2024–2025: Building Code Commission annual report
Letter to the Minister
June 27, 2025
The Honourable Rob Flack
Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
777 Bay Street, 17th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M7A 2J3
Dear Minister Flack:
Re: Building Code Commission annual report — fiscal year 2024–2025
It is my pleasure, as Chair of the Building Code Commission, to present to you the Building Code Commission’s Annual Report for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025.
The enclosed Annual Report highlights the Building Code Commission’s accomplishments and challenges over the 2024–2025 fiscal year. Overall, the Building Code Commission had a productive year, having received 17 new applications and conducted 21 emote hearings.
I would like to thank my fellow Commission members whose knowledge and dedication have earned the Building Code Commission an excellent reputation as a valuable service provider in the building and construction industry. On behalf of all members of the Commission, I would also like to express our thanks to the staff of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for their exemplary expert support to the Building Code Commission. Without their excellent secretariat, administrative, technical and legal assistance, the Building Code Commission simply could not function.
Sincerely,
Stephen Wong, Chair
Building Code Commission
Encl.
Mandate
The Building Code Commission (the Commission) is an adjudicative agency whose legislative authority is set out in sections 23 and 24 of the Building Code Act, 1992 (the “Act”).
The Commission has a mandate to resolve disputes between proponents of construction projects and local enforcement officials. The Act sets out 3 types of disputes that can be heard by the Commission:
- those relating to the sufficiency of compliance with the technical requirements of the Building Code
- those related to compliance with the prescribed time frames for permit processing
- those related to compliance with the prescribed time frames for site inspections
Commitment to service and guiding principles
The inaugural meeting of the Commission was held on February 9, 1976 and was made possible by the Legislature passing the first Building Code Act, 1992 into effect in 1974. Since then, the Commission has endeavoured to provide a timely, cost effective and non-adversarial process for resolving Building Code disputes through a streamlined and accessible appeals system. In doing so, the Commission has earned a reputation within the construction industry of being an effective, useful and high-quality adjudicative body.
The Commission has a Memorandum of Understanding with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in respect of the administration of the Commission. The Memorandum of Understanding sets out the relationship between the Chair of the Commission, the Minister and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (the “Ministry”) with respect to the Building Code Commission and the service it provides. The purpose of the Memorandum of Understanding is to establish the responsibilities of these parties and to ensure that accountability is a fundamental principle that is observed in the management, administration and operations of the Commission.
As an agency of government, the Commission conducts itself according to the management principles of the Government of Ontario. The Commission’s proceedings are governed by:
- the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990
- the Building Code Act, 1992
- the Adjudicative Tribunals Accountability, Governance and Appointments Act, 2009, S.O. 2009
- the Building Code Commission’s Guidelines
- Policies and Procedures Handbook, Management Board of Cabinet Directives and
- the Public Service of Ontario Act, 2006, S.O. 2006
The principles and governance elements required of the Commission by these statutes and documents include ethical behaviour, accountability, excellence in management, wise use of public funds and high-quality service to the public by contributing to the health, safety, accessibility and energy efficiency of buildings in Ontario and by playing a positive role within Ontario’s building design and construction sector.
About the Building Code Commission
Building Code Commission process and procedure
The process leading to a Commission hearing begins with the receipt of an application for a hearing. Section 24 of the Act provides that the Commission may determine disputes between a chief building official, inspector or registered code agency and an applicant for a permit, a holder of a permit, or a person to whom an order is given. Parties to an application to the Commission are typically builders, developers, architects, engineers and building owners as applicants, and municipal chief building officials, plan reviewers, building inspectors and registered code agencies as respondents.
The applicant submits a completed Application for Hearing Form together with supporting documents and the application fee. At the same time, the applicant is required to also provide a copy of the completed Application for Hearing Form and the supporting documentation directly to the respondent. Once an application is received, the Commission requests confirmation of the dispute from the respondent by sending a Confirmation of Dispute Form for the respondent to complete and return. The respondent is required to provide a copy of the completed Confirmation of Dispute Form and supporting documentation directly to the applicant. The Confirmation of Dispute Form is similar to the Application for Hearing Form. The purpose is twofold:
- To verify that there is a dispute involving the technical requirements or the prescribed time frame requirements of the Building Code.
- To allow the respondent to explain their position on the issue.
For disputes related to sufficiency of compliance with the technical requirements of the Building Code, once confirmation of dispute is received, the Commission, under the authority in subsection 24(6) of the Act, requests a technical report from the Building and Development Branch of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. This report, known as the Technical Background Information Memo, analyzes the matters raised by the parties with regard to the provisions of the Building Code identified by the parties as being relevant to the disputed matter. The Technical Background Information memo examines the technical considerations and proposed amendments (if any) regarding the pertinent Building Code provisions.
