Stock photo (Canva)
At Wednesday’s annual general meeting, members of the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board decisively rejected proposed bylaw changes that would have shifted some decision-making powers, including control over membership dues, from members to the board of directors.
Key changes included condensing the bylaws into plain language, introducing semi-annual dues payments with a surcharge and allowing the board to amend policies and bylaws without member approval. Critics argued the proposed reforms threatened transparency and accountability, especially amid financial pressures and declining membership numbers. Supporters of the motion insisted it was necessary for operational efficiency.
Sources inside the room confirm the motion failed to pass, with the final vote count 393 in favour, 635 against.
Criticism of the process, not intentions
Ken McLachlan, CEO Re/Max Hallmark, said he wasn’t surprised by the outcome, but he was disappointed.
“I believe the board of directors is trying to do what’s right for the members. A lot of the changes they proposed were necessary. But the way they went about it—the presentation, the discussion, the voting process—was poorly executed. If I have any criticism, it’s not of their intentions, but of the process,” he said.
“I think they need to go back and revise the proposal. From my experience on the board, they need to learn from this. If I were advising them, and I’m not, I’d suggest they revisit their purpose, break down their goals into smaller parts, and present them more clearly. And the voting process needs a complete overhaul. The way it was conducted was, in my opinion, terrible.”
Leading up to the vote, some members voiced concerns that the changes threatened accountability and transparency in the 73,000-member organization, which posted a $7.65-million deficit in 2024, according to financial statements. TRREB also reported a 3.3 per cent decline in membership year-over-year.
Last fall, TRREB members rejected a proposed $60 increase in dues for 2025. Fees vary by membership category but are generally around $700.
Statement from TRREB
In a statement to Real Estate Magazine, TRREB CEO John DiMichele acknowledged the outcome, emphasizing that the board “values the decision of Members regarding the proposed By-Law amendments.”
He added that TRREB’s focus has been on listening to member feedback while aligning changes with “legal compliance, good governance, and risk mitigation.”
The statement continues, “Moving forward, TRREB will continue to engage with Members, ensuring their voices guide the path ahead, while maintaining a strong commitment to accountability and the long-term health of the organization.”
Calls for broader participation and better communication
McLachlan elaborated on Wednesday’s voting process.
“You had to be physically present to vote—it was ridiculous. They allowed proxies, but I believe only about a thousand people voted. We’re all busy, and asking people to go to the convention centre, sit through presentations in a dark room and vote passionately in that setting—it’s not the best way to get a true sense of the membership’s views…”
“…If they had put it to a broader electronic vote, maybe things would have been different. I don’t even know if they’re allowed to do that, but the way it was handled didn’t give everyone a fair chance to participate,” he said.
“Honestly, I don’t think (the defeat of the proposal) says much about the members themselves. What it should tell the leadership is that the way they presented the initiative was ineffective. The goal may have been right, but the delivery failed. They need to return to the drawing board and figure out better ways to communicate with members, to allow for input, and to make it easier for people to vote.”
Divided membership and lingering distrust
Jeff Mount, a TRREB member and Realtor with Web Max Realty, said membership is divided, and there is anger between the two sides. He believes common ground can be found through the engagement of the members.
“I don’t believe it was a revolt against dues increases. It was a statement from members about engagement and being part of the process,” he explained.
“The process has taken us back a few years in the other decisions TRREB has made. In 2023, it was the ORWP…it was basically rammed down the throats of Realtors without engagement. And then the fall of 2024, there was a $60 additional membership increase proposed, and $60 to 70,000 people isn’t the issue. It was that there was a lack of transparency.”
Mount: “We have a spending problem”
“Even though they’ve done a better job today than they’ve done in previous years about finances, I think they still missed an opportunity (for) engagement to communicate to the membership why we need this money. They’re asking for money and we’re all in favour of that. When they spend it the way that they spend it, that’s when membership says ‘woah, wait a minute’.”
Mount quoted Ontario Premier Ford in describing the situation: “We don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
“I don’t think the two sides are as far apart as the vote indicated. I just think that the majority of the members are angry with the process and the lack of engagement, and the appearance of slamming it down our throat without member participation.”
McLachlan: “I support those efforts. It just wasn’t communicated properly.”
Ahead of the AGM, McLachlan says he recorded and shared a video with Hallmark Realtors after they asked for more information on TRREB’s proposed changes.
“Our members reached out to us with concerns about the lack of communication. They didn’t feel informed and were hearing things second-hand. So we felt we had a responsibility to provide clear information to our agents.”
