Hi Garry, thanks for reading. We don’t have that information; it’s best to contact Cornerstone directly with your questions: https://www.cornerstone.inc/contact/

During the SGM on 26 June 2024, MREB’s lawyer announced that there would be a Board of Directors meeting after the SGM. The Board of Directors meeting was scheduled in the morning, and due to the SGM, it was decided to be held after the SGM. It is a fair practice to give priority to SGM due to the urgency of the matter and conduct a board meeting afterward. Not a big deal.

While we were finishing up the lunch, a meeting of the Board of Directors was held in the presence of an MREB Corporate Lawyer, and a motion was passed by the Board of Directors to terminate the Amalgamation as mandated by the 119 members in the SGM and we learned that the lawyer was instructed to proceed with termination. Did the lawyer notify the new corporation of the termination of Amalgamation soon after the board meeting? It is unknown but reasonably can be assumed that due to the urgency of the matter discussed in SGM and subsequent Board Meetings, the lawyer perhaps did it. Did the MREB lawyer approach the court for an injunction? It is unknown. Did the Board Chair stop the lawyer from proceeding with a court injunction to stop the amalgamation? It is unknown and why? Was there another Board of Directors meeting to continue with the amalgamation after the SGM? It is unknown. A corporate lawyer is appointed by the Board of Directors, not the Board Chair thus Board of Directors can terminate his services. What happens? Was the Lawyer’s terminated by who? NO minutes of SGM. No Minutes of Board of Directors. No Court Injunction. Amalgamation happened against the mandate of membership. These are questions in the minds of hundreds of MREB members. Why 70 years of the proud history of MREB that we celebrated on 23 May 2024 was washed away in six months since this board took over?

It is very important to learn from this what went wrong and why so this does not happen in our democratic society. We elected Member of Parliament by vote. We vote for Provincial Members of Parliament and elect them. We vote for Mayors and City Councils in the Municipal Elections. We vote and select the Board of Directors for a Charity or Not-for-profit organization, and MREB was no different. Our voice was silenced undemocratically.

“One thing I can assure you of is that, as we all know, real estate is local, and we believe that boards also need to be.”

?? His this guy a joke… or is he for real???

Tahir I. Qureshi – Thank you for your comments. You are 100% correct.

Robert Ede – I agree!

D Reality –
Why are you in favor? Who are you?? For all we know, you might be the dictator and coward on the panel. The one who felt he needed to have security at the meeting!
For who’s benefit?? Certainly not for those in attendance!
Did the dictator have something to fear? The ignorance!

This kind of power-trip needs to be addressed and put to an end.
People like this need to be reminded that they work for the members and immediately removed and reminded that they need not “volunteer” for any position under the impression that allowed in only to serve their self-fulfilling needs or underlying selfish interests.

I’m out! Enough of paying for MREB bs!

And speaking of non-profit, Realtor.ca has been so profitable that CREA is looking into the future of Realtor.ca. There are profits to be made with data / technology. It is inevitable that technology is impacting the Organized Real Estate industry. Under the manual system, OREA Forms are necessary. Under the technology automation era, OREA Forms are obsolete.

Legislation must be made to regulate the Three Musketeers brotherhood. The Self-Governing Organized-Real-Estate’s “extortion-like” business model needs to be regulated. Please write to your local MPP to bring about legislation changes.

Agnes makes valid comments. The underlying factor that has hampered and hindered progress within Organized Real Estate in Cañada has always been the anti-competitive 3-way agreement. It hangs on the thread of the unnecessary need to use the CREA trademark terms MLS and Realtor to have a multiple listing service. . Restrictive trade practices are unique to resale real estate in North America. It is time to disband the Three Musketeers brotherhood in Ontario, if not Canada! The inmates have been running the asylum far too long.

Leadership retraining will help. However, leadership changes from time to time, if not often.

Moreover, the Three-Way-Agreement is a road block to a better environment for the real estate industry. Under the protection of the Three-Way-Agreement, the current business model is this: If realtors do not pay (health) protection fees, they suffer from business interruptions – i.e, all system access get cut off. Isn’t it a form of extortion like what happens in Chinatown? What has the leadership in CREA and OREA led the real estate industry into? Is this fair, professional, ethical? Are the associations truly non-profit seeking?

As Robert Ede said “…In recent years TRREB, Orea and now Mreb ‘appear’ to be acting independent’s/ contrary to the wishes of their members….Who can members turn to in order to control a not for profit?”

So true OREA is profit-seeking selling OWRP! And, sadly, there is nobody to turn to in order to control a not for profit.

What the industry needs are new legislations to keep the three levels of leadership on track; new legislations to ensure that the non-profit associations remain truly non-profit; new legislations to put the industry specific consumers like realtors under the Consumer Protection Act so that they will have the freedom to choose what they want to buy.

For a long term solution, please appeal to your local MPP to bring about legislation changes. The current non-profit-self-regulated business model needs to become a regulated business model. For the short term solution, stay on course and sort out the mess, make suggestions for solutions if you have any.

For Clarity without Prejudice:

The SGM of 26 June was requested by MREB members only with one agenda to move a motion to give authority to the Board of Directors to terminate the amalgamation. Unfortunately, the key persons including Chair decide not to attend the SGM. Over 250 members signed the petition. The board tried to turn that SGM into a town hall meeting contrary to the SGM notice sent to members. No doubt, it was hot and debated due to a lack of effective communication. The motion was passed by 119 Members voting yes to terminate, 2 voted against the motion and 4 abstained. It would have been nice if the Chair had attended and clarified why they wanted to proceed and explained why they did not consult with an MREB Corporate appointed lawyer and use a new corporation lawyer to represent them. In a democratic society voice of the people matters and whoever has good logic to persuade the people becomes the winner. In this case, the membership that bestowed their trust in them was defeated due to a lack of action by their elected officials. To provide more clarity, you should ask former MREB to share the video recording of the SMG to set the facts straight.

Without Projudice:

Emma, please ask former MREB to share the video recording of the SGM that was held 26th June 2024 to set the record straight. You can ask under the Freedom of Information ACT, freedom of speech and for clarity.

Thank you Tahir. That would have been good information to include in the article accusing them of conflict of interest.