In this episode, Chuck Kasky, CEO of Maryland REALTORS® and host of the Get Real Estate Podcast, has an honest, open, and progressive conversation with the National Association of REALTORS®' CEO, Bob Goldberg about NAR's recent DOJ settlement, implicit biases, the newly instated changes of NAR's Code of Ethics, the integration of technology in the real estate industry, and adopting the mindset of the “now normal.”
In this episode, Chuck Kasky, CEO of Maryland REALTORS® and host of the Get Real Estate Podcast, has an honest, open, and progressive conversation with the National Association of REALTORS®' CEO, Bob Goldberg about NAR's recent DOJ settlement, implicit biases, the newly instated changes of NAR's Code of Ethics, the integration of technology in the real estate industry, and adopting the mindset of the “now normal.”
Welcome to get real estate podcasts from Maryland realtor I'm CEO, Chuck casket, you're listening. So you are probably a realtor who pays dues to national state and local associations. First of all, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Because without you there's no us, there's no association. You are the assistant, but maybe you did not know that realtor associations operate under. What's known as the three way agreement, which establishes jurisdiction and broad responsibilities for over each level of our realtor world, the national association of realtors, advocates on our behalf before Congress on legislative issues and the administration non-regulatory ones, Maryland realtors does the same at the state level and your local board or association, the County and city level. We also provide different products and services collaborating along the way to bring our members value for their teams to illustrate this our podcast, we'll be exploring the different levels of realtor associations starting with today's guests, national association of realtors, CDO at Maryland zone. Bob Goldberg. Welcome. Bye.
Speaker 2:It's a pleasure and an honor to be a part of your
Speaker 1:We're really excited to explore, not necessarily the minute details of the three-way agreement, but I do want to very broadly give people an idea of what our different roles are. And then we'll dive into some of the specific things that are right now in front of us, specifically the DOJ settlement, new app, my last rules, the new code of ethics changes, what we're planning to do as far as our advocacy on the national level to address housing inequality. And then finally, we're going to talk about where we're going, given the changes that we have experienced and what we can expect, what the industry and the association world will look like on the other side of the pandemic. So that's all the little light conversation. So give us your take, first of all, on the three-way agreement, how do you see the differences and similarities between the federal, uh, the national association, state associations and local?
Speaker 2:Yeah, certainly, you know, put it in simple terms is that it doesn't work unless we all work together. You know, many of our members and I think they realize it, but I have run across many members that don't understand it, that when you pay your dues, you're really paying at all three levels, your local association, which provides phenomenal benefits at the local level training and education and rules of engagement, state association, which is doing the same kinds of things. But also as we all know, engage with advocacy at the state level, certainly in Annapolis and the federal of it, uh, by the national association of realtors, we have plethora of products and services like our state associations that are local to provide as many opportunities for our members to be successful. And so we work hand in hand, for example, I think the best, and we'll talk more about it is in our advocacy efforts, especially during this pandemic and when the stimulus package was being negotiated. And the terrace program that came out NPR was front and center with the federal government, but working hand in hand, for example, Chuck with your team so that when we were all successful, getting real estate named as an essential service in the state of Maryland and also the other 49 States, we lobbied hard on the federal level or with the department of Homeland security, which came up with a master list of what businesses are going to be deemed essential. Once we were successful doing that, he gave me ammunition to post like you Chuck and your team, to be able to lobby governor Hogan and the administration in Maryland and say, look, I know things need to be shut down, but real estate is essential. Housing is imperative. We've kind of made sure that our realtors and people trying to conduct a transaction can do so even through the pandemic, that is a perfect example of a state association in Nashville, working hand in hand to benefit our members that pay, as you mentioned in your opening, that paid dues and it doesn't work unless we're all working together.
Speaker 1:Yeah. That's an excellent point. And you could just tell, for example, not every state residential real estate was not deemed essential in every state and our, our border state, Pennsylvania, for example, for the first, I think four or five months, they were completely shut down.
Speaker 2:So a long time, despite all the lobbying and finally came around, but essentially real estate for many months in that particular state was shut down and nonexistent.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So it's just a good example of how the decisions made at the federal level, but then sometimes get pushed out to the States and we have to track all the different States and what their activities are. And that's a big part of the support we get from you at NAR. When we all, you know, you bring us together and we can talk about what's happening in different States. So that collaboration is a very valuable to us. So let's start substantively, let's start with the DOJ settlement and new MLS rules when you've talked about the local boards. And we talk about that and w you know, in Maryland here, we're obviously, we're, we're part of bright MLS, which is a regional MLS, just remind our listeners that in many parts of the country, local or state associations with mostly local associations zone, the MLS own and operate MLS is as well. We don't have that here in Maryland, but you're fortunate enough to have if not the largest, but one of the largest regional MLS, but let's talk a little bit about what happened with the department of justice as settlement and the new MLS rules and how those are going to potentially affect our members.