Had proposed changes been explained “more clearly,” McLachlan feels the vote may have gone differently.
“Everything costs money to run, and I think they should have explained that more clearly. Some members may have made decisions based purely on emotion around the $50 increase, without a full understanding of what services they’re receiving.
“…As for the bylaw and procedural modernization—that’s absolutely a good thing and an important one. I support those efforts. It just wasn’t communicated properly,” he said, adding he senses that the board was not completely surprised by the outcome.
McLachlan described a feeling of “passion” among attendees, attributing some of it to misinformation and some to poor communication.
“(The board is) on the right track with wanting to make changes, but they need to approach it differently, possibly by breaking it down into smaller parts. And they need to improve how they communicate with members. We elect them to do a job, and we need to trust them, but trust requires transparency and engagement,” he explained.
Mario Toneguzzi is a contributing writer for REM. He has more than 40 years of experience as a daily newspaper writer, columnist, and editor. He worked for 35 years at the Calgary Herald, covering sports, crime, politics, health, faith, city and breaking news, and business. He now works on his own as a freelance writer for several national publications and consultant in communications and media relations/training. Mario was named in 2021 as one of the Top 10 Business Journalists in the World by PR News – the only Canadian to make the list.
The members always know best . Try cutting your budget . How in the hell do you end up with a 7 million dollar budget shortfall .
Well said Moss.
Great points Ken, perhaps it’s time for you to get back on the board…if you can make it through the current vetting and TRREB endorsement of candidates’ process.
How? Well bringing in Pitbull to entertain instead of someone who could teach was not a smart move
“It was ineffective” according to Mr. MacLachlan. On that I agree with him. I totally disagree that they were not surprised at the outcome, The directors’ email was rude and patronizing. They could have said sorry folks, we’ll scrap it and get back to you six weeks before the fall annual AGM. They didn’t! Likely because they once again miscalculated the anger and disengagement would allow it to pass.
Did the directors learn anything, this time? For the most part, none are novices at this. Eight of them have between 2 and 7 years experience on this board and according to the prerequisite, also have about 4 years of committee experience.
I’d say that’s a goodly number of years to have learned something.
In contrast, RECO’s 2024 virtual AGM had fewer than 200 members voting. That’s 1/5th of todays covering a complement of 106,000 voting registrants. A handful asked questions, all carefully thought out, and intelligent. RECO took all the time necessary to thoughtfully respond, never once hedging, demurring, cutting off or being condescending.
One segment in particular had numerous questions concerning directors. From how they became candidates to their qualifications, outside job if one, renumeration by RECO and most of all, conflicts of interest which I’ll mention last as it may be important to the upcoming RECO AGM on May 29th.
Cathy Polan who was at the time OREA’s incoming president, seeming incredulous, wanted to know why RECO’s non-industry director candidates are not brought before the AGM to give a speech as she would like to see them in action before endorsing them.
Why is that great question of importance to REM’s readers? Because Ms. Polan’s very organization which consists of past directors of boards including several from this board, shut down the ORWP Q&A in 2023 as noted in this very publication. Likewise, the board, at it’s 2023 fall AGM shut theirs down after 1 question that was seeking financial clarity for legall actions taken against its members.
How much was learned then, when it came to engaging with the members by doing a complete overhaul of by-laws, to just hold two townhalls, one in a small restaurant, not properly explain the change and give 73,000 members 30 minutes by which to cast the one and only vote when they were allowed 6 days to vote for the directors? The Director candidates who, incidentally, were not given the opportunity, either in 2024, 2023 or ever, to stand in front of the members and speak akin to what OREA’s current President Polan wanted to know of RECO, while she was a director at OREA .
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Another question diligently asked of RECO’s Chair, Katie Steinfeld, was about looking for conflicts of interest in its candidate vetting process. Ms. Steinfeld responded offering that, RECO’s board has ‘a very strict conflict of interest policy.
Ms. Steinfeld is currently up for re-election at RECO’s upcoming May 29 AGM. Her spouse, Daniel Steinfeld sat at today’s AGM as the president-elect.
Is there a disclosure of that RECO Chair, board President spousal relationship somewhere? Should there be? Is there a potential for a conflict of interest if a complaint was made to RECO about a director?
Are you voting on May 29?
Editor’s note: This comment has been edited to remove a misattributed quote. While readers are encouraged to share opinions and critique, direct quotations must reflect what was accurately said.
