RALEIGH — The N.C. Association of Realtors may have been “morally wrong” when they forced members to pay dues that were used in a massive anti-tax campaign, but they did not break the law, the State Board of Elections ruled Thursday.
Voting 5-0 , board members dismissed a case brought by a Wake County Realtor against the Greensboro-based association and took pains to say they were troubled by what they heard during the hearing.
The board ordered stronger reporting requirements for money raised and spent directly in support of referendums on the county level.
“I’m very pleased with the message from the board of elections to the Realtor association,” said Becky Harper , who brought the case.
In 2008, NCAR levied a one-time dues payment of $70 to replenish an issues-advocacy fund. That fund had been drained by efforts to prevent the General Assembly from allowing counties to raise the transfer tax charged on property sales.
When efforts to persuade lawmakers failed, NCAR funded committees to battle county efforts to put the new tax in place. All 24 of those referendums failed under withering criticism from Realtor-linked groups.
“I can’t make a living without being a member of this association,” Harper said. Without being a NCAR member, real estate agents cannot access the multiple listing service used by agents in finding and listing houses for sale.
Harper and her lawyers contended the Realtor association dues were tantamount to forcing members to pay for political speech with which they may disagree under the threat of losing their livelihoods.
State Board of Elections Chairman Larry Leake said he could not find a statute that would allow the board to fine the Realtors or refer them for prosecution. However, he called their actions “morally wrong” as a preface to dismissing the case.
“I think when you deprive an individual of their ability to earn a living because they differ with you on a political issue, that’s morally wrong,” Leake said after the hearing.
The Realtors’ attorney and Harper’s attorney spent much of the three-hour hearing sparring over facts and arcane bits of election law. At one point, Harper presented evidence that the Realtors’ total anti-transfer-tax effort totaled $2.6 million, which Realtors’ lawyer John Wallace said lumped together unrelated types of spending.
Asked after the hearing about Leake’s characterization of the group as morally wrong, director of government affairs Rick Zechini said the group would consider the statement.
“That’s something that would be before our membership,” Zechini said, characterizing the decision-making process that led to the special dues assessment as open and time consuming. “This is a membership-led association, and the membership supports this.”
Elections board members said they were troubled by evidence presented by Harper that showed dues money from the Realtors sloshing around two dozen referendum committees as well as other entities that mobilized to fight the transfer tax. Until this week, there was no comprehensive picture of how the Realtors spent money to oppose the transfer tax.
The state board ordered county boards of elections to report filings made by referendum committees to the state so they could be compiled in one place. That makes them more easily accessible to reporters and others who may be trying to piece together how a particular political effort is working.
Board members and campaign transparency advocates said this case exposed gaps in North Carolina laws made worse by the Citizens United decision, a U.S. Supreme Court case that opened the door for trade associations like the Realtors, labor unions and businesses to have direct involvement in political campaigns.
“We need to know where that money is coming from and how it’s being spent,” said Damon Circosta who leads the N.C. Center for Voter Education.
That can’t be done by election board fiat alone.
“I think the legislature is going to have to fix it,” said Chuck Winfree , a Republican member of the state board from Greensboro.
Contact Mark Binker at (919) 832-5549 or mark.binker@news-record.com
Not all of the newspaper's content appears online.
*There is a fee for downloading some older articles.