For disputes related to the prescribed time frames, a Technical Background Information Memo is not requested, as no technical matters are involved in the dispute.
In addition to the 3 types of disputes noted above in Section A Mandate, under subsection 25(5) of the Building Code Act, 1992, a judge may refer questions respecting the interpretation of the technical requirements of the Building Code or the sufficiency of compliance with the technical requirements of the Building Code to the Building Code Commission for a hearing and report to the judge. The Commission’s procedure for hearing a court referred matter is the same as an application made under section 24 of the Act.
Hearing procedures
Once all of the required information is received and has been provided to all parties to the hearing, a hearing is scheduled.
Commission hearings, while generally informal, are conducted in accordance with procedural rules established under the Building Code Act, 1992 and the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990.
The Commission Chair, Vice-Chair, or Chair-Designate for the day conducts the hearing. Hearings begin with introductions of the parties and preliminary matters, such as identification of exhibits. Parties can represent themselves, but applicants often choose a designated agent such as a contractor, architect, engineer, lawyer or specialized consultant.
Once a hearing has concluded, the members of the panel deliberate on the evidence and render their ruling. This decision is then communicated to the parties to the hearing and the full written decision is subsequently issued to the parties and posted online to the CanLII legal reporting website. View past BCC decisions on CanLII.
Commission members and ministry staff
As of March 31, 2025, the Commission had 16 part-time members, which include the Chair and 1 Vice-Chair. All Commission members are appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council through an Order in Council. Current Management Board of Cabinet Directives permit individuals appointed to the Commission to serve a combined term of appointment of up to 10 years. The Chair, Vice-Chair, or Chair-Designate for the day presides over hearings. Commission members are on hearing panels and render decisions on disputes. Each hearing panel comprises 3 members including the chair of the hearing. The Chair and Vice-Chairs also make administrative decisions regarding operations and relations with the Ministry.
The Commission believes it is appropriate to seek staggered terms of appointment for Commission members as part of its succession planning strategy. This staggering of terms of appointment allows for newly appointed members to be mentored by experienced members and ensures that large numbers of members do not have terms that expire all at the same time.
To ensure an adequate number of members, the Commission Chair and Ministry staff work with the Public Appointments Secretariat to advertise positions for new members with relevant expertise in the construction sector.
In addition, the Commission also works at maintaining the knowledge base of its membership. It is important for the Commission to continue to solicit new members with expertise that reflects the full spectrum of relevant technical disciplines represented in the Building Code.
The following branches of the Ministry and technology cluster support the Commission in fulfilling the requirements of the Agencies and Appointments Directive:
- Housing Policy and Planning Division’s Building and Development Branch
- Business Management Division’s Corporate Services Branch and Controllership and Financial Planning Branch
- Communications Branch
- Legal Services Branch
- Community Services Information and Information Technology Cluster
The Commission receives all its staffing and financial resources from the Building and Development Branch of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.
Although the Commission has no staff of its own, the Policy/Program Analyst – Building Code Commission is the Ministry staff person assigned to support the Commission. The Policy/Program Analyst – Building Code Commission is responsible for managing the overall administration of the Commission. This involves managing the appointments process, issues management, business planning, performance measurement, monitoring of expenditures, managing the application and hearing process, communicating and publishing rulings and ensuring compliance with agency sector requirements and Management Board of Cabinet directives.
2024–2025 caseload
The Commission can hold up to 3 to 4 hearings in a month; however, the number of applications received determines the number of hearings the Commission needs to schedule. For the current reporting cycle, the Commission received 17 new applications, no court referral applications and conducted 21 remote hearings.
The Commission received the following number of applications over the previous 5 years:
Fiscal | Type of application: Building | Type of application: On-site sewage system | Type of application: Permit processing prescribed time frame | Type of application: Site inspection prescribed time frame | Total applications | Court referrals | Total hearings |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2020–2021 | 17 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 1 | 31 |
2021–2022 | 27 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 0 | 18 |
2022–2023 | 18 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 22 | 0 | 23 |
2023–2024 | 17 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 22 | 0 | 23 |
2024–2025 | 13 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 21 |
It should be noted that the complexity of applications continues to increase. With the increase in the complexity of the applications and the number of applications that contain multiple disputes, the Commission notes that the length of time it takes to fully hear the matter has also increased. In addition, the Commission has also seen an increase in the number of applications requiring it to examine and determine its jurisdiction and mandate, because of disputes that may extend beyond the technical requirements of the Building Code.
