whose party?

This is sorta a follow-up to the Anaheim meetings regarding the "Realtor Party" and it's relationship to traditional left/right ideologies. The PAC monies from the state and national association action funds are indeed distributed to both sides of the isle. See Open Secrets for an education on the allocations. There are fewer Republicans so the distribution of funds per candidate doesn't reflect the distribution per party. The key is that voting record on real estate related issues is the extent of the consideration. The remainder of the recipients voting and other activities is not considered, including deranged comments to the press and receipt of other campaign contributions from other PACs. Whatever the PACs and positions, it's all fine if the voting record on real estate matters measures up. I'm sure the many right leaning members of the state association are inflamed that some of the pinko progressives on the left fringe get real estate PAC money, just like the few liberal progressive members cringe at the thought of their PAC contributions going to a radical pro life candidate.

The real question is whether supporting correct voting on real estate related matters is getting in the way of electing quality candidates. The recent performance of Congress could dispute the wisdom of focusing on one aspect of a politicians voting record. We need better people in Washington. Much better people. Another failing is that the PAC monies dolled out for real estate voting records do NOTHING to build a middle to the political spectrum. Having an extreme far right/tea party group on one side and a not so progressive left on the other with little in the middle is clearly not working. There are essentially no moderates and no inclination to be bipartisan at anything more contentious than a July 4th BBQ.   

Back to Anaheim. A brief comment about the process at the state association exemplified by Land Use and Environmental motions/discussion of Prop 23. The whole process might have unfolded more smoothly if an overview of the significance of the various possible positions the state association could take had been presented by the Chair, or the state or national political lobbyists BEFORE discussion commenced at the microphone. People like to make decisions and take stands---up or down. The so called “Realtor Party” is allegedly neither right nor left, but it is important to realize that it has a delicate existence only in a very tightly defined political habitat where an immediate, direct and readily apparent nexus exists between the issue at hand and the interests of the real estate industry (and in most cases, current buyers and sellers). If the nexus is clouded, a half step removed, results from a secondary effect or is fuzzy in any other way, discussion of the issue in committee tends to depart the bounds of the Realtor Party and revert to conventional right/left political ideology. The results are predictable, but not always in the best interest of the organization, because legislators, real estate practitioners (and the public) span a much broader spectrum of political beliefs than those attending CAR meetings. There are allegedly liberal progressives among the state directors, but I'm not sure I've ever seen one admit to it. Where there is a range of opinions among the directors and an uncertainty about the actual effect of the proposition, a neutral position is clearly the best outcome. The neutral position to a long way around and there was considerable doubt on the way to the floor of the directors session. In addition, a “For” position would have created ripples in the energy/environmental arena impacting CAR's credibility in commenting on future legislation with much more direct importance to real estate.

On more random political observation. Regulation and control take on an ominous meaning for many purporting to be conservatives--unless THEY are doing the regulating and exerting the control. Governmental bodies are most often associated with regulation, but in the absence of governmental regulation we don't actually have a lack of regulation, we have regulation by the private sector. Deregulation of the banking industry produced regulations crafted by the banking industry. Does anyone feel all comfy after the banks regulated the public into an epic fiasco of lending largess that produced world wide ripples that may not attenuate during my lifetime? There is little real difference between the regulatory greed of big government as compared to big corporations, who in turn have big PACs to influence big government to selectively defer regulation to the big corporations.

The state and national real estate associations have a plan for how the public should buy and sell residential property. Through their products, training and forms they attempt to regulate the residential sales arena (commercial is a whole 'nother story). They want to keep the banks out of real estate and keep the government out of real estate so they can regulate it themselves. As I've posted before, in many cases what's good for the trade associations, the industry and the brokers is good for the consumers, but not always. Where interests don't coincide, as is the case with green issues, such as energy labeling, the real estate trade organizations follow their doctrines to a fault. The public can push back and have whatever kind of real estate experience they want--fiduciary duty and all that---but only if they know where their interests really lie. In an industry measured by GCC (gross closed commissions) the level of effort to educate consumers is seldom noteworthy.

In a final note, I will be joyous when this election is over. The candidates, the mud, the rhetoric and the posturing have explored heretofore unimaginable depths of political depravity. Time will tell, but there may be no real winners on November 3rd.  

outa the groove

Been lax about posting since state association meetings. They are mind numbing in their predictability, but that's only a partial excuse. I also had to write a report on one of the committees, which turned out to be a bigger job that I anticipated, because of the political leanings of the readers, me and the state organization. All leaning in different directions--LOL. Finished it and submitted it and have heard nothing more--few ever read the reports. The amount of interest in state association activities among the rank and file practitioners is slim and none.

I'll throw in a part of the report that turned out to be enlightening to me--that's next post on the state organization "party" and how it relates to the right/left, republican/democrat ideology.

Today (see, I'm getting around to it--finally) I want to comment on a segment of the main event, a real estate show put on each year to raise funds for the region. One of the presenters focused on social media, other technology and what the consumers of real estate services really want from their agents. Interviews were done recently in Phoenix (I lived near there in Scottsdale for 30 years) and the results were reviewed. Many of the conclusions were based on the assumption that the consumer is right, that more technology is always better and that having more information helps the decision process. Those are typical viewpoints in the industry and they shape the state organization, the various vendors and the real estate community. Are they valid? Minor point?

If you've read way back among my early posts, you know I once did a seminar titled Back to the Future in which I argued that real estate had a golden glow 20-30 years ago that's lacking today.