Speaker 2:And it's certainly been in the news quite a bit in the last month and a half. A lot of folks didn't know about it because it's not the kind of thing that while you're going through an inquiry, rather than keep those things confidential, the department of justice, I think the most important thing is, and we'll pause for me about what the settlement is all about, but more importantly, you know, we were very clear that we did not agree with the DOJ at all on their assertion, that, that some of the practices and rules in place works fair and competitive, you know, I would submit. And it was to the point that we made with the DOJ is that all of our policies were about openness competitiveness and providing the consumers with as much transparent information so that they can make an educated decision when they're making the largest purchase in their life. And so there was debate on that, that has been going back and forth. So we were very clear that we have done nothing wrong, that we, as an industry, continue to pull the key tenet of putting the consumer first. But I will tell you that that's interesting in year, and we'll talk about the settlement and the impact. First and foremost, the settlement had no financial impact. We were not penalized. It was not. You'll see a lot of lawsuits for the DOJ where there's a financial impact in settlement, punitive pain. We had different approaches of opinions as to what each of them for doing. So the settlement basically said, okay, then let's do this. Let's make sure that your rules are clearer and that you've doubled down ensuring that consumers and your participants in the industry are more open and fair with their communication. Now, what does that mean? Okay, well, number one, these are not in any particular order, but they want to ensure that compensation that is put in the MLS cooperation and compensation, which is a key tenant of how MLS does work and share information that, that data is shared fairly with consumers. Now, what does that mean? There is, there was some concern that there may be situations where clients may be only shown properties from an MLS that might mean better financial gains for members for realtors. And we were like, well, no, but there have been some situations where there might have been some bad actors that said, Hey, you know what, I'll only show clients properties that may give me a better commission. I don't think that's why it's spread. Most, every practitioner I deal with 30 plus years in this industry say they would never do that. That's not what it's about, but in order to ensure that that doesn't happen to make sure that it is clear and open, that a consumer knows how pop station is being handled so that there is no ambiguity. Every property that is available to be shown in listed is provided to your client no matter what the commission structure is. Right? So that's another key piece on that. And that's, you're not, you're, you're not making a decision that our members aren't saying, I won't show this property doesn't financially benefit me. So that's another area, which is interesting is that DOJ is perspective on buyer's agency, representative or buyers many times would represent, or maybe market their services as being free. It doesn't cost their clients any money. Well, the reality is we all know that the way that a buyer's agent has compensated is through the overall commission that a seller is provided, but the DOJ failed. It's misleading because a buyer's agent services aren't really free. They are compensated by the seller's commission in that respect. So there will be a requirement there'll be far more open, and to make sure that there is no ambiguity in that, that they must in fact be clear about their, about their services. Um, so that was the crux of a big part of it is just the education and communication. So what we agreed to do, and one of the core one is with regards to lockbox.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah. That's, we're actually having more conversation about that at our level. And we're coordinating with locals about that than anything else, right?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Once I've just mentioned, and I'll talk a little bit about the lockboxes, but the ones I've just mentioned, Ashley, I think as an industry, we do a really good job. We tell, you know, we're very open about commissions. We're very open about the structure of those, but in order to ensure that we're being better in this day and age, the DOJ wanted us to be clear about that. Now the lockbox issue is one that says that a real estate licensed professional has an opportunity to have access to a property. Again, making sure that the seller is in agreement with that, even if they're not a member of the MLS. So that's a discussion about, so how do you accommodate that? Now, the feeling there is, is that the DOJ did not want it to be that real. And it was a reminder, you know, those 1.4 million members of ours probably can call themselves realtors. Aren't the only ones that have access into a property. If you are a licensed professional that you can't be the secular club over here and say, you can get in, but this person can't and all that. Now the seller has to read all of that. That says are the only, I want to be able to show my property or the following books, but that way it does allow that opportunity to be there. The rules of engagement on that get a little more complex, but there's all kinds of other of the concerns that we're working on with our MOS and our associations about liability and who really has access and is the seller really in agreement with it. So we're working with the MLS directly to get a lot of input on this process. Is that a one day code or a one-time access type of thing. It was the last box itself, had the capability of accommodating that. So I know for example, in right MLS area, for the most part, they use central lab is an NAR backed company. So I know the capabilities I actually is wearing another hat as chairman of the board of central ops capabilities are there. So all of this will be worked through the next step in this Chuck and to all the listeners here is that we're going to work with the DOJ to come up with rules that are very specific for each of those items that I mentioned. And it requires us to work with our board of directors get approval sometime during the first quarter. So we approve it or not. My hope is, is that we'll all come to an agreement that makes sense. The DOJ will then review that with us, and then the matter will be set. And so I feel very bullish these things as any of you, who've been involved with the DOJ. I hope everybody has that been for years. And I think that we were very successful as an industry, working with the DOJ with their career Eurocrats. And I don't say that as a negative, it's just the career employees of the DOJ and the elected ones and the appointed ones to be able to show them that look, we're trying to be a very cooperative industry. We've all been about the consumer. And I don't think you can ask anybody in our industry that says, Hey, making sure that our clients are well-informed and have information so that when they make this important decision, then our member is the catalyst behind that. And so I think that's why we were able to come to an amicable approach of clarifying rules and making some modifications in terms of access. I can lock boxes. I think that's a fair way for us to all accomplish what we're all looking to do. Yeah.