Analysis of Building Code Commission performance
Performance measures and targets
The Commission has long-standing established performance measures and targets that are set out in the Business Plan and are reviewed each year. These are: fairness, timeliness, quality and consistency, transparency, expertise and courtesy.
Several steps have been taken to enhance the Commission’s performance and accountability over the years, including continued monitoring of Commission-specific performance measures and continued surveying of its clients to provide feedback on the Commission’s performance. The Commission has met all of its targets for the 2024-2025 fiscal year set out in the 2024-2027 Business Plan. The results of the Commission’s performance can be found in Appendix 1.
Fairness
- The stated target of not more than 10% of hearings resulting in judicial review was again met in the 2024-2025 fiscal year with no judicial review. Survey results indicate that 95% of clients who responded to the survey agreed that they were treated fairly.
Timeliness
- The Commission has set a target for timely communication of its decisions to parties within 15 working days of the completion of the hearing for 75% of all hearings. The Commission met and exceeded its target and was able to communicate its decision to parties within 15 working days of completion of hearing for 100% of all hearings.
- The Commission has set a target to offer a hearing date within 30 working days from receipt of a complete application for 85% of all hearings where a complete application includes receipt of all required documents from both parties to a dispute. The Commission met its target and was able to offer a hearing date within 30 working days from receipt of a complete application for 100% of all hearings.
- The Commission has set a target for preparing and finalizing full written decisions within 6 months of completion of hearing for 75% of all hearings. The Commission met its target and finalized full written decisions within 6 months of completion of hearing for 78% of all hearings.
Quality and Consistency
- The Commission has set a target that 85% of parties will feel that the process had a high degree of quality and consistency. Survey results indicate that 95% of clients that responded to the survey agreed that the processes and procedures had a high degree of quality and consistency.
Transparency
- The Commission has set a target that 85% of parties will feel that the process and procedures were clear and understandable. Survey results indicate that 100% of clients that responded to the survey agreed that the processes and procedures were clear and understandable.
Expertise
- The Commission has set a target that 85% of parties will be satisfied that Commission members demonstrated an appropriate level of expertise regarding the technical matters under consideration. Survey results indicate that 90% of clients that responded to the survey agreed that members demonstrated an appropriate level of expertise regarding the technical matters under consideration.
Courtesy
- The Commission has set a target that 85% of parties will feel that they are treated with courtesy throughout the application process and the hearing. Survey results indicate that 100% of clients that responded to the survey agreed that they were treated with courtesy by Ministry staff throughout the application process and 100% felt that they were treated with courtesy by Commission members.
Operational performance
The Commission believes that in order to provide quality service to the public and to the building design and construction sector, the Commission as an agency must operate as effectively and efficiently as possible. This means more than having performance measurements and strategic direction in place to strive for service excellence on a day-to-day basis. It also means pursuing excellence from an operational and administrative standpoint over the long term. To achieve this, the Commission also assesses itself on its operational performance. As with the above performance measures, operational excellence ensures accountability.
The following are some of its operational achievements in the 2024-2025 fiscal year:
- The Commission continued to accept electronic applications and held all hearings by video conference to enhance digital delivery and customer service.
- The Commission continued to maintain its compliance with the Management Board of Cabinet’s Agencies and Appointments Directive:
- The 3-year Business Plan for 2025–2028 was prepared, finalized and submitted within the specified time frame.
- The Annual Report for 2023–2024 was completed, approved by the Commission and submitted within the specified time frame.
- The Commission’s Memorandum of Understanding, Business Plan and Annual Report were publicly posted.
- The Commission continued to maintain compliance with the Adjudicative Tribunals Accountability, Governance and Appointments Act, 2009.
- The Commission held 2 semi-annual meetings of the full Commission in order to complete the review and approval of its accountability requirements, assess risks and consider proposed operational improvements such as improving the timeliness for issuance of written decisions and offering timely hearing dates.
- The Commission continues to monitor risks, including identifying and assessing the risks and proposing mitigation strategies which are reported in the Business Plan.
- The Commission continued with its practice of holding hearings by video conference and received an overall satisfaction rating of 100% from clients who responded to the survey regarding their experience.
- The Commission continues to be committed to providing services in accordance with the Accessibility Standards for Customer Service and the Integrated Accessibility Standards regulation made under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.
- The Commission Chair and Ministry staff continued to work with the Public Appointments Secretariat and the Minister’s Office to improve its membership in terms of technical expertise and appointed 6 new members and posted a job ad to fill the vacant Vice Chair position. The competition for the Vice Chair position is underway.
