollars of consumer property transaction and tens of millions of commissions each year. That board manages staff of less than 100. Whatever you and other leaders like you have to say carries a lot of weight.
Your voices should be heard loud and clear, and more often. Please and thank you.
Brandon Reay is forcing a serious conversation, yet few are responding. That is a shame.
This opinion piece concludes with “You’re not just a member. You’re the owner. Act like it. Ask harder questions. Demand transparency. Refuse silence as an answer.”, and although I share his broad concerns about ORE, on that point we would disagree.
The fact is members are not owners, not even remotely. NPO non share capital arrangements cannot and would not ever be akin to a share corporation. Mr. Reay is absolutely correct to say the way ORE remains silent is structural.
Unequivocally, ORE – the buck stopping with its board of directors – demonstrates they are responsible parents to the child professional, they work around them…so very correct. They act in their own interests or in the misguided belief they are acting in the organizations broad interests.
Yes dissent is viewed as disloyalty, the label that drives oppossition to the opposition and a righteous belief the Board has got it best…which is why, for instance, the OREA wellness program was designed to require imbalanced in put for reward arrangements, not every member is treated alike in that program.
Yes, the process, heaven help us to find a process that actually is a process of considerate manner.
Members are shut out. There is no accountability, because accountability is measurable. Nothing in ORE is measurable.
But it cannot be fixed by a vote as Mr. Reay suggests. It can only be fixed by a revolution of idea and approach. And REALTORS® have not reached the tipping point where ORE is so in the way of service to clients and earning a living that it is moved from irritant to inhibitor.
He mentions disenfranchisement….and that is definitely structural. Decisions at OREA and CREA in selecting governance matter decisions is not made as one REALTOR® one vote…the grass roots associations have the votes. So let us all change this one thing…every one of us votes at OREA, CREA, and local.
And move away from NPO to share capital. Then the results will always be measurable!
Thanks, Cameron.
I always appteciate your engagement and completely agree with your clarification.
You’re absolutely right, Realtors are not legal owners in the NPO sense, and I should have been more careful with my language – I can own that.
What I intended to convey is that we fund these associations, rely on their services, and are meant to be the ones they serve. That moral and financial stake deserves more than passive membership (at least in my view). But precision matters and I hope it didn’t detract from the rest of the argument!
Your point about “a revolution of idea and approach” resonates deeply. Structural reform won’t come from a vote, but widespread awareness, pressure, and a rethinking of how power is distributed within our associations might begin to move the needle.
Thanks again for pushing the conversation forward
Brandon, clarification accepted and appreciated. And I did not really miss your point about members responsibility is to not be passive. Might disagree with that one too, but not for the idea that members should not be involved. Rather the systemic structure of NPO’s, where there is no accountability or objective means to evaluate organizational success, both breeds, inhibits, and dismisses the very involvement your ideas promote. ORE is directly involved in the success of us REALTORS®, we actually think because it is for us alone that we even know how to run it from a governance viewpoint, and we cannot. Being more active is not the solution, shifting our governance to professional governors of corporate structures would be the more beneficial route, in which case, like the lowly shareholder of a for profit share corporation, our interests at profiting from the entities existence would always be the guide and not the few who believe what they know is all that is necessary to know.
Great comment. I would count myself among those who don’t feel When TRREB moved from NPO to For Profit along with the creation of PropTx (and the whole back story there) I expressed the opinion that our Associations should be Share Capital Corporations. You’re the only other person I’ve heard express this. Cheers! I’ve toyed with running for office based on this platform instead of the usual, dare I say drivel, we hear from not all, but too many candidates The MLS, PropTX etc. were all built with Realtor funding yet we aren’t the real stakeholders are we. Share Capital would be transformative in terms of realtor engagement and benefits to membership. I’d back anybody running on this platform.
Finally someone reporting on the facts and the harsh realities of current market conditions.
Couldn’t agree more with the sentiments expressed so well by Brandon Reay. So, what specific, meaningful next steps can we take to kick start change for the better? Vetting and supporting Board candidates who align with these views?
Superb objective article!
ORE is in desperate need of a third party governance review and results distributed directly to each and every individual member for their participation to achieve results reflective of the collective will of the members who, as you know, are footing the bill of ORE! Somehow this has been overlooked by so many and it’s no wonder members neither trust nor respect ORE. Radical changes are necessary, however, those in charge of the process have to step up or step aside.
You pointed out the real failure of real estate boards. i have seen their empowerment over 40 years and how salespeople have no interest in them and treat Boards as a necessary nuisance and expense to be successful. Thankyou !!! now get ready to be lambasted for criticizing them.