Technology is here to stay and it's VERY easy and VERY profitable for the trade associations and the vendor industry to pander to the current consumer enchantment with new technology and strongly urge the adoption (and purchase) of all manner of technological bling by real estate agents who desire to remain in line for impressive business volumes. The inference is that without technology agents will suffer financial failure. The old fear factor at work.

Relatively impersonal Twitter and Facebook communication is becoming the norm, at least for the tech generations. Facial expressions and body language and vocal intonation are rarely in the mix in this new world. Information and research tools are made available to the consumer with little background or training. It's assumed that there is a universal genetic ability to perform multivariate analysis on several hundred fields of data and magically reach the perfect decision about which house to buy. Don't need an agent for that--the consumers can do it themselves. Of course many of the agents are so immersed in the technology pool that they believe this approach works. It sure is easy--turn the consumer loose with the data and get ready to write a contract--which can be done with e-signatures. Sure, the consumers will understand the 30-40 pages of paperwork! Using technology makes people really smart about whatever the technology touches, doesn't it?

The bigger question involves whether the real estate industry gives the consumers what they want or provides what is in their best interests.  Many would argue that isn't an important question because getting what they want is ALWAYS in the best interests of the consumer. What about subprime mortgages, super sized fast food, botox, mega SUVs etc., etc. Maybe real estate is just different?  

Back to the RIGHT HOUSE and RIGHT BUYERS concept as a measure of success (see earlier posts). If the Buyers don't always buy the RIGHT HOUSE, but do always get the technology and information they want, is that enough to represent success for the industry and the agents on the front lines? Many would say--DEFINITELY! Money metrics still prevail. Turn the sides and cash the commission checks. If technology makes that easier, technology is good and worth the expense. Technology is far easier to obtain that wisdom--it just takes money and if it makes money too, so much the better.

That's enough to digest. I'll continue to develop this argument, but rest assured I am not against technology, I'm in favor of wisdom applied in full consideration of human behavior, evolution and capabilities.

The place in which we live has a primal role in our existence dating back before we became human. Technology is an overlay that may not always assist in decisions involving the RIGHT HOUSE or in many other areas of our lives. Technology is seductive in its ability to replace ancestral patterns, but how plastic is the human brain in the face of unprecedented stimuli? How well do those signals map onto the foundations of human experience--like choosing a place to live?

back from disneyville

Back yesterday from Anaheim and the fall meetings of the state association. Anaheim is a strange experience. Nothing is human scale--the hotels, the parking lots the sidewalks the streets are all designed for hoards of people in their quest for escape from reality with the mouse and company. I stayed in a vintage motel about a half mile from convention center--got to see the homeless on my morning runs. I made at least two walking trips a day from motel to hotel. Got a nice tan.

Meetings were pretty typical for fall. A few landmarks were notable. The new state regional (whatever that means) MLS was top of the list. There was a sorta farewell to the old statewide committee and chair. The baton is being passed to the mergee's leadership from the mega regional in LA area, although there is a new board of directors, but there was also an old board (with many of the same people) allegedly supervising the old statewide MLS as it twisted and turned in the wind----while running up over $4 million in debt (that's not including the intelligent agent fiasco--another million). With luck the Board will not be involved with actual project supervision this time. The mega regional has a good track record of achievement and the state association has amply demonstrated that the politically astute ladder climbers are not necessarily well equipped to run a tech corporation.

The real question is whether the application entity that evolved from the old statewide will survive the need to achieve sufficient user base to survive. The application is still not fully complete and I expect that most new accounts will opt for the mergee's existing vendor.

Personally I'd like to see attention turned in the direction of making MLS system reach more of their potential, enough of their potential to compete with the 3rd party aggregator sites that now attract much of the public's interest with their entertainment value, despite having data of much lower quality than MLS public portals.

Next post will delve into the real estate political arena. The politics of the state association were showing in the discussions of ballot propositions and other matters. The real estate "party" attempts to create a strange world that could easily become the basis for a theme ride at Disneyville.

I'll end with an image only possible in LA---I saw a late model 5 series BMW--with a Domino's Pizza sign on the top --- out making deliveries--OMG!

Also went to the OC Car Show Friday night--that produced some other classic images of LA.

Talking and Tightrope Walking

Finally, after two issues with virtually NOTHING green, the state association magazine has a green feature story.

Greening the MLS. Old news, but they take a big swing at it, although they really mention only a handful of the many MLSs that already have green features in the data (including the regional I belong to). There's still a feeling permeating the content that it's all about using green for business purposes, not in recognition of a greater planetary goal of enhancing the quality of life of subsequent generations. Guess that's some other entities task.

A telling paragraph features a quote from a national association leader of matters green stating "one of the obstacles to faster implementation of greening the MLS is the erroneous belief by some that green practices are a left political agenda". OMG! Can you imagine how a member of the public with a progressive liberal political slant and a sincere concern about the global climatic trends would react to that statement! The mere suggestion than some of those practicing in the real estate industry would put politics above client interests, planetary priorities and good sense is an striking indictment of the industry and it's leadership. That sort of non-fiduciary attitude didn't appear by magic. It was fostered by industry practices and leadership over the past several decades. The greening of real estate ushers in a time for a change of attitude in the industry and among the leadership. The are now talking the green talk, but the walking part isn't happening just yet. It may not happen with present leadership--something about dogs and tricks.

Received an email from the state association that my committee appointment requests for 2011 were approved. Land Use/Environmental and Housing forums, same as last year. The show is always entertaining and there may be some new scenes in the pageant this year. The green mist is slipping into the foreground and threatening to obscure some of the doctrinaire attitudes of past agendas and individuals. Will the organization persist along a well worn path or break out across new landscape to follow the public in a quest for a more sustainable future?