My letter states, “We noted an error in the wording of Bylaw 8 as amended at the January 21, 2020, AREA AGM. As the agenda package and minutes clearly indicated, the basis for this change was the assumption the “proposed” provincial administrative justice program would be successfully launched. It was not, and the unintended consequence is a section of the Bylaw that must be corrected.”
I went on to say in the letter, and the Board continues to feel that, “We see this as a friendly amendment, and we requested AREA’s support in garnering approval from the membership at the upcoming AGM.”
We have no control over how AREA distributes their AGM agenda items but we worked with AREA to enable agenda items were presented based on the date which they were brought forward.
We appreciate that many participants in the AREA AGM were unaware of all that was being proposed, which is why I said in the AREA AGM, we do not believe this assembly is prepared to debate this today.
AREA’s response was the motion they presented at the Jan 16 AGM, which posed some concerns that center on the new concept AREA proposed for there to be member choice in who provides administrative justice services to members.
AREA’s administrative justice program, as outlined in AREA’s bylaw proposal, is designed to address commission disputes, violations of the REALTOR® Code, provincial practice rules and conduct issues that originate from violations of provincial practice rules, all of which duplicate current CREB® services.
CREB® has invested significant member dollars in establishing our current program, which has passed judicial review with flying colors and by all accounts is considered “best in class,” but will be duplicated if AREA proceeds.
The question we have advocated to be put to all members, is whether having competing programs raises the bar for member behaviours and enhances your member experience. CREB® members are footing the bill for CREB® services and must ask themselves if they are prepared to foot over 50 per cent of the AREA bill for a competing program.
CREB® has a long history of innovation and has advocated for more efficient structures in organized real estate. The AREA motion proposes the adoption of a new AREA administrative justice program policy that is based on the concept of member choice.
Member choice in Association and Board programming is a new concept and was not part of the discussion at the AREA AGM in 2020, nor any AGM since.
Member choice in services from boards and your provincial association is a concept that bears greater discussion and the validation of the membership at large.
The concept of member choice being the foundation of our provincial association is one the membership must have a say in.
The bylaw amendments we presented very simply clarifies how we currently operate, based on the local real estate board having the responsibility to either deliver the required member services in the administrative justice program, or to delegate that obligation to another body.
Having non-competing service entities is consistent with CREA’s direction for a board to document a REALTOR® Code enforcement option.
There has been no assessment of the pros and cons of competing administrative justice programs in Alberta, so we have pushed for a province-wide member engagement which was approved in the postponement motion.
We believe that the AREA bylaw amendment creates an uncertain outcome, and that the approval of our amendment would have returned us to a state of best practice in delivering our part of self-regulation.
After all, the most important aspect of our position is that we firmly believe that our industry and its member boards and provincial association have a duty and an obligation to efficiently uphold the principles of self-regulation.
The consumer and our members expect us to properly enforce rules and resolve disputes effectively and efficiently. Like every other aspect of life, clarity is needed in how processes work. CREB®’s current complaint process serves the members very well and works to meet the unique needs and expectations of members who use it.
All that is needed is for there to continue to be clarity in roles between the organizations you fund and for those organizations to exist within their mandates. This will enable us to continue to have confidence in the consistent application of our rules.
It is important for us all to take some time to consider the costs that come with choice. We will continue to transparently inform our members, so you are knowledgeable of the impacts on your membership.
{ 5 comments…}