Mega boards created by the elimination of local boards have greatly contributed to the current state we are facing. Members will not, and do not have the time nor desire to drive 1 to 2+ hours to a meeting in Toronto or any other location with a now centralized board. The focus of boards seems to be on engaging high price tech companies to “make our life easier”. While these new costs does give boards another reason for increasing/adding fees. Claiming to make us more professional. They are downgrading the importance of personal interactions with clients and agents that are a vital component of real estate business.
The number of agents today who do not bother to (or do not know how ) to complete a proper CMA is appalling! They quote numbers from systems generated reports that are drastically skewed with properties that are out of area, different types/& or size of properties, or in poor state of repair. At this point, what is the benefit of boards, OREA, of CREA ?
We have RECO dictating rules!
One independent agent membership controlled listing service would suffice (not board, not TRREB, not RECO controlled) .
Disagree with the idea ORE amalgamations is a contributor. Certainly, the combining of boards has not realized improved governance benefits – it is perhaps entrenching the malais that has existed for a long time in the associations, and if that is what is meant by contributing to the current status – maybe that is fair.
Agree the emphasis of ORE is downgrading instead of uplifting the professionalism. And for certain agree the foundational aspect of what REALTORS® do is about a very personal relationship and support which is not manifest in remote, distance, and virtual services.
Still, and historically speaking in relation to how a professional guild transforms from territorial, local community structured organizations into a provincial one, the consolidation of 40 areas into 35, then 30, then 25 and eventually to 1 begins with an amalgamation. In that sense one is better than none and on the road to more that leads to all into one.
Even though the horizon may be visible, the problem is that some for profit entity will soon be ahead of the approach. We will loose. Or worse, we will get to the horizon first but will have not changed our governance ways.
Thank you for this well-written and timely article. I can only hope that our associations take the time to read it and recognize that this reflects how most of us feel.
It’s time for our associations, and in particular, their CEO’s to remember that their role is to support the membership, not the other way around. We are the ones on the front lines, and we deserve leadership that understands that reality and operates with our best interests in mind.
It may be time for a change in leadership, we need new dedicated individuals who truly understand their responsibility to serve and advocate for the professionals they represent.
Brandon — You’re right: a healthy sales mindset keeps clients calm, but sugar-coating the data just gives everyone cavities. Here’s a quick, constructive fix-it list:
Member-led focus circles – 15-20 agents recruited for their willingness to question dogma, not their campaign posters. Quarterly, no-spin briefs in plain sight.
Open-call volunteer panels – choose contributors by problem-solving track record, rotate yearly, and celebrate dissent as a KPI.
Reality dashboards – the same debt, cap-rate, and pipeline stats you flagged, updated monthly. If it looks ugly, that’s the headline.
Participation nudge – tie voting rights to a micro-credential on governance basics; turnout and literacy climb together.
Audit-and-sunset rule – any program launched without a member vote auto-expires in 24 months unless re-approved by a super-majority.
Truth-first comms – yes, stay positive, but lead with facts. Our job is to educate the public, not spin them. Optimism without candour is just marketing; clients deserve adulthood.
More truth, more voices, more doing. Boards serve us, not the other way round. Let’s swap spin for signal and get back to work.
Thoughts?
Thanks for this, Larry,
The reality dashboards idea is spot on. If the numbers look rough, that should be the headline. That’s how we build real trust (with facts, not filters).
I’m a big fan of sunset clauses. So many programs just live forever without review, and members are left wondering who approved what and when. Putting an expiry on anything not member-voted makes a lot of sense.
The rest of your suggestions all point to the same thing: participation. Not just performative input, but real, structured involvement. And I agree! That’s where the shift starts.
My worry is that the folks who aren’t participating now likely still won’t, even if we build a more transparent, inclusive culture. They’ve been conditioned to believe their voice doesn’t matter, or they’re too busy navigating a tough market to take time for governance. So we need to do more than just open the doors; we need to pull people in. Show them how this directly affects their business. Connect the dots between board decisions and their day-to-day.
Maybe that’s a mix of micro-credentialing like you suggest, targeted outreach, and rethinking how we define “value” in membership. Not just services, but agency. If members start to feel like they own the outcome, I think the numbers shift.
Thanks for adding to the conversation. More of this.
