RESIDENT MANAGER MODEL, OPERATIONAL OVERSIGHT, AND OWNER DEC

---

 INTRODUCTION

This summary is intended to assist owners in reviewing certain operational, governance, financial, and disclosure considerations relating to:  

• the proposed transition away from the Resident Manager model; and
• the proposed sale of the strata-owned Caretaker Suite.

The comments below are provided for informational and discussion purposes only and are not legal advice.

The purpose of this summary is not to advocate for or against any particular staffing model. Rather, it is to assist owners in considering whether sufficient operational information, analysis, and owner consultation were provided before owners were asked to approve the permanent disposal of a strata-owned asset connected to the Resident Manager function.

THE RESIDENT MANAGER ROLE

Based on materials circulated to owners over the past two years, the Resident Manager role appears to have involved responsibilities extending well beyond ordinary janitorial or cleaning services.

The role reportedly included functions such as:

• day-to-day monitoring of building operations;
• oversight of mechanical systems;
• coordination with contractors and trades;
• support relating to maintenance and repair issues;
• resident move-in and move-out coordination;
• fire and life safety oversight functions;
• operational reporting and communication;
• on-site response and problem identification;
• and continuity of operational knowledge regarding the property and building systems.

Owners may wish to consider whether these broader operational functions differ materially from a standard contracted cleaning or custodial arrangement.

Owners may also wish to consider:

• which operational functions are expected to continue under the proposed contracted-service model;
• which responsibilities may be reduced, modified, or reassigned;
• and whether the long-term operational implications of those changes have been fully explained to owners.

ADDITIONAL OPERATIONAL CONTEXT

Additional context regarding the operational scope of the Resident Manager position is reflected in the “Resident Manager’s Report” - See sample and APPENDIX “A” below.

The report appears to confirm that the role extended beyond ordinary janitorial or custodial services and included a combination of operational, administrative, maintenance coordination, contractor liaison, monitoring, and building systems responsibilities.

Examples referenced within the report include:

• daily review of major building systems;
• coordination with contractors and service providers;
• operational reporting to property management;
• move-in and move-out coordination;
• programming of key fobs, garage openers, and enter-phone systems;
• review and coordination relating to fire safety systems;
• monitoring and response relating to mechanical issues;
• coordination relating to flooding and restoration incidents;
• maintenance follow-up and repair coordination;
• and ongoing monitoring of operational deficiencies requiring contractor attention.

The report also references numerous building infrastructure and operational matters occurring during the reporting period, including:

• boiler repairs;
• parkade ventilation repairs;
• fire safety testing;
• drainage and catch basin maintenance;
• lighting repairs;
• EV charging installations;
• sump pump replacement concerns;
• hot water system issues;
• and other ongoing operational maintenance matters.

Owners may therefore wish to consider whether:

• the Resident Manager role functioned as a broader operational oversight position rather than solely a cleaning or custodial role;
• sufficient information has been provided regarding how these operational functions will be managed under a contracted-service model;
• and whether the long-term operational implications of eliminating the on-site role have been fully evaluated and communicated to owners.

A sample of the Resident Manager’s Report can be found here for owners wishing to review the operational scope of the role in greater detail.  See APPENDIX “A” below.

THE TRANSITION PROCESS

Materials circulated to owners indicate that following the resignation of the former Resident Manager:

• interim contracted services were retained;
• a replacement recruitment process was initiated;
• a committee process was established relating to the recruitment effort;
• job postings were revised during the process;
• and council later reviewed the comparative costs of maintaining a Resident Manager versus continuing with contracted services.

Subsequently, owners were advised that a proposal would be brought forward to:

• continue with contracted services; and
• sell the Caretaker Suite.

Owners may wish to better understand:

• when the possibility of permanently transitioning away from the Resident Manager model was first considered;
• whether multiple operational alternatives were fully evaluated;
• what operational analysis supported the recommendation;
• and whether owners were provided sufficient information regarding the long-term operational consequences of the proposed transition before the sale resolution was advanced.

THE STRAW POLL AND OWNER CONSULTATION

Owners were advised that a community “straw poll” reflected support among participating owners for continuing with contracted services and selling the Caretaker Suite.

However, the materials circulated to owners suggest that much of the discussion focused on:

• operational preferences;
• staffing arrangements;
• service delivery models;
• and comparative costs between a Resident Manager and contracted services.

Owners may therefore wish to consider whether:

• owners were ever separately asked to decide the long-term operational model itself;
• support for contracted services necessarily equated to support for permanently selling the Caretaker Suite;
• and whether the operational decision and the asset-sale decision effectively became combined into a single process.

As described to owners, the straw poll was not a formal or binding vote under the Strata Property Act.

OPERATIONAL AND GOVERNANCE CONSIDERATIONS

Owners may wish to consider whether additional information should have been provided regarding:

• the operational role historically performed by the Resident Manager;
• how those functions will be replaced under a contracted-service model;
• long-term building oversight and operational continuity;
• coordination relating to maintenance and mechanical systems;
• future operational accountability;
• comparative long-term operational costs;
• and whether additional owner consultation would have been beneficial before advancing a permanent asset-sale resolution.

Owners may also wish to consider whether:

• the long-term operational model should first have been determined independently;
• and whether the question of selling the Caretaker Suite should only follow after owners had clearly decided the future operational structure of the building.

THE CARETAKER SUITE AS A STRATA ASSET

The proposed resolution involves the permanent disposal of a strata-owned asset historically connected to the Resident Manager function.

Owners may therefore wish to consider whether sufficient information has been provided regarding:

• the operational implications of eliminating the Resident Manager model;
• future staffing flexibility;
• long-term service continuity;
• mortgage and financial considerations associated with the suite;
• and the potential impact on building operations over time.

Owners may also wish to consider whether additional financial and operational analysis would assist in evaluating the long-term implications of the proposal before irreversible decisions are made.

RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER MAJOR BUILDING OPERATIONS

Owners have noted that the proposed transition away from the Resident Manager model is occurring during a period involving several significant operational and infrastructure decisions affecting the property.

Owners may therefore wish to consider:

• how ongoing operational oversight responsibilities will be managed;
• whether sufficient building-specific operational continuity will remain in place;
• and whether the long-term operational structure has been fully developed and communicated to owners.

FINAL OBSERVATIONS

The concerns summarized above do not necessarily mean the proposed resolutions should be rejected.

However, given:

• the permanent nature of the proposed asset sale;
• the operational significance of eliminating the Resident Manager model;
• the broader operational responsibilities historically associated with that role;
• and the governance and disclosure considerations  identified above,

owners may believe that:

• additional operational analysis;
• clearer owner consultation regarding the operational model itself;
• and further discussion regarding long-term building oversight

would have been beneficial before owners were asked to vote on the proposed resolutions.

Owners are encouraged to:

• review the circulated materials carefully;
• ask questions;
• seek clarification where appropriate; and
• make informed voting decisions based on their own assessment of the long-term interests of the strata community.

This summary is intended solely for informational and discussion purposes among owners.

APPENDIX “A”

January 2026 Resident Manager’s Operational Report

The following sample report is included solely for informational purposes as an example of the operational scope historically associated with the Resident Manager position.

Inclusion of the report does not imply endorsement of every statement contained within it.

The report is provided to assist owners in understanding the range of operational, maintenance coordination, monitoring, and building support functions historically associated with the role.

Prior to publication, owners may wish to ensure that:

• personal information;
• contact information;
• unit-specific information;
• and security-sensitive operational details

have been appropriately reviewed or redacted where necessary.

View the Sample Report