- The Commission continued its practice of surveying clients and received an overall satisfaction rating of 95% from clients that responded to the survey.
Financial report
Budget
The Commission has no financial budget of its own, separate from that of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. All the Commission’s costs, including members’ per diem remuneration, other operating costs and administrative support, are provided by the Ministry.
The chart below provides details of the costs associated with the Commission:
Expense | 2025–2026 estimates | 2024–2025 estimates | 2024–2025 actuals | 2024–2025 actuals vs. estimates | 2023–2024 actuals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Members’ per diems | $88,000 | $88,000 | $51,683 | −$36,317 | $58,642 |
Members’ travel and hearing/meeting expenses | $29,000 | $28,200 | $5,013 | −$23,187 | $3,380 |
Other administration | $23,200 | $22,500 | $5,684 | −$16,816 | $16,217 |
Subtotal | $140,200 | $138,700 | $62,380 | −$76,320 | $78,238 |
Full-time equivalent (FTE) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | N/A | 1.0 |
FTE costs (salary + benefits) | $139,500 | $129,100 | $131,210 | $2,110 | $121,174 |
Total expenses | $279,700 | $267,800 | $193,591 | −$74,209 | $199,413 |
Note: Numbers may not add up due to rounding.
Revenues
A fee for filing an application to the Commission has been in effect since January 1, 2014.
Revenues from the application fee are recorded as part of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing’s non-tax revenues. Effective January 1, 2023, the application fee was frozen and is currently $212.
The chart below provides details of the revenues associated with applications to the Commission:
Revenue | 2025–2026 estimates | 2024–2025 estimates | 2024–2025 actuals | 2024–2025 actuals vs. estimates | 2023–2024 actuals |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Application fees | $7,420 | $7,420 | $4,664 | −$2,756 | $3,406 |
Total revenues | $7,420 | $7,420 | $4,664 | −$2,756 | $3,406 |
Remuneration of commission members
As part-time appointees, Commission members receive remuneration in the form of a per diem at rates established by the Management Board of Cabinet’s Agencies and Appointments Directive. Effective January 1, 2018, this per diem ranged from $472 for members to $583 for the Vice-Chair and $744 for the Chair. Commission members are also reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses associated with attending Commission hearings and meetings, in accordance with the Management Board of Cabinet’s Travel, Meal and Hospitality Expenses Directive. The list of Commission members’ remuneration for the 2024–2025 fiscal year can be found in Appendix 2.
Costs associated with Commission activities, including member per diems and other operating costs, form part of the overall budget of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The number of applications to the Commission or the complexity of issues raised in the applications directly impact the budget requirement in support of Commission activities.
Appendix 1 – Performance measures table
Outcomes | Measures | Targets | 2024–2025 Status | 2025–2026 Commitments |
---|---|---|---|---|
Fairness (processes and procedures that are fair and are seen to be fair) | Parties | Not more than 10% of hearings should result in judicial review on an annual basis | Target met | Not more than 10% of hearings should result in judicial review on an annual basis |
Timeliness (Timely resolution of disputes related to technical Code requirements) |
|
|
|
|
Timeliness (Timely resolution of disputes related to prescribed time frames) |
|
|
|
|
Quality and Consistency (process and procedures that have integrity and uniformity) | Parties are satisfied that the Commission process was conducted with a high degree of quality and consistency | 85% of parties feel that the process had a high degree of quality and consistency | Target met | 85% of parties feel that the process had a high degree of quality and consistency |
Transparency (clear and understandable process and procedures) | Parties are satisfied that the Commission’s process and procedures were clearly understood | 85% of parties feel that the process and procedures were clear and understandable | Target met | 85% of parties feel that the process and procedures were clear and understandable |
Expertise (Thoughtful and sound Building Code Commission decisions made due to technical competence of members) |
|
|
|
|
Courtesy (polite and courteous treatment of all parties) | Parties are satisfied that they were treated with courtesy throughout the application process and at a hearing | 85% of parties surveyed feel that they were treated with courtesy throughout the application process and the hearing | Target met | 85% of parties surveyed feel that they are treated with courtesy throughout the application process and the hearing |
Appendix 2 – Building Code Commission appointees list
The following table shows the Commission’s Appointments from April 1, 2024 to March 31, 2025.
New appointments and re-appointments that occur after the end of the reporting period are not shown. See the Public Appointments Secretariat website for the current Appointees List.