Sadly, governance review is not the answer either. Since the consulting companies are hired and paid for by the status quo CEO’s and directors, they can hardly be the agent of change. They are however excellent at reinventing the governance wheel and implementing yet more charts and dashboards and measures that keep everyone busy but does nothing for accountability. I recall an interview with one consultant while I was a director. I said to him, “you know that the CEO needs to go don’t you” and he responded, :Of course he does but I can’t recommend that because he hired us”. At least he was honest but he did earn $112,000 to put us in an even bigger mess.
Ok! So all the congrats and we all agree that a change needs to happen. Maybe a revolution….
This is all fine and great. But…. where do WE go from here?
When and how do WE kick these wallet sucking leaches off of their high-horses and teach them a lesson the next governance will not soon to forget?
Until that happens, this all just talk and they will simply continue sitting there laughing at all these comments.
And! If the boat is rocked or they feel threatened, they will simply use your/our money to defend themselves. Not the board… themselves!
So, When does the revolution start?
Unfortunatley, talk is cheap.
The revolution starts when keyboard warriors become action agents, very few are game
and,
they then stand up to the threats and vigorously defend. Fewer still will.
The revolution starts when keyboard warriors become action agents, very few are game
and,
they then stand up to the threats and vigorously defend. Fewer still will.
Unfortunately, talk is the only thing that’s cheap in this industry.
I hear you, and you’re right that venting alone won’t create change. But it can be the start of something more if it’s used to connect and organize.
The next step is understanding what the broader membership really wants. Talk to people in your office, in your network, at events. Ask what matters to them. What do they think needs to change? What would they support? The goal isn’t to rally outrage, it’s to build alignment around shared priorities.
Once you have a sense of that, look at your board’s by-laws. The process is already defined. What does it take to bring a motion forward? How many signatures to call a Special General Meeting? When’s the next AGM, and how do you get something on the agenda? Knowing the mechanics is key.
From there, start preparing: whether that’s drafting motions, building a group willing to speak publicly, or creating a place to share updates and coordinate next steps. A small, organized group with a clear ask is far more powerful than scattered frustration.
Once you have a widely accepted idea of where you want to go, you then bring in the tools to get there. Ideas like referendums for major decisions, sunset clauses for board programs, and better ways to engage members in governance. But none of this moves forward unless more people start getting involved at the local level and within the structure that already exists.
It’s about being prepared, informed, and persistent. That’s how things start to shift.
I appreciate the comment and have a pretty good sense of what my next contribution to REM should be! Thank you
If you want to see what connect and organize produces, search OROMOO and lawsuit.
The silence in support of the two little fish advocates who will win their case to the benefit of 100,000 agents, is deafening. Except for a handful of open supporters of the two women, that was a group of keyboard warriors at their finest happy to have 4 women do the work while they rambled on and threw money at lawyers to do something. Recentlly, another woman was publicly defamed for raising awareness about a by-law overhaul managed to rally a thousand or so to vote it down. There too crickets for change or over her being insulted.
Talk is cheap! Today it’s the twitter version of no one wanting to read anything in full or spend more than a few hundred keystrokes on a position.
Few, very few are more than keyboard warriors. The big fish talk who have the soapbox and power do nothing. It’s telling that all the advocacy pieces for change are written by men in positions of power but the only actions were by women with relatively few of the thousands of keyboard warriors they advocated for, openly standing with them.
The for profit thing isn’t new either. There is a story of an attempt to start one by a handful of well known agents each with multiple decades in the business, and as directors, presidents and association arbitrators. It was a hair-brained plan to dismantle a provincial association’s current reason for being, create an opposing for profit association that would profit by charging a fee to belong to a private website and by selling products to the membership. It included talk of suing one or more boards by one of the principals who felt he was being targeted for speaking out against them. The organization was registered in one man’s name, its website created.
Not all ideas of for-profit in this industry is made with sound logic or even good intentions. That surely was not one. It was thwarted when discovered but I suspect that plan may still be on the table. Fortunately, the principals don’t know what they’re doing.
The only real solution is competition. Sever the link between board membership and MLS access and let boards compete across territories based on the true value they offer their members. Even if we end up with something like Canada’s bad telco model, we’d still be miles ahead of where we are today and where we’re likely headed.
Whatever boards are still standing after the Competition Bureau/Hereford litigation funder duo finish throttling the industry should be pick up the pieces, damp down their egos and join forces. For example, I’d love to see Cornerstone and Calgary team up and give TRREB/PropTx a run for their money.
CREA should also think seriously about selling off a chunk of Realtor.ca while its near peak value. Giving Zillow, CoStar or Beike a toe-hold in Canada’s portal business is not for the faint of heart, but something’s going to give soon. We should get ahead of it.
Excellent Article