Home > Blogs > Jennifer Kirby > The Minneapolis Real Estate Blog

Are Realtors who Market to the Gay Community Now Violators of The Code of Ethics?

By Jennifer Kirby

Real Estate Broker/Owner with Kirby Fine Homes

November 15, 2010 12:19 PM

Now I am sure this question will draw some interesting responses, so I hope to not cause too much of a stir, but after reading a Code of Ethics update emailed to me by the Minnesota Association of Realtors, I have to wonder if Realtors who market themselves to the gay, lesbian, and transexual communities, are now going to be in violation of Article 10 in the Code of Ethics.

In case you don't know, a major change to the Code was voted in for Article 10, adding the terms "sexual orientation" to the group of discrimination protected classes:

Here is the amended language of Article 10 (additions are underlined):

REALTORS® shall not deny equal professional services to any person for reasons of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or sexual orientation.

REALTORS® shall not be parties to any plan or agreement to discriminate against a person or persons on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or sexual orientation.

REALTORS®, in their real estate employment practices, shall not discriminate against any person or persons on tis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or sexual orientation

So I can assume we are all in agreement here: adding "sexual orientation" to the above language is a good thing, since Realtors are held to higher standards.

BUT, where problems could occur for Realtors that promote themselves solely to gay communities is a change to Article 10 Standards of Practice 10-3:

REALTORS® shall not print, display or circulate any statement or advertisement with respect to selling or renting of a property that indicates any preference, limitations or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, or sexual orientation.

According to this new amendment of 10-3, Realtors cannot discriminate against ANY sexual preference. So my take is that now those Realtors who specialize in gay communities and directly market, advertise, or circulate any statement of their specialty are now discriminating against those that are straight.

To me, this amendment is vague. At first glance I thought it read that no ad could say "no gays", for example, a home owner that tells his agent to advertise "no gays allowed" or the like, but upon further thought, it could stretch to cover agents that say they work for those of different sexual preferences. By an agent putting out an ad that says "Specializing in Gay Communities", it seems they are now in violation of the Code of Ethics, and I am sure those Realtors are not going to be too happy if that is the case. There are even real estate companies out there that have the term "gay" in their brokerage name, so what happens to them?

Please, let me know your thoughts on this. I find it kind of upsetting that NAR did not think of this take on the change, as it will greatly effect Realtors nationwide.

Comments(12)

Comment

Show All Comments

Sort:

Karen Fiddler, Broker/Owner

Karen Parsons-Fiddler, Broker 949-510-2395 - Mission Viejo, CA

Orange County & Lake Arrowhead, CA (949)510-2395

Well....maybe if they are stating that a certain neighborhood is a "gay" community to the exclusion of others. But I think it's the "discrimination" wording that is the point. If I wanted to live in a gay community and they tried to sway me away from a home because there are many gays in the building?

Nov 15, 2010 12:23 PM

Bob Marsh

Warm Weather Real Estate - Mesa, AZ

480-529-2936, Warm Weather Real Estate

Jennifer, That's a good question. I won't ask and won't tell, if you won't - would not want to do anything that might be confused as what they call a hate crime.

This is getting to be the most outlandish free speech country...no matter what you say or do, if the courts find it out of order, you're out of luck.

What's your answer?

Nov 15, 2010 12:24 PM

Jennifer Kirby

Kirby Fine Homes - Minneapolis, MN

The Luxury Agent

Karen, as Realtors, we are not suppose to steer anyone to a community based on religious preference, so now it would appear we cannot steer anyone to a gay community either.

Nov 15, 2010 12:25 PM

Jennifer Kirby

Kirby Fine Homes - Minneapolis, MN

The Luxury Agent

Bob- I have seen how some Realtors stretch the Code of Ethics to fit their thoughts on what an Article means, and sometimes they have won their case, even though I don't believe the Code was originally attended to cover their beliefs. It can be openly interpreted, so that is why I feel the change could cause some to now be in violation.

Nov 15, 2010 12:29 PM

Jane Peters

Home Jane Realty - Los Angeles, CA

Los Angeles real estate concierge services

Soneone wrote a post recently about having lost a client because that client wanted to be amongst her own ethnic demographic. She couldn't "steer" her so the client moved on to someone who would. This whole discrimination subject has gotten completely out of control.