Speaker 1:So let's get crazy with the advent of buyer agency, roughly about the turn of the century. We stayed with the cooperative model, right? So of compensation. So prior to buy our agency is many of our listeners know, but some may not, if you have been in the industry and we have a lot of new members and they've never lived through cooperating brokerage, where in fact you were the seller's agent, even though you were bringing buyers to property. So a lot of people never experienced that when we adopted it brought buyer agents at buyer representation into the industry without changing the compensation model, right? So sellers and by sellers and listing brokers still in effect for the most part pay buyers, brokers, even though buyers, brokers are duty bound to represent buyers in the transaction. So is it easy to understand the confusion? Again, I that's, my, my point here is I have sympathy for people trying to wrap their heads around the fact that the buyer's broker works for the buyer, but gets paid by the listing broker. And so I do have some sympathy for the way. We try to explain that I talked to members every day, almost most or weekly who have trouble explaining the buyer representation agreement. And, and we, when we say free, you know, we put air quotes around it and we're doing that even though we're not on camera. When you try to explain that to consumers, that they're not paying for your services, but that doesn't mean your services are quote unquote free. So I do have some sympathy for the lack of understanding of how that actually works. So I, my question to you is you may not want to answer this, but that's okay. I don't want to put you on the spot. Do you foresee a time where buyers hire and compensate brokers directly instead of using the current compensation model?
Speaker 2:No, I think, well, no, I think it's a fair question. And I think Chuck you're spot on. I think there is consumer confusion when explaining it usually doesn't get challenged on the buyer side as much because the buyer is saying, Hey, I'm not having to write a check. And by the way, hence the reason I think the DOJ is very clear about let's make sure it's even clearer than ever before. The problem on that issue has been as much as the buyer's agents are going around and broadcasting, my services are free. Well, you can't really say that because you're right, Chuck, they're not free books aside. So I see they, that that model could change possibly. It's interesting. I think that is that evolves to gesture personally, as we all trying to figure this out, I think the cost of the transaction may go up as opposed to our members in all fairness. And my wife has been a practitioner for years. She is now taking a hiatus, but it is interesting because all of the, your whispers bust they're showing clients properties and all that. And the transaction doesn't come to fruition, took the buyers each of their mind or whatever, and they don't get compensated. Do I see a model where maybe folks were compensated based on an hourly wage or taking them around, and then there's some other piece of this. I think there's a lot of pros and cons, but, but by the way, there were players in our industry putting that model in place to see how that might work. So any are typically tastes a play. And I know Chuck, you're the same way. We're not going to drive a particular business model in the industry because I think the players in the industry are the ones that are innovative. They'll come up with the best practices. They think that would drive the best business for them. And I actually, and our leadership applaud all those very different models that are out there. Some of which are I buyer, for example, has caused consternation, what does this mean for industry? And it's like, you know what, bring it up. First of all, that's a model that ultimately evolves. You know, I'm reminded by many players in this industry. I've been in it 30 plus years. And I remember back in the eighties, there was a couple of major franchises that were already doing high buyer. They just said, Hey, I can't sell your property in 60 days. I'll buy it from that. Isn't high buyer. Now I buyers backed by major venture capital and capital investment. And so it's a little different than it was before, but our industry continues to evolve like an amoeba. It moves around in different forms. And so I, I think there will be variations in hybrids, all kinds of models and some of which may be, Hey, you see these limited service brokers is a very prominent one in our market area that is doing some pretty cool things. And I think it forces everyone to raise their game to be competitive because in the end, it's all about the consumer and what they want.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I think that's a fair point. And I guess to wrap this up, our position as the state association is an and you, you said it eloquently, we don't pick winners and losers in the race or the development of business models. We don't do that. And we don't tip the scale. But what we do pledge is that when whoever comes into the market plays by the rules that the playing field stays level and that we have a broker's act, we have a highly regulated industry that no matter what your business model is, you're going to play by the rules that everybody else has played by. You don't have an unfair advantage, at least as far as the rules. But other than that, we don't pick winners and losers.