Commission members | Appointment date | Expiry date of current appointment | Location | Total annual remuneration 2024–2025 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Stephen Wong, Chair | December 31, 2018 | January 15, 2029 | Toronto | $13,042 |
Alison Orr, Vice Chair | October 17, 2018 | December 8, 2024 | Hamilton | $1,749 |
Matthew Graham, Vice Chair | April 11, 2019 | July 24, 2029 | Ottawa | $3,498 |
Judith Beauchamp | September 13, 2017 | January 15, 2029 | Kitchener | $3,186 |
Christina Kalt | November 2, 2016 | July 26, 2026 | Toronto | $2,006 |
Leszek Muniak | November 2, 2016 | July 26, 2026 | Toronto | $4,248 |
Alexandra Chow | February 2, 2017 | September 25, 2026 | Toronto | $2,478 |
Elektra Vrachas | February 14, 2019 | April 10, 2029 | Toronto | $5,074 |
Michael Egberts | February 14, 2019 | April 10, 2029 | Toronto | $4,602 |
Michael Gooch | February 14, 2020 | February 16, 2030 | Bracebridge | $3,422 |
Alexander Campbell | September 16, 2021 | September 15, 2026 | Bradford/West Gwillimbury | $1,888 |
James Eduful | March 4, 2022 | May 15, 2027 | Ottawa | $2,006 |
Brian Raymond | August 29, 2024 | August 28, 2026 | Cobourg | $1,038 |
Douglas Durham | August 8, 2024 | August 7, 2026 | Ottawa | $330 |
Dominic Esposito | September 13, 2024 | September 12, 2026 | Ottawa | $802 |
Matteo Gilfillan | August 29, 2024 | August 28, 2026 | Toronto | $802 |
Katherine Rentsch | August 8, 2024 | August 7, 2026 | Erin | $708 |
Douglas Vergunst | August 8, 2024 | August 7, 2026 | Kenora | $802 |
Total annual remuneration for the commission | N/A | N/A | N/A | $51,683 |
Note: Numbers may not add up due to rounding. Remuneration represents the per diems and does not include expenses.
Footnotes
- footnote[1] Back to paragraph The Commission’s fiscal year runs from April 1 – March 31.
- footnote[2] Back to paragraph Differences in application vs. hearing totals may be attributed in part to matters being resolved between the parties before a hearing is held as well as having some hearings involving files from previous fiscal years.
- footnote[3] Back to paragraph In 2020–2021, in addition to the 23 applications, 1 more application was referred to the Commission by Superior Court of Justice resulting in 1 additional hearing day in fiscal year 2021–2022.
-
footnote[4]
Back to paragraph
The expenditure estimates are based on an estimated application rate (using historical data and projecting forward) that determines the number of hearings; member per diem remuneration rates; and other operating expenses noted in the table above. Member per diem remuneration rates are established by the Management Board of Cabinet’s Agencies and Appointments Directive regarding part-time Order in Council appointed members.
Operating expenses cover costs associated with meetings, administration, per diems for members and reimbursement for out-of-pocket travel expenses related to meetings. These include hotel accommodations, meal allowances, parking and public transit in accordance with the Management Board of Cabinet’s Travel, Meal and Hospitality Expenses Directive. Ministry staff support costs are also reflected in the expenses. - footnote[5] Back to paragraph In 2024–2025, lower than estimated per diem costs are mainly due to the Commission having a lower application rate in the fiscal year and therefore, a reduced number of hearings. For example, 17 new applications were received and 21 hearings were held compared to a budgeted rate of 35 each for applications and hearings.
- footnote[6] Back to paragraph In 2024–2025, lower than estimated expenses related to travel and meetings are mainly due to the use of video conferencing and fewer in-person meetings. The Commission held 2 in-person meetings of the full Commission and all hearings were held using video conference since there were no requests for in-person hearings. The increased use of video conferencing also affected the expenses in 2023–2024.
- footnote[7] Back to paragraph In 2024–2025, lower than estimated administrative expenses are mainly due to the lower number of applications received.
- footnote[8] Back to paragraph Revenue Estimates are based on an average of 35 applications per year and the fee effective at the start of the fiscal year.
- footnote[9] Back to paragraph Revenues for applications received are deferred to a future period and will be reflected in the financial table when the revenues are earned. 2024–2025 Actuals reflect revenues for a total of 22 applications. This includes the revenues earned from 6 applications that were received in 2023–2024. In 2024–2025, lower than estimated revenues are mainly due to a lower application rate during the fiscal year.
- footnote[10] Back to paragraph In this Table, “parties” are those recognized by the Building Code Act, 1992, namely applicants to the Commission (i.e. applicants for building permits, holders of building permits or persons to whom an order has been issued) and respondents (i.e. municipal chief building officials and their designates, inspectors and registered code agencies).
- footnote[11] Back to paragraph Member is no longer on the Commission.