Nar Responds To Nyt Report On Nonprofit Wing’s Funding Efforts

Just hours after The New York Times released an exposé on Monday in which it accused the National Association of Realtors (NAR) of covertly funneling funds to conservative groups through an affiliated nonprofit known as the American Property Owners Alliance (APOA), NAR fired back.

In its article, the Times described the creation of the nonprofit as shadowy. But NAR claimed in a FAQ published Monday night that it “publicly announced the launch of APOA in 2020 with a press release and media push, and periodically promotes its work through NAR channels like Realtor Magazine.”

NAR also issued corrections to the Times’ version of the nonprofit’s origin story. The Times claims that APOA traces its roots to 2011 when Bill Malkasian, the creator of the Wisconsin Homeowners Alliance, became NAR’s vice president of political strategic planning.

According to NAR, this is incorrect. The trade group wrote in its FAQ that the idea of the organization “emerged in 2019 from a working group tasked with assessing how to modernize NAR’s approach to advocacy.”

“APOA was one of several recommendations made by the working group and was approved by the Board of Directors in November 2019 at NAR’s Annual Convention in a vote of 771 to 22,” the FAQ noted. It goes to specify that the focus of the group is to support property owners.

NAR also refutes the claim that it funds the nonprofit with membership dues, instead saying that it is funded by an “annual grant, which is fully transparent to our members and the public.” NAR added that the grants given to the APOA “reflect the importance of property ownership to our members and overall mission,” and that APOA will receive a $6.6 million grant from NAR in 2025 to fund its efforts.

According to the FAQ, this grant is a planned expense that is “vetted through NAR’s governance channels and will be reported in our future expenditure disclosures. In no way does this grant represent a disproportionate amount of NAR’s budget.”

Additionally, NAR notes that while it appoints the APOA’s board of directors, the board operates “independently and without oversight from NAR.”

NAR also took issue with the Times’ description of its donations as “dark money.” It said that NAR and the APOA “disclose all required advocacy related expenditures in full compliance with all legal and regulatory requirements — which is how the NYT has access to this data in the first place.”

The trade group also refutes the Times’ claim that APOA’s giving is inconsistent with its tax-exempt status. The FAQ states that APOA’s “program activity to date is consistent with its stated mission of advocating for the rights of property owners.” 

“In addition to its own direct advocacy activities, APOA works in coalitions and provides financial support to other organizations that will benefit property owners. The support for these other organizations with interests aligned with APOA ultimately works to advance APOA’s own policy agenda, and the work of these grant recipients has a direct impact on property owners and their rights,” according to the FAQ.

In a similar vein, NAR also sought to correct the Times’ claims on the APOA’s grant recipients. While the Times claims that nearly $10 million in funding has been given to Republican-aligned super PACs since APOA’s founding, NAR says that APOA does not engage in “political activity as defined by the IRS.”

The FAQ also claim that APOA gives grants to organizations that fall on both sides of the political aisle.

“Cherry-picking data can tell one story, but a holistic review of APOA giving reveals that its giving is split and changes from year to year based on current priorities. For example, in 2023, more than 70% of APOA grant disbursements were made to left-leaning organizations. APOA also does much more by way of advocacy than grants alone,” the FAQ states.

NAR goes on to reiterate that it and the APOA are nonpartisan organizations and that their “expenditures across the political spectrum reflect the industry’s support for organizations and policymakers who champion policies that are important to consumers and real estate practitioners.”

While APOA has given to groups like One Nation and the American Action Network, as the Times highlighted, NAR notes that it has also given to the National Fair Housing Alliance, Mobility Works, National Housing Conference, Up for Growth Action, National Community Reinvestment Coalition, National Homelessness Law Center, International Association of Official Human Rights Agencies, MLK Memorial Foundation, and the Thurgood Marshall College Fund.

Since the article’s publication on Monday, many real estate industry executives have taken to social media to voice their outrage at the article and its author, Debra Kamin, who has written several exposés on NAR for the Times.

NextHome CEO James Dwiggins called out Kamin’s journalistic integrity.

“Since I’m married to a journalist for CBS, we talk often about how sad is it that reporters now insert their own agenda in things and are allowed to do so by so called ‘news organizations,’” Dwiggins wrote on LinkedIn. “I mean, all it takes is reading some of Debra’s articles or her bio for that matter to understand her agenda. This is the opening paragraph of her bio on the NYT website:

‘The real estate industry accounts for nearly 20 percent of the goods and services sold in the United States, making it a significant part of the economy. It also has the largest gender pay gap of any field in the nation and is rife with charges of corruption, sexual harassment and housing discrimination. My work focuses on interrogating those in positions of power and exposing these issues.’ Can you say … bias anyone?”

In a share of Dwiggins’ post, Anthony Lamacchia, the broker-owner of Lamacchia Realty wrote, “Well said James! Time for NAR to sue!”

NAR did not provide HousingWire with any other comments beyond its FAQ.