Speaker 2:Yeah. We're not about being market makers. That's unfair number one. And I think it's all about, as you stated that I think that's a true statement that applies at the local level, the state level and national, we may partner with people, um, uh, to bring added benefits and services to the industry. But we will typically say we'll pick one over another, especially in what I call the endemic play, those that can influence or industry trying to pick all the winners and losers and variably you will lose.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah. So let's switch gears a little bit. The biggest news coming out of the annual conference in November, where the changes to the code of ethics, adoption of a new standard of practice under article 10 regarding hate speech, that for the first time subjects are members to enforcement under the code of ethics for activities specifically hate speech outside of the real estate transaction. And that was a pretty fundamental change. And there's been a lot of comments from the membership positive and negative, mostly positive, I will say, not a hundred percent, but overwhelmingly positive. I think you'll agree with that. And so can we talk a little bit about that? A little of the history, not a whole lot, but just, you know, what, the kind of conversations that went on to get us to this place. And first of all, I think I'll also talk a little bit about why we're doing this, why we're doing this now. I think some of the history, you know, when we promised this podcast, we're going to get real estate. So we, we want to have these difficult conversations. And this is probably if not the, certainly one of the most difficult conversations we're going to have because we were complicit in organized real estate was complicit along with the federal government and state governments and the denying housing opportunity for prospective home buyers of colors, especially give us your perspective on that. Why now, what do we hope to get from this? And then what do you see moving forward? Because that's going to lead into our conversation about NARF advocacy agenda, moving forward to also address the disparities in housing opportunity. That's a lot just, just that, just that,
Speaker 2:Yeah, there was a big deal. It is a big deal. First of all, you know, if you give a little background, you know, you're correct. We were as an industry, lots of discrimination. In fact, we weren't open as a membership in the, as late as the seventies, right? We wouldn't allow in many cases African-Americans or other minorities to be a part of the national association. I mean, that's, it's hard to believe that's in our lifetime. It's easy to say, wow, that's the old one. And in many ways it is, that is not how we practice today. And we'll talk about in a few minutes, our continued focused on fair housing and equity. And what does that mean? The basis of this conversation, about the changes on the hate speech and harassment and the bullying and negativity was something that I would say would have happened irrespective of what we saw in current events with, with the social unrest and things like that, where we were headed with this, this was actually happening even before the unfortunate incidents that happened earlier this year with George Floyd and Briana Taylor. And the story after story that we all as, as Americans have experienced in the reality of it is, is that with the rise of social media and everybody being online and what's real and what's fake, and everyone has an opinion on everything more so than whether we like it or not. That's, that's the way the world works. And when you call it real news or fake news or embellish, you don't know what's real and all that. But what we were finding especially is the social unrest aspect was happening in our country is that we were finding that members, um, like every other American has the opportunity to do with expressing their opinions. Sometimes it went over the line where it got into hate and discriminatory perspectives and very outwardly, uh, embarrassing comments. And so several associations, for example, and local associations, we're bringing up to NAR and to our members. I want to be clear when people say that not just an entity as all of us, same way in Maryland, the state association of Maryland members of Maryland. So it's not like I sit in a room with our presidents that, well, here's the rule we're going to put in place. This is a member driven organization. They make decisions. They get input from fellow members. This is not a bunch of staff people sitting in the room to say, what can we do to help her assist our members? Even though we do that every day in practice rules of engagement, unless our members are the ones. Now having said that there were some very unflattering and disparaging comments that are, that some of our members were making in this, right? And it reflected on all of us as an industry. I'll give you an idea because there are some, you know, if you look at the counter argument, what is your, I have a right to say what I want, but the issue with that is, and this is not first amendment issue, by the way. Cause I hear that thrown up amendment for government, making a decision that you don't have free speech, but a private entity has a right to engagement. Cause there's always consequences. You can say, you can do what you want, but here's what happens. Well in our situation, think about it this way, the brand, it's a membership Mark, but it's also a brand. It's a$5, one of the top in the United negative comment by a member that portrays themselves as a real for, in really a lot of aspects of their own life, ends up disparaging our own industry. For example, that we have to be able to say to someone, you can't be a member, real per family. Cause you're wearing you say something very negative and I'll call her about how that's adjudicated. But if you say something very negative, becoming a professional in our industry, the problem is where we have seen it. And we've the story out there where a certain member, yes, I am a neighborhood. Well, let me tell you what happened. The broker immediately lacked that person says you're no longer affiliated, but guess what? They can hang their sign down the street with somebody else and call themselves. There's still a real core and that's our brand. And when I say our, yes, it's NAR and it's the state and it's the local and it's every member's brand. And so by being disparaging like that, we all get a certain perspective by consumers. So we needed to have some teeth in this debate to say that, look, if a situation occurs, yes, we have brand equity. We have to protect, but more importantly, we need to protect each other. As an industry. Consumers don't have a view of us negatively that we have been about for several years, doubling down on housing, equitable housing, working closely with HUD, about what can we do more as an industry. And yet we find that there are certain people that are upholding this standard by their speech. And we needed to have some peat. Now that doesn't mean if we, if we go through a process that is set up by the local board of ethics violation and let it be discussed there and determine if there's any teeth need to be put in place to say, you know what? You can't be a member anymore, or here's the sanctions or whatever it is, doesn't mean that we're taking their livelihood away for. They can still be licensed in their state. Now I wouldn't be surprised. Now if we start seeing real estate commission, not worthy of holding a license, but that's really the driver that's behind. I'll give you one other tastes listening to the impacts of this, but they're in a part of the country, certainly not here in Maryland because it didn't happen here. One of our members who sadly, they were a member where they made a very negative comment about rates on a radio program, they hosted and what happened. Well, their broker or this person's broker immediately suffered times. That is unacceptable. We can't believe you said that on there. And immediately that real core ended up going to another brokerage and the nickname of that brokerage and that they'd gotten branded in the market as the number one is not fair to the nine plus percent transactions and the light, and yet hate speech like that should not be expected. Naturally. The conversation that happens by our board of directors, 800 plus people were involved in this conversation after the professional standards committee, but they did it for a, it was approved by our leadership team. And then it goes to the board of directors and it was approved many of the debates folks that were against it. We're not, it's not that they were saying, Hey, we should be allowed to say racist. That negative thing almost to a tee. Everyone was like Krista. And by the way, I think it's a viable concern to have the dialogue. Is this a slippery slope? What happens with my family and I'm visiting some city and I happened to take a picture and a Confederate monument happened to be in the background. Am I going to get nailed on that? Because it wasn't waving a Confederate flag, even if I was, does that mean I'm a racist and all that. So I think the point is that will be every opportunity. Someone would have to file a complaint. They'd have to go through a process and it needs to be a high hurdle that we go through to make sure that our member has every opportunity to provide the evidence. So I don't anticipate that there being a large influx of all my God, Richard, all the people that are, but I think we needed to have stuffing that we could fall back on.
