SBA Communications Corporation v. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Region 07, 2021 CanLII 46451

Tribunals Ontario

Tribunaux décisionnels Ontario

Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE: May 27, 2021

FILE NO.: DM 169545

Assessed Person(s): City of Peterborough

Appellant(s): SBA Communications Corporation

Respondent(s): Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Region 07

Respondent(s): City of Peterborough

Property Location(s): 425 Kennedy Road

Municipality(ies): City of Peterborough

Roll Number(s): 1514-010-021-02401-0000

Appeal Number(s): 3412515

Taxation Year(s): 2020

Hearing Event No.: 742266

Legislative Authority: Section 40 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.31

Parties	Representative
City of Peterborough	Submissions not received
SBA Communications Corporation	Chantelle MacMillan
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation	Charmaine Siddle
City of Peterborough	Submissions not received

REQUEST FOR: Dismissal of Appeal(s)

HEARD: March 26, 2021 in writing

ADJUDICATOR(S): Carly Stringer, Member

MOTION DECISION

OVERVIEW

1The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) has brought this motion requesting the Assessment Review Board (the “Board”) dismiss appeal 3412515 (the “Subject Appeal”) for lack of jurisdiction.

2SBA Communications Corporation (the “Appellant”) opposes the motion.

3The City of Peterborough has not made submissions on this motion.

Result

4For the reasons that follow, the Subject Appeal is dismissed.

BACKGROUND

5The parties have provided the Board with an Agreed Statement of Facts.

6The Subject Appeal relates to a property with the municipal address of 425 Kennedy Road in the City of Peterborough, Ontario (the “Subject Property”). The Subject Property is owned by the City of Peterborough.

7The Appellant has a communication tower located on the Subject Property. The Appellant filed an appeal with the Board relating to the Subject Property pursuant to s. 40 of the Assessment Act (the “Act”) for the 2020 taxation year.

8The Appellant delivered its Statement of Issues (“SOI”) on December 22, 2020. The only issue raised in the SOI is whether the Appellant’s communication tower located on the Subject Property should be exempt from taxation pursuant to s. 3(1)21 of the Act. The Appellant argues that the classification of the Subject Property is incorrect because the communication tower should be classified as exempt.

9The Appellant does not dispute the 2016 current value of the Subject Property.

10MPAC has brought this motion to dismiss the Subject Appeal on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that the Board does not have jurisdiction to hear matters involving tax exemption.

ISSUES

11The Board must determine a single issue on this motion: should the Subject Appeal be dismissed?

ANALYSIS

12The Board has issued a decision in SBA Communications Corporation v Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Region 01, 2021 CanLII 44050 (ON ARB) (“SBA Communications”) that is entirely applicable to this case. The Appellant was a party to the motion decided in SBA Communications. The facts are almost completely similar. The legal issue and submissions being advanced by MPAC and the Appellant on this motion are identical to those being advanced in SBA Communications.

13The Board has carefully considered the evidence, submissions and case law presented by the parties. The Board is satisfied that the decision issued in SBA Communications is entirely applicable to this case, and accordingly adopts and applies its findings and reasoning from SBA Communications to the within motion.

CONCLUSION

14For these reasons, the Board finds it does not have jurisdiction to hear the Subject Appeal and determine whether the Subject Property is exempt from taxation.

ORDER

15The Board grants MPAC’s motion to dismiss the Subject Appeal.