NAR dues rising 50%
In March, we broke the news that the National Association of Realtors’ annual Mid-Year meeting in Washington DC would play host to a major vote proposed and voted upon by the Board of Directors regarding a potential rise in dues by 50% up to $120 annually.
Several raised important questions while others balked the idea of any change. The Realtor Party Political Survival Initiative was explained in detail that a recent Supreme Court ruling put NAR and members at a major political disadvantage as the reason for the need to raise dues (hence “survival”).
We were the only news organization that asked what would come of the dues if the ruling was overturned and were told by NAR program director Liz Giovaniello told AGbeat, “The funds for this initiative are needed NOT ONLY because of the Supreme Court ruling, they are needed in order to help ensure the success of our state and local association advocacy efforts – to help them be as successful as possible. Even of [sic] the ruling had not occurred, we would need to bring our advocacy efforts to a higher level.”
The vote passed
We are again the first to break the news that this morning, the NAR Action Center said that the “NAR Board of Directors votes to fund political survival initiative through $40 dues increase, beginning in 2012.”
Sources say a motion to reconsider the vote was overwhelmingly defeated as a strong majority of the Board voted for the increase.
Realtor responses varied to the overwhelmingly affirmative vote ranging from Duane Fonts, President of the Arizona Area Association of Realtors who tweeted congratulations to Realtors (which appeared to be genuine and not facetious) to Maryland Realtor Tyler Wood noting that it “would have be nice for the minority to have had opportunity to be heard” and even Florida Realtor Lisa Rose-Mann asking, “when does the class action begin? Sign me up.”
We asked you, our readers, what your thoughts were on an increase in dues and the AG report on sentiments on NAR dues reflected 66% of respondents were “very upset” about a potential increase, and 14% were mildly upset with 32% saying they only pay dues because they have to in order to use the MLS. The upset on the increase by our readers was similar to several other studies published afterward which confirms Wood’s feelings that he (and other Realtors) are not well represented at the Board level.
We would love to hear your thoughts in the comments. Did you think this measure would pass or fail? Are you upset or glad RPPSI passed? Do you think the Board of Directors is in touch with what you and your peers are experiencing?