Speaker 1:And I appreciate that. And you make the point to just to follow up on the quote unquote enforcement. I don't like the phrase, but we talk about enforcing the code of ethics, what we're applying it to situations in determining whether our members have violated the code. And you're exactly right. We're working with our local boards and getting a lot of additional information and training from NAR. So thank you for that. And we're in constant communication w uh, supporting our local boards because it will follow the professional standards process. So a member will have to file a complaint, and that goes through a grievance committee process. If they determine there's enough evidence for a hearing, the professional standards committee will conduct a full due process hearing and weigh the evidence and make a determination about whether there's been a violation. And if so, what are the appropriate sanctions? So we are working very hard with our local boards and the state grievance and professional standards committees to make sure we all understand if we do see a complaint for violation of new standard of practice, 10 dash five, that we'll be able to process those in accordance with our existing, significant due process rights that respondents have. So we do think that we will not see a flood of complaints in this area, but we will be prepared to handle them if they do arise. I think that's an important point.
Speaker 2:So
Speaker 1:Let's move a little bit to what's next, as far as our advocacy having admitted. And, and if, if listeners haven't seen Charlie uploaders apology, I really highly recommend that they visit nar.realtor and search for if they can't see it right on the front, on the homepage. Charlie's very well thought out and heartfelt apology on behalf of our industry for past wrongs that we, we talked a little bit about not to belabor. And then I guess the question is what's next. So we talk about fair housing and some of the protections under the fair housing act have been watered down a little bit over the last four years. So we'll think about, talk about that a little, a little bit. And what other things do you see on the horizon for NAR as far as advocacy on the federal level to address housing opportunity?
Speaker 2:Well, I'm saying, uh, as you mentioned the apology, and while you heard Charlie stated, and like you said, there's a video and there's a whole discussion about it by our president, Charlie oppor, this started many years ago. This was, I remember distinctly two and a half years ago. We commemorate the 50th anniversary of the fair housing act. And I give lots of kudos to Elizabeth Mendenhall and her leadership team on that 50th anniversary, who said, let's have an honest dialogue about what occurred. And if any of your listeners here happened to go to our mid-year legislative meetings that year with Elizabeth, you'll see that our opening conversation was focused on the 50th anniversary and what we have done and what we didn't do and what we should have done. And it's easy to acknowledge that, you know, there's a lot that needs to be done, but you can't move forward unless you acknowledge and accept what you were part of. And that's really where that, for lack of a better term healing started where 2018, we said, it's the 50th anniversary. Let's acknowledge some of the sins of our past, and that we're not our or mothers
Speaker 3:Or uncles or aunts in AR we're a different industry in a different situation. So that process started. And I think the point there being is we had to lay the foundation of you. Can't talk about all the things you stand for in fair housing, equity and housing and property ownership. If you don't acknowledge where you came from. So that process has been a multi-year process. It wasn't a one and done type of program. It was one that said let's acknowledge it and move forward with what we believe in, in today's era of how we want to best serve our industry and best serve consumers. So I'm proud to tell you that we have a individual. We brought on board, Brian Green in our housing arena. He was an under secretary from home. What I love about Brian, by the way, as the nominal of what he knows. And we brought him on board about a year and a month ago, a year in December. So that would be the end of 19. What's remarkable about that is we had made a commitment. We were going to double down on fair housing. So president maybe right before him, and as I've mentioned before, about with bill Brown, we, we brought him on board with the whole of how do we do more in the fair housing arena and let Ashton speak better than our words. We as an industry. And they, by the way, when I say industry, it's not just, you know, what's being done on the linear side, on the appraisal side and all the aspects of a real estate purchase. What can we, as an industry do to change things. So we bought Brian on the program, which ultimately became the act program. And if you can go to nar.realtor search act for talent ability, culture change, and training, it gives them an opportunity to start putting programs in place. And those actions that will help change this industry. We brought Brian on before, and I'm sure most of everybody listening here is aware of what happened in long Island a year ago, January this month. And end of February, we're Newsday, hidden, hidden microphones and cameras, and really lots of situations of active discrimination by real estate professionals, with certain buyers and sellers. And it was embarrassing at best. It shows that it still happens and it can't happen. And we had already had Brian onboard. So many people sitting there talking about Brian and all the attributes he's bringing to the, to our industry. People are like, Oh, you did it as a reaction. No, the answer is we actually had them on board with the goal of the long Island situation. Only accelerated the discussion and then the social address that occurred as well. So we were already well-prepared. And ahead of that, we put an implicit bias video together during the year, which I would ask everybody to go to npr.realtor and to look at that 45 minute video for the best tools that our members use. We just launched a program in November fair Haven, it's free to our members. It is an experiential simulation training program. Again, it's free members have told us, I hear over and over that it's one of the best tools they've ever had in this industry. It helps you go through a real estate transaction and navigate your way through situations to help you learn of what could be considered biased or something that you're doing, that you don't even know that you're doing.
