The National Association of Realtors has proposed a new “Political Survival Initiative,” which would beef up its already muscular political lobbying arm. But to fund the move, the group is mandating a stiff increase in dues, and controversy is already brewing among local Realtors.
The annual increase would be $40 in 2012 and 2013, according to a presentation to association executive in Dallas last month. That would amount to a 50 percent increase in the amount of Realtor’s dues devoted to the national organization – from $80 to $120.
“Our dues, when you take local, state and national, are upwards of $500 [annually] by now,” said Conrad Allen, a RE/MAX agent in Webster. But for him, it’s matter of “principle, not principal. I don’t want to become a teacher’s union or an auto union where our leaders decide who we’re going to vote for and we have no choice.”
Separate Efforts
In 2009, the last year for which data is available, NAR spent $19,842,383 on non-deductible lobbying and political expenditures, according to tax filings. With the dues hike, the organization expects to generate an additional $38 million per year dedicated to political lobbying.
Such efforts would be separate from those of the organization’s 40-year-old political action committee, the Realtor’s Political Action Committee, (RPAC) which contributes money to candidates and lobbies on political issues of interest to Realtors. Contributions to RPAC are voluntary; the presentation outlining the Political Survival Initiative says that NAR has no plans to change its fundraising goals for the PAC, stating that the “pressure is still on to raise hard dollars.”
The increased attention to lobbying has been prompted by the outcome of a 2010 Supreme Court case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, in which the court ruled that organizations and corporations were entitled to spend corporate funds directly on political candidates and advocacy campaigns.
Kevin Sears, of Sears Real Estate in Springfield and a former president of the Massachusetts Association of Realtors, sat on a NAR advisory committee which looked at the impact of the Citizens United decision on the group’s lobbying efforts, and is strongly in favor of the additional fundraising effort.
“I think it’s vitally important for not only our industry but for the consumer and homeowners,” said Sears, “Because right now homeownership is under attack in D.C.” He pointed to recent efforts to shut down the GSEs and repeal the mortgage interest tax deduction as particularly important for Realtors to combat.
In his travels around the country, Sears said, he’s seen very few Realtors who don’t see merit in the initiative.
“There is a question about the dues increase, and is now the right time or not,” he acknowledged. “And to that, I say we can’t afford not to do it, because of the ramifications inaction could have on our industry.”
During the 2010 election campaign, RPAC spent $12 million on congressional races. The Realtors’ candidate won eight of the 11 races where they focused most of their attention and effort, and overall their candidates won in 78 of the 103 races in which they contributed some funds. Their efforts were noticed by the political press, with D.C.-based paper and website Politico highlighting NAR’s efforts as a possible blueprint for other organizations’ campaigns post-Citizens United.
Tempting Options
But such national recognition for its lobbying prowess is not necessarily the most important goal for NAR, some agents say, especially with the industry so battered by the housing bust.
“NAR needs to be relevant to the local Realtor, and not to the politics of deciding who you want to represent you,” said Allan.
Many agents are struggling during the downturn in the housing market, and are particularly sensitive to any increase in fees.
“You have to understand, somebody gets a dues bill for anywhere between $400 and $600, it’s coming from the local board,” said Ann Rendle, chief executive officer at the Westford-based Northeast Association of Realtors. “And we’re the ones that are on the hook to collect it, and so we’re the ones that are on the phone with the members. And most of them are cool but some of them are telling us, ‘you realize how difficult these are to pay?’ Some of them are crying, some of them are yelling. So we have our fingers on the pulse of the membership and where they are with their dues bills.”
Such concerns may put more pressure on brokerages to drop the Realtor label. In large swathes of the country, local multiple listing services are run by a local Realtor board, and real estate agents have to join NAR in order to gain access to listings.
But in Massachusetts, while two of three local MLSs are Realtor-owned, the largest – MLS-PIN – is not. That means that Bay State brokerages could opt to drop the “Realtor” tag and still access listings – a tempting option if it means skipping out on increased fees.
And it’s not an option without precedent: Earlier this year in South Carolina, another state with a non-Realtor MLS, one of the state’s largest brokerages opted to drop its Realtor association membership after agents complained about high dues.
Most local boards will meet over the next few weeks to review the proposal and send feedback to the NAR. Only the national organization’s directors, however, will be able to vote on whether to approve the measure, when they meet next month.