I hope TRREB made notes today.
The outcome was embarrassing, poorly delivered. Everyone on both sides of the fence were let down.
Those who use the word transparence should actually look up the definition of this word.
No where in the definition is the expllanation of how to screw everyone over.
Its one of the words POLITICIANS and anyone in power uses to scew people over. Its like the saying “LET ME BE CLEAR”.
So let me be clear how im going to Transparently SCREW YOU OVER!!!!
Having sat on both sides of these tables, I can understand a boards desire to press ahead without giving membership at large too much opportunity to engage.
Our industry has evolved piecemeal, which now has caused a traffic jam of initiatives and nobody knows what anyone else is doing, or why. The boards focus full time on their initiatives. Typically led by a board of directors who are at least somewhat active in the industry, who also don’t benefit monetarily from their work (at least, not significantly), I believe they try to have the best interests of the industry and the agents at heart selflessly.
Conversely, we know that the broad majority of realtors don’t have a deep, internal understanding of board vision. And we’ve seen mob mentalities spread like wildfires in a drought spinning simple plans designed to assist agents over the long term into sinister intentions thought to destroy.
Thus, the divide widens, and clarity clouded. Insults are slung, respect disappears, cease and desists and threats of lawsuits for interference scattered from ivory towers and any opportunity to learn or grow is far out the window.
Asking trreb to clarify their intentions to try to vote again won’t make enough of an impact, in my mind. A fraction of our membership read beyond the second paragraph in TRREBs last email, and walked away furious at TRREB for opening information with petty drama that nobody ever knew about to begin with. The membership cares, a lot. This is their careers and livelihoods on the table the boards are tinkering with. However the vast majority do not have the ability – for whatever their own reasons – to dive into the learning enough to really understand.
The water cooler talk will always prevail with a membership this large, spread as wide as they are.
Hmmmm… an argument for smaller boards that can more easily and intimately reach their constituents? 😉 Truthfully, I don’t know what the answer is. There’s pros and cons to all the options our stakeholders are demanding. I think it takes a quality board to really consider all the options from an entirely unbiased perspective, and a continuance of a board beyond 2 year turnovers to carry it through.
Ken: brilliantly worded. You and Steve provided more fair and unbiased transparency and agent support than TTREB did through this. Thank you.
Very Well said! Just to clarify, those threats of Lawsuits are Very Real.
Toronto Regional Real Estate Board v.s Maher, Dutkowski, John Doe & Jane Doe.
Ken McLachlan did a simple thing that shows his leadership and why ReMax Hallmark grows regardless of conditions in the market.
He took the time to help his large group of agents understand the issues by creating a video.
Agents need real leadership in a brokerage or they leave to find it.
Congratulations Ken on showing the way to be leader.
The vote represents the mistrust that realtors have for the leadership at TRREB. Realtors, such as myself, still have contempt for the disingenuous way the ORWP was implemented. There is a general belief among many realtors that the vote on the ORWP initiative was manipulated in favour of the moving parties, by bastardizing the democratic process to ensure passage. Threats of lawsuits against realtors who had strong opinions against the ORWP created mistrust and suspicions of malfeasance by those in leadership. The vote against the TRREB by-laws this week is the residual effect of the ORWP debacle and the mistrust, and motives of people who want to take away voting rights from member realtors. Let’s call for a financial audit on spending and a review of the oversized bureaucracy at TRREB, I’m certain that we could find cost savings that would keep these bureaucrats out of our pockets.
Agree 100% with John Civello comment. Very well said. Why would members want to give TREBB even more power by changing bylaws? No trust there whatsoever.
“Let’s call for a financial audit on spending and a review of the oversized bureaucracy at TRREB, I’m certain that we could find cost savings that would keep these bureaucrats out of our pockets”
Has TREBB dropped the law suits against their TREBB members for speaking out against ORWP??? That would save some money!
“Maybe I Shouldn’t Put My Name Here” No they have not. The results should be coming soon. May 29th, there and about.
Absolutely. I felt bad because most of the proposals were entirely reasonable. But when trust was lost I feel it needs to be earned back – with transparency – before you ask for even MORE autonomy.
We need to bring in an independent auditor to take a look at everything and make suggestions. I suspect we have a lot of dead wood that needs to be removed and wasteful spending. From what I understand they just spent $500,009 on a guest speaker. Really? Who were they were trying to impress with that.
