Assessment quality and customer service

March 28, 2002

Dear Mr. Hume,

The way Futures is going, the focus of customer service has failed, and will continue to fail as long as people are removed from local offices, with local knowledge, and local customers. The ratepayers in my area of responsibility will continue to ask for me after Futures is complete. I know the businesses, and the buildings and their concerns.

I have had to deal with phone calls from ratepayers with who have been sent letters, threatening letters, from Larry Hummel [MPAC Vice-President, Property Values] telling them that if they don’t send in their income information, they will have to deal with MPAC’s lawyers. Unfortunately, many of the people I had calls from own properties that are owner occupied and do not have income received from tenants. Because of this, these types of properties cannot supply the information that MPAC was requesting. Some of the properties did not even have buildings on them as they are parking lots. Unfortunately I was not aware that these letters were being sent out and so I had to ask the first ratepayer if he could fax the letter to me so that I could explain it to them. As a professional person, this was embarrassing for me that our company did not even notify the local offices that they should be aware of this in case of enquiries.

Mr. Hume, I have been responsible for maintaining the valuation and defence of the valuation of income producing properties since the last reassessment. I feel that this problem could have been avoided if I were still responsible for sending out the letters requesting this information. Because I have the local knowledge, I am aware of the properties that should have letters to them, and the properties that are simply parking lots.

If someone took more time to think out what needs to be done and all of the problems that are associated with new changes, we would see less unhappy and irate ratepayers phoning the local office.

I am also concerned that the local office has not been involved with the reassessment that is due January 2003. I have heard that commercial values will be arrived at through "trending." This means that someone in Toronto will determine that the market has changed by, let’s say 2 per cent, so all of the values will be increased by 2 per cent in order to reflect the 2001 market. This will produce a value that surely cannot be as accurate as the product that our office would have determined if we had the opportunity to do a proper market study of actual sales. Some neighbourhoods in this area alone have increased in value by more that 2 per cent, and some have decreased in value by more than 2 per cent. How would someone who lives in Toronto know this information? You wouldn’t know unless you saw it everyday, and worked with it everyday. I’m sure that you are aware of similar neighbourhoods in Ottawa that are more desirable locations than others, and that should receive larger increases than others. On the flip side, I’m also sure that there are some areas that are less desirable than others which should receive decreases.

As a representative of a municipality, I am surprised that you can "buy into" the Futures plan of Mr. Richards. As a person who has been involved with the business for 10 years now, I know that this can’t be good for the municipality or the ratepayer. Mr. Richards and many of his employees do not have much experience with Property Assessment and have made these decisions for our company based on the same principles that are used in selling cars or pantyhose. THIS IS NOT THE SAME TYPE OF BUSINESS. This is a public service that affects the financial situation of every property owner and municipality. Ask any person who has dealt with this business how they feel this will go, and they will tell you...horribly. I have spoken "off the record" with many senior management, and they tell me the same thing (but they will not tell Richards - he has given them a carrot in the form of a job – why would they?).

I ask you, Mr. Hume, to please take a moment to think if this is really what the municipalities want. Once we take that step, it will be very hard to get back to the quality product that us dedicated professional property assessors can provide.

Thank you for your time.

Deanna Seney, Rodney, Ontario

February 8, 2002

Dear Mr. Hume:

A colleague I have been associated with over the past 10 years asked a question of me that I would like to forward to you and the Board. His question: “Whose harebrained idea was this to eliminate the mapping section at the regional assessment office"? You see, he works for one of our municipalities here in Durham region in the planning department and has on many occasions contacted me for information. He knows and trusts me in that I am his most valuable source of information due to the fact I am familiar with the entire region and it’s municipalities. The thought of having to obtain information from some voice on the other end of the phone, and I quote, "sends shivers up my spine," he says. “How do I know that the person I talk to (a) will have the knowledge of the region, (b) will have the professional skills to expertly answer my questions and (c) will even know where Durham region is?

“I thought this whole Futures thing was supposed to be about customer satisfaction," he said. "Well how come I was never asked how I feel about how satisfied I am and the way I’m treated by MPAC, because I am very satisfied and really do not need or want this change." He said that I should contact the people in charge of this corporation and tell them that he wants a knowledgeable, skilled professional working in the regional office and that he needs our mapping section intact.

This is a question or questions I am repeatedly asked by the people at the various municipalities that I have dealt with for the last twelve years. After building the rapport we have with our municipal and regional clients do we really want to go back to the drawing board and start all over again?

Sincerely,

Keith Meadows, Oshawa

February 1, 2002

Mr. Hume:

I have been an Assessor since 1970, having been hired shortly after the provincial takeover. Since that time I have seen many changes some good, some not as good.

Using the Beaubien Commission report as a catalyst the current CEO has launched sweeping changes which will essentially gut the regional offices. While I agree that there is always room for improvement, I don’t believe that these changes are good or will address the shortcomings enunciated in Mr. Beaubien’s report.

The main thrust of the report was the need for improved customer service with consideration to the fact that individual taxpayers are also our main customer. Centralization will not improve customer service! One has only to look at the ARB’s move to Toronto and the resulting taxpayer dissatisfaction to realize this. During the last "appeal season," I fielded more calls from taxpayers complaining about difficulties with the board than I have in the last 32 years.

During a recent visit by John Harriman of the Futures Transition Team, he compared the way our organization will work, after Futures implementation, with a bank or a pizza delivery service. MPAC is clearly different from these businesses. Please review the futures program and its effect both on customer service as well as staff/morale.

I would be pleased to discuss my concerns further.

Respectfully,

Derek L. Groves, London

January 25, 2002

Dear Sir,

There are claims by previous reports that our corporation is striving for better customer service and a closer relationship to property owners and municipalities.

How does “Futures” hope to achieve this by centralization? Currently someone can phone my office, talk to someone who is somewhat familiar with the area in question and get back to them as soon as possible depending on the type of concern. This is called immediate service and good relations. However, we are now being told that with centralization, a minimum five-day turnover is now acceptable and considered normal. It will soon be standard practice for someone to call our office only to get a call centre. Then they can wait to talk to someone who knows nothing of the area, only to be told that information will be copied and forwarded to the appropriate office and someone will reach them whenever. It is an embarrassment when we are forwarded stuff that is five days old and mis-spelled or copied incorrectly.

Rebecca Macdonald, Harwood

Return to What front-line workers are saying about Futures Index