News   May 23, 2024
 217     0 
News   May 23, 2024
 424     5 
News   May 23, 2024
 852     0 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's always monthly.

For everyone else's reference, the way it works is that every condo owner has a vote in the Condo Board of Directors, and certain residents will take on certain tasks within that. Each Condo Board must manage the state of good repair of the building, so they will be both billing residents for things like overall month to month maintenance (landscaping, pools, etc) but also creating a slush fund for big-ticket items that will come up in the future (roof replacement, window replacement, rooftop mechanical replacement, etc). Since each condo board decides for themselves how to collect and allocate these resources, you end up with some buildings with really low maintenance fees (usually because they are mismanaged) and some buildings with really high maintenance fees. Typically the ones with really low fees will hit a point where they have a big ticket expense but nothing in the coffers, so everyone's maintenance fees will skyrocket for a month or two to cover the cost.

So to answer someone's question "Why would anyone live in a building with such high fees?" The simple answer is, you can never really know what your maintenance fees will be... you just have to hope that your condo board has its wits about it and is properly managing their books. You can typically get this information before purchasing a unit in a building for peace of mind. I'm sure the fees in that building weren't always so high, and it can sometimes be a reason that people are selling (which has a habit of depressing the value of the unit).

Yes, maintenance fees in condos are always payable monthly but you are not quite right about how Condos work in Ontario. Every condo corporation has a Board of Directors and every owner gets to vote for the Board. Once the Board is elected they are legally responsible for ensuring the 'common elements" are properly maintained. (A condo building has two parts: Units - maintained by owners - and Common Elements - maintained by the Corporation - and the boundaries between these two parts are described in the Declaration of the Condominium Corporation - the Declaration is really its constitution.

By law each Corporation has to have a Reserve Fund (not really a 'slush fund") to deal with (only) major repairs and replacements and by law must have an engineer or architect or other trained professional review it every 3 years (a Reserve Fund Study). The annual budget, which is set by the Board, is comprised of the "running expenses (utilities, salaries, basic upkeep, management fees etc) PLUS the contribution to the Reserve Fund - the latter is, in essence, set by the Reserve Fund Study.

The part of the monthly fees that go towards "running expenses" can be controlled by the Board (though these costs will go up each year as utilities and wages increase). The part of the monthly fee going to the Reserve Fund is, pretty much, outside the control of the Board as it is really set based on the Reserve Fund Study.

In some cases (the Dixon Road condos are apparently in this category) nobody is prepared to serve on the Board so sooner or later the courts will appoint an 'administrator' who has all the powers of a Board but is not elected.

If one is buying a condo it is probably NOT a good idea to buy one in a Corporation where nobody is prepared to be a Director, where the Board is not functioning or where it has been more than 3 years since the last Reserve Fund Study..
 
Thanks for this. As an aside, isn't it against the rules to distribute this kind of material outside of an election period?

Yes it is. My understanding of the law is that distributing materials that state "Rob Ford Mayor" are allowed but anything with "Rob Ford for Mayor" would be against the rules.

Hopefully some of our UT members were at Taste of Italy and can confirm the exact wording.
 
Oh, it is possible. Use the same tactics as blockbusting developers in the 1960s and 1970s. Buy a few units at market value, move in bad tenants, buy more units as the smart or lucky ones move out, take control of the board of directors, run the place down and raise fees and bring in more bad tenants. Eventually you have control of the building; and there is a threshold at which that a condo corporation can dissolve and the property goes private, forcing out remaining minority owners.

This likely takes at least 3-5 years, but it can be done.
Were condos not a very rare bird in the 60's and 70's, so rare that the strategy you mention would be useless until many years later.
My mother sold her home in East York on Cosburn Avenue to apartment (not condo) builders who employed extremely questionable and persistent tactics. My wife and I started to search for our first home in 1961, no one had heard of condos at that time.
 
The updated story has been changed to: "handing out “Rob Ford Mayor” magnets and business cards."
 
Yes it is. My understanding of the law is that distributing materials that state "Rob Ford Mayor" are allowed but anything with "Rob Ford for Mayor" would be against the rules.

Hopefully some of our UT members were at Taste of Italy and can confirm the exact wording.
It wouldn't matter. Ford doesn't a) read the rules b) know the rules c) care about the rules
 
Yes it is. My understanding of the law is that distributing materials that state "Rob Ford Mayor" are allowed but anything with "Rob Ford for Mayor" would be against the rules.

Hopefully some of our UT members were at Taste of Italy and can confirm the exact wording.

That's called a "technicality". "Technicality" is how both Rob Ford and Hazel McCallion won their court cases. Its like getting a parking ticket, but the license plate number is wrong, you win because of a "technicality". Rob Ford can distribute material that is technicality not campaign material. Maybe Olivia Chow can distribute material with "Olivia Chow MP" but has to be careful how she lists the Toronto local points or notes in it.
 
Last edited:

I love it, Robbie getting a direct response from the "common folks", I love democracy.

Councillor Doug Ford was also strolling the section of College St. late Saturday afternoon, posing for photos and handing out “Rob Ford for Mayor†magnets and business cards.
When a Star reporter asked him about the alleged assault on his brother, he replied: “I've had more complaints about you guys along this strip than anywhere, absolutely anywhere."

And I wonder if someone should be looking into Dougie campaigning out of season, Robbie can get away with it, however, if someone else is handing out the stuff, especially someone who has professed to campaign for Robbie...

As for his attitude, the word maniacal comes to mind.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how much longer Rob thinks he can just wade into the masses at public events like the one on Saturday and think that people are just going to smile and wish him luck.
 
Oh, it is possible. Use the same tactics as blockbusting developers in the 1960s and 1970s. Buy a few units at market value, move in bad tenants, buy more units as the smart or lucky ones move out, take control of the board of directors, run the place down and raise fees and bring in more bad tenants. Eventually you have control of the building; and there is a threshold at which that a condo corporation can dissolve and the property goes private, forcing out remaining minority owners.

This likely takes at least 3-5 years, but it can be done.
Were condos not a very rare bird in the 60's and 70's, so rare that the strategy you mention would be useless until many years later.
My mother sold her home in East York on Cosburn Avenue to apartment (not condo) builders who employed extremely questionable and persistent tactics. My wife and I started to search for our first home in 1961, no one had heard of condos at that time.

Spider,

I think you might have not understood what Sean was trying to say. He was saying that one possible way to take over a condo board would be to use strategies that real estate agents used in the 1960s to blockbust neighbourhoods or to initiate white flight. It has nothing to do with condos. It has to do with the strategy.
 
Oh the irony - an average joe throwing juice can get one arrested but having multiple run ins with the law in a position of power (CoI, reading while driving, this whole crackgate saga) doesn't.

I love it, Robbie getting a direct response from the "common folks", I love democracy.

Touche.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top