I’m not a TRREB member and generally agree with many of the criticisms citing lack of transparency and accountability. After OREA’s mandatory ORWP challenges including at our local boards, no one should be surprised at any member’s mistrust of any level of organized real estate. It’s time for an arm’s length (no realtors or board CEOs or any staff) objective review/audit of our provincial and local governance, policies etc. and provide recommendations to address deficiencies in order to regain the trust of the members. And if current leaders (elected and non-elected) can’t see this themselves then nothing will change for the betterment of the members.
Thankyou Mario – great article – let’s here more from you! And nice to see democratic real estate in motion, not top down imposed dictums.- – maybe well meant but also unfortunately sometimes cloaked, under-informed & misdirected & fallible – maybe even ego-self-serving
I’m not surprised that TRREB members voted overwhelmingly No. Another organization, The Real Estate Institute of Canada (REIC), revised their Bylaws recently with the same Consultant involved in the process. The argument is always made that Directors are acting in the best interests of membership and therefore need more power. Member rights were taken away and control handed over to the National Board and CEO for most decisions resulting in numerous members leaving or withholding their dues in protest. Any members that voiced concerns were summarily suspended. The previous bylaws of REIC had a CPI clause so that dues could not increase above inflation, the new bylaw allows unlimited increases. As soon as they were passed, National dues were increased 13.8% after an increase the previous year as well. Like others have commented, it’s not the $60 but rather having a voice and transparency that the members are asking for. A Quorum of 100 people is ridiculous for an organization of 70,000 members. My advice to TRREB is to learn from the REIC mistakes that have created havoc and mistrust. Members do not like important decisions being made on their behalf with no transparency. Leaving our most important decisions to a small group has proven over time to be a bad practice.
Good points John. Efficiency and transparency are opposites, you cannot have maximums of both. When they butt up against each other, you must always err on the side of transparency and open governance.
In governance organizations, whenever there are deficits, the answer is always higher taxes, I mean membership fees, and never lowering expenditures.
As well, to argue that requiring physical presence somehow swayed the vote is not a valid argument. Those who make the effort to get properly informed will make the effort to go and vote. Method of voting does not favour yes or no sides in an issue.
What happened at REIC is, in my opinion, very misguided and disappointing. No member was ever suspended in 50 years and all of a sudden, long time, highly respected, very active members are being suspended without any due process or notice to membership.
TRREB members made the right decision. Never let too much power into too few hands. The reasons for asking for more power are always pure and virtuous – and always wrong. The entirety of human flourishing rests on this principle. Good job TRREB members.
I want to know why members were not given the opportunity to vote remotely. The fee for Realtor quest was astronomical…. unless they would allow you to attend the meeting without having to sign up for Realtor Quest. If we were permitted to vote remotely I did not see any information on it.
Tim,
The opposition was strong. It was possible that TRREB wanted to ensure that those in disagreement did not rally their indifferent peers or act as their unofficial proxies (e. g. sign in and vote from multiple devices). Even the proxy designation process was quite rigorous this time.
So sick of Bullying tactics of the board
It is about time that we have some changes at the top of the food chain. Why is it that we don’t want a new CEO. In most cooperations CEOs last the longest would be 5 years. We need new vision and someone who wants to listen to its members not the same old. So far Brampton, Barrie are gone. looks like more will go if this keeps up. Why don’t they work together and do what is best for the members. TRREB must have spent Million of dollars for the new system that no one likes why not just enhance what we had. No wonder if the same people keep running the show and Management controls the BOD members nothing will change. It is time for a change at the TOP. There are no other qualified people in this country who can run this board than the ones who are doing it now and promoting themselves without any input from the members. Wonder how much are they getting paid for the jobs that no one is happy with.
Full disclosure. I am not a member of TRREB nor am I even a licensed real estate practitioner. I am a customer, but a customer who has been responsible for completing thousands of residential real estate purchase and sale transactions across the country. While I am now retired, I still have many friends, colleagues and acquaintances within the industry, and therefore, an interest in what happens within the industry. As a result, I have knowledge based on 40 years of experience, that entitles me to some opinions.
As a customer I have long held opinions of issues within the real estate industry that need to be addressed. As an entrepreneur, I also have years of management experience running my own company.
Based on all of the above, I see dark days ahead for organized real estate that have been on the horizon for a long time. I have watched from the sidelines as the industry continues down a path that will ultimately cause it to implode. I am encouraged however, to see the membership, the true owners of TRREB, speaking up. It’s not to late but the finish line is approaching fast.