Speaker 1:I did it, I did it. And it took me a while to get for transactions settled. Cause there were things I couldn't, I, what did I do wrong? I couldn't even tell. And the implicit bias testing stuff too. I learned a lot.
Speaker 3:It's so good. Even my friend, Brad had a great review, but the fact is outside reviewers have looked at it and said, you know, this is a great, great product and service for our members. And by the way, it's not the end all beat all. We've got to do this every single day. So I think it gets to the point, Chuck, to your question of, okay, well, that's great. We're putting these tools in place, but how does that impact housing policy? And especially now, when you're looking at a change of administration, for example, I'm pleased to tell you that Brian and my team already had a conversation and a meeting with Marcia fudge, who was the nominee for HUD, who expressed what our priorities are though. I'll touch on them in just a minute. But I think the good news in this, as soon as she was named, we were all over this one because we view ourselves as a very close partner with hut. And I think that's imperative that we have one of the best advocacy organizations in all of Washington, the hands down. So I think that that was important that even before the election, actually, it was a couple of weeks before the general election between Trump administration and the Biden ticket. We were already meeting with the Biden tastes. They want same with the Trump administration. We don't take a position in NAR as a presidential candidate yet, but it is imperative that we're working with those respective players to ensure that the issues that are important to us as an industry are front and center. So we met with one of Biden's top people before the election. We have the, obviously since the election with the president of the left to meet with their team. And like I said, with a HUD nominee, and by the way, she was very attentive to the issues that we raised as well as other housing organizations, but really listened to the importance of the things that we see. We think we have alignment. We've already been talking to the Biden administration. They have put in their white paper by the way. And we provided them a white paper. What we felt was important. You've probably heard about their first time home buyer tax credit that they're looking at to support that that's a wonderful bank. Now that highlights another problem. There not a lot of homes that are affordable for first time and we've got math equally. A difficult is first time home buying for the minority community. There's a lot of obstacles. So we've been working with and already made it very clear. The Marcia fudge, for example, FHA premiums. That is a huge deterrent with those insurance premiums, especially to lower qualified buyers, minorities who were impacted by that. We've got to make sure that those insurance premiums are not anchor on getting people an opportunity to get alone. That's the lending aspect of this. And I've talked about that. It's not just real estate sales. It's also the aspects of how do you fund a purchase. So we're working hard. That's that's one example, the other, uh, housing priorities, the rental housing relief program. We've all went to hearing about that, about the moratorium. Now, interestingly, it's a double-sided coin for us as an industry because the folks that many times are landlords or our members, businesses, mom, and pop that are like, if I don't get paid, I go into bankruptcy. I have a mortgage and I have to put food on my own table. So how do you balance this situation? Because NAR and our members are not about let's throw people out and put them on the street. That is that's heartless. That is not who we are as an industry. So we want balance on this, which is if you're going to enforce moratoriums, which we fully support, by the way, at the federal level, there must be a companion component to this, which is how do you ensure that the landlords are also tap whole on this? Otherwise this, this ripple effect happens all the way through. So we've been very clear already with the Biden folks and said that, you know, this is going to be something that we've got to deal with. We were dealing with it with the Trump administration as well. We've done in short fairness on both sides with any of the respective stimulus packages that are being worked on. So that that's an example, access to credit, for example, same thing. It's just not there. I had a meeting with Mayra, which I think many of you know, which as I met with their folks and the black association, by the way, most of those folks are members, but they're focused on the issues that pertain to the black community. And we want to be a tighter connection with them to be able to in a meeting with them. And they said, here's a good example. And this gets into the appraisal side, which impacts credit. Then you come into a city and you come to a T intersection in a small town and you make a left turn on the main street and you go down two blocks and there's a house by builder X and here's the appraisal. And you come to that same T and you make a right turn, but it's not main street is MLK Avenue, two blocks down, same builder. And yet it can be a 15, 20, 30% difference in valuation. Why? Because appraisals typically will go lower on something that's perceived in a less desirable area and therefore impact that particular buyer we've got to do as much work with folks that do appraisals and getting, allowing for better access to credit. That's the kind of thing that's very important. So we've doubled down also, not only on our federal programs, that we're going to continue to push, but expanding our multicultural organizational partnerships. That was one thing that I felt was imperative. When I came in as CEO three and a half years ago, I wanted us to do more with minority associations. So multitude, gender based, sexual orientation based color-based, whatever it is, we are all in association together to help drive Washington. And I'll leave one last point on this subject. One of the things that I felt was imperative when I came in CEO, is there used to be an org, a group called the group and the group, the mortgage bankers association, ABA, the bankers association, the home builders and NAR, and that sort of felt, uh, fell apart many years ago. And the problem was is that we would end up battling each other on top of the Hill when it came to housing policy and priority. And so when I came in as CEO, interestingly, the CEOs of the mortgage bankers and the American bankers were relatively new CEOs. So I contacted them and I said, look, we're all new CEO. Why don't we work together and create a strong force together on top of the Hill, Capitol Hill is the first one that would recognize that we weren't in unison in our approach. If you remember the tax reform that was done, when Damon, interestingly, the home builders took a different position than we did, the bankers took a different position than all of us did. And what happened was what I heard from Shannon McGann, who was our chief advocacy officer who came from the Hill. And by the way, Shannon was voted one of the most powerful, most influential women Capitol Hill and Shaylynn. When I brought her in and she's five, I got to just tell you the perspective of the whole was perfect. You guys are fighting with each other. You're not in unison. Thank goodness. So when we put the group back together and we put it back together, we said, look, we agree on 95% of things, we all want there to be affordable housing enough properties that people can get in. We want there to be fair credit, easy opportunity for people to get loans in fair and equitable way. We all stand for those things. So why aren't we showing Capitol and all that on the two or three or 4% of things, we may have differences and nuances that we're highlighting, let's agree in the 95% and go to the Hill. I'm pleased to tell you that issues like a GSE reform and how that's going to work. And our position on that was supported by all four of us. We sent one letter and a press release that the group, the four largest major players in the real estate vertical all together and that we were enforced to be reckoned with. And that what made me the happiest is when Shannon said from her cohorts on the Hill, Republican and Democrat, the comment was like, what the hell is going on with that industry? All working together? Yeah, that's what all of this is about our locals, our States, our national real tours, bankers, mortgage bankers, home builders. We need to all be on the same page to support our industry. And I'm pleased to tell you that. I think that's the major change that we've done.