Nov 15, 2010 12:31 PM

Elizabeth Cooper-Golden

Huntsville Alabama Real Estate, (@ Homes Realty Group) - Huntsville, AL

Huntsville AL MLS

I'm hanging out here to see what the comments are...this could be interesting.

Personally, I'm with Jane. This has all gone WAY too far.

Nov 15, 2010 12:41 PM

Andrew Mooers | 207.532.6573

MOOERS REALTY - Houlton, ME

Northern Maine Real Estate-Aroostook County Broker

Promote the property, the area to the hilt...let it do the talking, walking. Being the tractor beam for whoever wants the total package, deciding on their own.

Nov 15, 2010 12:41 PM

Matt Grohe

RE/MAX Concepts - Des Moines, IA

Serving the metro since 2003

Jennifer: Expressing a preference to help one of the above groups could really be a sticky wicket. I'd steer clear.

Nov 15, 2010 12:43 PM

Eric Kodner

Madeline Island Realty - La Pointe, WI

CRS, Madeline Island Realty, LaPointe, WI 54850 -

Jennifer - The language in the Amendment has been extensively reviewed by the NAR legal folks, including General Counsel Laurie Janik. And the Amendment passed through a process of redundant committee review, including review by the NAR Interpretations and Procedures Subcommittee (part of NAR Professional Standards Committee) and the NAR Board.

The Amendment was also strongly endorsed by a number of past Presidents of NAR, as well as by 2010 President Vicki Cox Golder. It was ratified by a delegate vote of 93% of the NAR Delegate Body on November 8th in New Orleans.

I would say NAR did a thorough job of analyzing the implications of the Amendment beforehand. And no, the Amendment is not a license for GLBT agents or brokers to discriminate. It would be unwise for any agent who belongs to any of the protected classes under Article 10 of the Code to market preferentially to only one group, and to the exclusion of others.

As far as agents advertising themselves as being gay is concerned, organizations like NAHREP (National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals) and AREAA (Asian Real Estate Association of America) exist to promote members of the groups they represent and their existence is not considered to be a violation of the Code, unless such an organization engages in discriminatory activity. It is not "discrimination" for example, for the National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals to exist. Their existence alone does not constitute discrimination.

I serve on the NAR Equal Opportunity Committee and we were informed in New Orleans that NAR is in the process of assembling guidelines and "best practices" for LGBT marketing (both marketing by LGBT real estate professionals and also marketing that is targeted to LGBT consumers) which is intended to address the same issues you have raised in your post.

If you speak with Fred Underwood or Kyle Lambert London at NAR, I'm sure they will be glad to answer any questions you may have about how the Article 10 Amendment was crafted and how it will be enforced.

Nov 15, 2010 12:54 PM

Trey Thurmond

BCR Realtors - College Station, TX

College Station , Texas Homes

Hello Karen

I am more confused and confounded than ever. Living in a major University area I have always served all types of people no matter what their orientation might be. As far as I am concerned all of them spend green money.

Recently I saw an agent marketing a "Hispanic oriented" business in a large "Hispanic neighborhood. " I questioned if he might be turning off others and possibly violating some rules. He concurred and immediately changed the ad format and wording.

Very thought provoking post.

Nov 15, 2010 03:59 PM

Frank D'Angelo

EXIT REALTY NEXUS Minneapolis & St. Paul MN - Coon Rapids, MN

Helping people is my business in Real Estate

Nice post Karen. I agree. Marketing and/or promoting to the communities is opening a can of worms. Unfortunately we have so few monitoring and/or regulating this. Particularly in MN.

Have a great year and thanks for the post. Hopefully a few others who dabble in this might see your past.

frank

Dec 05, 2010 04:22 AM

Eric Kodner

Madeline Island Realty - La Pointe, WI

CRS, Madeline Island Realty, LaPointe, WI 54850 -

Frank, would you argue then that marketing by NAREB or NAHREP or AREAA to the African-American, Hispanic or Asian community is "opening a can of worms"?

I wonder if many Realtors are unaware that NAR has endorsed and assisted similar affinity groups for decades.

Why is there an immediate, knee-jerk assumption on the part of some in our industry that an effort to ensure the rights of consumers is an invitation to abuse?

If you have any collateral evidence that any such affinity groups are violating the Code of Ethics, please produce it so that we may all see if what you have suggested in your comment is based upon fact.

Dec 05, 2010 05:38 AM