Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE: June 2, 2017

FILE NO.: WR 146492

Assessed Person(s): Daniel Anzarut and Jill Anzarut

Applicant(s): Daniel Anzarut and Jill Anzarut

Respondent(s): City of Toronto

Property Location(s): 44 Romney Road

Municipality(ies): City of Toronto

Roll Number(s): 1908-064-280-02000-0000

Appeal Number(s): 3210665 and 3210616

Taxation Year(s): 2014 and 2015

Hearing Event No. 670686

Legislative Authority: Section 323.(8) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, c. 11, Sch. A

Heard: April 11, 2017 in Toronto, Ontario

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Counsel+/Representative
Daniel and Jill Anzarut	Self-represented
City of Toronto	G. Tanner*

DECISION OF THE BOARD DELIVERED BY S. LIGHT

ISSUE

1The Applicants testified that while the subject property being their residential home was being renovated from July 2014 to sometime in the spring of 2015 they moved out of the home due to the renovations. They are applying for the cancellation/reduction/refund of all or part of their property taxes levied in the 2014 and 2015 taxation years respecting the subject property pursuant to s. 323.(1)(h) of the City of Toronto Act (“Act”) due to renovations to the subject property that he submits prevented the normal use of the land for a period of at least three months during each of these years.

2The Respondent municipality argues that the Assessment Review Board (the “Board”) has no jurisdiction to adjudicate this matter on its merits because the Applicants failed to file their applications in accordance with the deadlines for submission set out in s. 323.(3) of the Act being the last days in February of 2015 and 2016. Therefore, at the outset of this hearing the Respondent requested the Board to rule on its jurisdiction to hear this matter on its merits.

3Accordingly, the issue before the Board is its jurisdiction to hear an application by the Applicant for the cancellation/reduction/refund of all or part of taxes levied respecting the subject property in the 2014 and 2015 taxation years pursuant to s. 323.(1)(h) of the Act.

DECISION

4For the reasons stated below the Board finds it has no jurisdiction to hear any applications by the Applicant pursuant to s. 323.(1)(h) of the Act for the cancellation/reduction/refund of all or part of taxes levied respecting the subject property in the 2014 and 2015 taxation years.

5Accordingly, the applications to the Board are dismissed.

REASONS FOR DECISION

Legislation

6Section 323.(1)(h), 323.(3),(4),(5),(6),(7), (8), (9), (10) of the Act states:

Cancellation, reduction, refund of taxes

323. (1) Upon application to the city treasurer made in accordance with this section, the City may cancel, reduce or refund all or part of taxes levied on land in the year in respect of which the application is made if,

(h) repairs or renovations to the land prevented the normal use of the land for a period of at least three months during the year.

Timing

(3) An application under this section must be filed with the treasurer on or before February 28 of the year following the year in respect of which the application is made.

Application by treasurer

(4) Despite subsections (2) and (3), an application under clause (1) (f) or (g) may be made by the city treasurer on or before April 30 of the year following the year in respect of which the application is made if no application is made by a person described in subsection (2) within the deadline set out in subsection (3).

Meeting

(5) On or before September 30 of the year following the year in respect of which the application is made, council shall,

(a) hold a meeting at which the applicants may make representations to council;

(b) notify the applicants of the meeting by mail sent at least 14 days before the meeting; and

(c) make its decision.

Notice

(6) Within 14 days after making its decision, council shall notify the applicants of the decision and specify the last day for appealing the decision.

Appeal

(7) Within 35 days after council makes its decision, an applicant may appeal the decision of council to the Assessment Review Board by filing a notice of appeal with the registrar of the board.

(8) If council fails to make its decision by September 30 of the year following the year in respect of which the application is made, an applicant may appeal to the Assessment Review Board by October 21 of the year by filing a notice of appeal with the registrar of the board and the appeal shall be a new hearing.

Notice

(9) The Assessment Review Board shall notify the appellants and the city treasurer of the hearing by mail sent at least 14 days before the hearing.

Decision

(10) The Assessment Review Board shall hear the appeal and may make any decision that council could have made.

Analysis

7The Applicants testified that they commenced renovations to their home in July, 2014. They rented a house to live in and researched whether they might be eligible for some government tax credits or subsidies to assist them with living expenses related to their renovations.

8The Applicants testified that the City of Toronto (“City”) has established a program under s. 323.(1)(h) of the Act that would provide financial assistance to homeowners in their situation but the City does not adequately communicate the availability of this program to homeowners. As a result, they testified that they were unable to apply for this assistance within the mandatory legislated deadlines being February 28, 2015 respecting the 2014 calendar year and February 29, 2016 respecting the 2015 taxation year. They argue that the Board should still hear their appeals.

9The Board has reviewed the legislation and other Board decisions presented at the hearing being Mariani v. Puslinch (Township) [2007] O.A.R.B.D. No. 437 and Calandra v. Municipal Property Assessment Corp., Region 9 [2016] O.A.R.B.D. No. 221 (WR143193) issued on November 8, 2016. The aforementioned decisions discuss the Board’s jurisdiction to hear applications that have not been made within the time period provided in the legislation. The Board has consistently ruled that it has no discretion to modify or extend the statutory filing deadlines.

10Furthermore, the Board does not have any inherent or equitable jurisdiction or the authority to act beyond powers given to it in the statute.

11Accordingly the Board is governed by the mandatory deadlines being the last days of February in 2015 and 2016 and therefore must dismiss the relevant applications.