Speaker 1:Great. And so the bottom line for people is that our listeners to stay tuned, go visit nar.realtor as often as possible follow up on the advocacy agenda as it rolls out. And that it's a very broad approach, a federal level. We can do a lot, not just in Congress, but as you mentioned, a lot of this is regulatory and it's done through the agencies and same thing with the GSE reform, qualified mortgage rules, things like that. And so stay tuned. We'll be looking at this from a lot of different perspectives. So thanks for that. Touching on those things, we'll finish up. I want to talk about resilience and I want to talk about normal and where we think the industry is going to be, and associations are going to be, I've coined a phrase. I'm sure it's not original, but you know, people keep talking about the new normal and they want to get back to normal. And so I started thinking in terms of now normal, wherever we are today, we know tomorrow's going to be different. Change is exponential. The pace of change has driven our adoption of technologies. Like you mentioned before, a place where we probably would be already, or at some point we were going to be pace of change is accelerating changes normal. So I don't know about you, but I don't want to go back to the way we used to do things. I don't miss parts of that. I love the fact that we're able to do this. You're at your house. I'm at the office. Josh's around the corner. We're adapting, we've adopted all this technology. We're utilizing it. We're able to put these things together. We can have our meetings. Yeah. We're zoomed out. But much of this, especially in the transaction, went and talked to members, remote settlements, remote notary, accelerating use of digital signatures, all those things. I don't want to give that up, but at the same time we do miss certain things like we miss getting together. We may miss the networking and things like that. So talk a little bit about the incredible resilience of this industry and our members, the ability to adapt and adopt these new technologies and your thoughts. Cause I know you love to think ahead and we're always looking forward. Let's not look back. And so you're a visionary in a lot of respects. So what do you think the is going to look like in six, 12, 18, 24 months and what our association is going to look like in that same time?
Speaker 3:Well, very fair question. I have to chuckle a bit, which is when you talk about the terminology now, normal, I started using that in all my speeches six months ago.
Speaker 1:Not copy that from you, but I
Speaker 3:Tired of the same thing. And I noticed the article that you have written as well, where you talk about the downward versus new normal, because I was getting tired of hearing words like, Oh, this is unprecedented five months of doing zooms eight to 10 hours a day is not a new normal it's mine. And by the way, I don't think that's going to change. So let's get into what that really means. I agree with you a hundred percent. It has this pandemic has accelerated our industry to moving to things that were inevitable. Anyway, I agree that if you talk about a silver lining, if you can do that in a middle of a pandemic, I think that's what it is, is that our now normal is putting together key elements of how this industry needs to run both from a practitioner's perspective, as well as from an association, from an association perspective that I'll handle first. And I'm sure Chuck is, this podcast is a perfect example. I don't know if you were doing them before the pandemic. I know in my case, I'm doing on a weekly average note, seven to 10 zoom meetings with members, large groups of members, small groups of members. And I think to myself, wow, why wasn't I doing that before last March? Because the engagement levels are so much higher. I used to think, you know, when I came in as CEO, I was bragging. I'm the social media CEO. I've got tens of thousands of followers. And I invite all of our listeners. I have many followers in Maryland on LinkedIn and Facebook. And I thought, there's the answer. I'm going to be on Facebook. And you look at it. And I say, well, I've got 50, 60,000 people following me, which is really big number. And you realize there's 1.4 million members, and that's just a drop in the buffet. But with social media in this now normal where we're doing things now, virtually Vince and I are last year's president Vince Malta. And I figured out that our leadership team and myself engaged almost a half a million of our members, frontline on a screen with us being able to hear what we were saying, but more importantly, giving us an opportunity to hear it and listen to what our members are saying. That is a great now normal. That is a great situation where I give our example of our legislative meetings last may. And I think if your listeners, I know that it is opportunity where people from around the country come in, we lobby on the Hill. It gives us a chance to have a realtor messages front and center where we go and knock on the doors on Capitol Hill. But we couldn't do that in may. We typically get eight to 9,000 people at our legislative meetings. We had 28,000 people sign for virtual legislative meetings. We had top-notch speakers from the Hill work tool meeting is that ribbon being held by our members around the country with their Congress folks, their senators, governors, I mean exploded because they now remember Congress also saw the benefit like there. Now, normally I can talk and listen to more of my constituents instead of those that just knock on my door. Now thousands in my community want to have access to me virtually. So it opened up our eyes and say, wow, we can get that many people. We did a leadership live event. I think it was last June or July with our leadership team, myself and our elected leaders. And we did it. It was running on Facebook live. We had over 20,000 people registered for that shop and saw it live, you know, a hundred thousand people saw it two days later, like the same thing with your podcast, it will go viral. People will talk about it and they'll say, God, can you believe Bob Goldberg said that? Or you'll hear it directly from us. I think that's the beauty of where we're going to be. Because in the next six months to a year, let's get past this pandemic. We're not going to throw this away. I think it will be hybrid. We will have events where people can come in to meet personal cause that's what are the nature of our industry is so the nature of human beings, but at the same time, getting the opportunity to expand our reach of listening to our members. I think it's just a tremendous opportunity. I, as I told our leadership team, I said, you know what? We typically for annual conference would get 25,000 people, 20, 25,000. What about if we ended up only getting 5,000 virtual firstly, you were like, Oh my God, what does that mean? But if we had a hundred thousand of those members online with us, or 200,000 members, guess what we have more engaged now will have impacts because we won't have as many people who's limiting and sponsoring, but we'll figure that out as an image, that to me is just tremendous opportunity from a member side, you mentioned a Chuck digital transactions. And when you talk about, I think this is where the value proposition of national association of realtors, the Maryland realtors, the local boards really come into play. I would submit the value of your association. And I'm speaking to all of our members about this has never been more evident than now. If what is the pre now the tools that are there. I know in any ours case, for example, we have a venture capital arm called second century ventures. We have a real estate accelerator, which is part of that, which means we look at small companies that are emerging, that have a seat at the table with NAR and our members so that we can have great foresight as to what might happen. I'm pleased to tell everybody, a lot of members don't know this. We have over a hundred technology companies that we have equity investment, a hundred. Now people are like, wow, any, or has that go to any dot rotational kids, second century ventures and reach. And you'll see those companies. We were one of the first investors in DocuSign right now. Why? Because 10 years plus ago, we said, why are we requiring people to do hard signatures with they? Why don't we just do an electronic signature in real estate? And not only did we partner and have equity ownership and DocuSign as we still do today, we actually worked with the regulators in DC to allow for real estate transactions to be visually done with e-signatures right? Well, that was 10 years ago. You know, we did a couple of years ago, we invested in a company called notarize right now, go online, look at notarized equity. Thinking that one day people are to want to need or want to do remote online notary. Now everyone now in the digital age of pandemic says, we gotta be able to do closing well, has a solution. It's because our members, and again, it's not just me sitting there saying, let's do this investment. We have members and say, we ought to be thinking about doing a, B and C before anyone else thinks of it. Or before we get this intermediate, we gotta be the front ones at the table to say, let's drive or industry. So you have companies like that. We have a company called box brownie, for example, one of the best digital photography companies in the world. And many of the listeners here, I will tell you probably use box Brown. Well, we found them in Australia. Wow. It was a small company in Australia. We have our accelerator program running in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the UK, as well as the U S the goal of the, of our companies in those other countries is find emerging technology solutions that will help our members and put our members first. That's the point that when you asked her, where are we going to be in two, up to a year, two years, as long as we, as an industry, continue to say, we will do what's best for our consumers and do, and lead the way versus following. We'll be in great shape. We have been a very resilient industry. Real estate sales right now are higher than pre pandemic, which you just find a great partner that can quickly come up with more properties for everybody. But I think that shows that we should not be afraid of moving forward, going backwards is not who we are as an industry. We've never been that way. And so we should embrace it. I know most of our members do, and guess what it is forced, what was going to happen anyway to happen now, and guess why we have players in our industry that are small mom and pop organizations, as well as big teams, big brokers, all competing fairly together because of those tools that we've been putting in place that we thought about years ago. And we'll think today about tools we need three years from now.
Speaker 4:Bob, thank you so much. We appreciated the bark time. Uh, it's a privilege to have you thank you so much for joining us.
Speaker 2:Thank you. Chuck has been my honor and privilege, and I'm proud to say that I am the first in AR video from Maryland, Maryland. Thank you all.
Speaker 4:So to our listeners, thank you for the privilege of your time for Maryland realtors. I'm Chuck cascade. Our program is produced by Josh Woodson. Thank you, Josh. Please like us. Share the program and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Give us five stars. We've earned that most important. Let us know what topics you'd like us to explore and guests you'd like to hear from tune in next time for another real conversation about real estate until then stay safe.