Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the power of the Inman Community, and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!
As a 30-plus-year champion spades player at my family game night, I have two mottos. The first is “Play to win the hand you are dealt.” The second is “You have a partner; act like it.: They also apply to each iteration of the real estate market that I have seen over my lifetime, beginning as the child of “mom and pop” (because they are my mom and pop) real estate investors to now. But how do these mottos hold up today?
You may have noticed that the federal government under President Trump’s second administration is eliminating spending for various consumer protections, investigative resources and enforcement actions (through HUD, DOJ and CFPB) that claimed to be already lacking in their budgets and staff.
With these federal funding freezes and firings, it seems we may have less fair housing and lending federal enforcement (along with subsequent penalties) for the foreseeable future. As devastating as this is, I have never been a fan of focusing solely on penalties at the expense of rewards — positive reinforcement, often known as the “carrot versus stick” — to motivate any learner, especially not in the real estate industry (from sales agents to lender to appraisers to HOA leadership).
The cards we have been dealt
I believe even with these changes, we can play the hand we have been dealt while we see if the dealer is going to re-deal. Ultimately, I believe that self-motivation, transparency and accountability are greater than prioritizing mostly enforcement.
With the overall U.S. homeownership rate only increased by roughly 2 percent in 10 years (see first image below), the entire real estate industry, including mortgage and appraisal, has a great opportunity to self-motivate because the rewards of increasing homeownership for everyone ideally are:
Economic growth
Local spending/investment
Tax incentives
Job generation
Neighborhood stability
Wealth creation and inflation hedge for homeowners
But what about transparency and accountability? Let’s start with some highlights from the 2025 Snapshot of Race and Home Buying in America by the National Association of Realtors Research Group.
The truth about steering
“I wouldn’t live there if I were you.” What racial group do you believe has experienced the most unfair housing in the form of steering? Well, according to NAR’s survey, it was white Americans.
How does that sit with you? Are you surprised? Or, do you instantly think of some agents who are notorious for direct commentary (such as “Who wants to live there?”) or indirect signals (e.g. eye-rolls, etc.)?
“We must fight for the right to live where we want, not where we are told.” — Fannie Lou Hamer.
Takeaway: Unfair housing impacts everyone. It is no secret that laws of any kind can be violated. (Have you ever watched the ID channel or listened to a True Crime podcast? Yeesh!) Thus, illegal steering (along with all other forms of unfair housing) in real estate takes away our legal rights. Let’s do better and hold each other as real estate colleagues accountable.
“The Fair Housing Act was a start, but our work is far from over.” — Barbara Jordan
Valuing peace of mind
Significantly, between a quarter and half of those surveyed used the proceeds from the sale of their last home to get their next home. Yet, some of the white (6 percent), Black (11 percent) and Asian (14 percent) homeowners believed that they experienced unfair lending in regard to their home appraisal. Avoiding the McNamara Fallacy, those numbers matter.
“I was so happy, but then it just sinks in. It sinks in that what was devaluing my home was me.” — Carlette Duffy, Indianapolis, a homeowner who discovered racial bias in her home appraisal.
Takeaways: We may play cards, but we do not play about our money. If a homeowner suspects a lowballed appraisal, even if the appraiser is the creme de la creme (never having a complaint) our habit as the professionals should be to encourage a second opinion.
In other areas of our lives (from car repairs to significant surgeries), getting a second opinion at the least adds to our peace of mind. For many people, it is no secret that buying, selling or even refinancing a home is one of their most significant transactions, so let’s remove the stigma of getting a second opinion.
How proactive are you about making store returns?
My mom hates the hassle of returns, from finding the original packaging to dealing with potentially long or slow lines with the customer service department. For her, merchandise returns are just not a good use of her energy, even when she needs to return the only-once-used Dyson vacuum. I, on the other hand, do not mind, so I made the pricey return for her.
Similarly, I am not shocked that this NAR survey found that between 92 percent and 96 percent of people who believed they experienced unfair housing did not bother to report it. Supporting this data, the National Fair Housing Alliance has estimated actual complaints (there were over 30,000 in last year’s report) likely account for only 1 percent of actual perceived violations.
Takeaways: Every time I teach a local fair housing class and I show the various local websites and organizations available to report and investigate unfair housing, real estate pros discover these resources often for the first time. Let’s change this. Sure, we legally will not complete forms for our clients (like I can do the store return for my mom) but we can keep a toolbox of what local organizations can help.
Wishlist for future NAR studies
This version of the NAR report does not mention any of the survey limitations, so any easy improvement — customary to research studies — is to include a discussion of limitations and recommended improvements in all future studies.
Secondly, this report did not specify a more detailed look at the respondents’ identity, such as who has a disability/accessibility need, which may account for the survey showing nominal disability discrimination (since national data supports disability having the most discrimination complaints but this report shows the opposite). Ideally, to gauge unfair housing more comprehensively for race, the report should identify more sub-categories (somewhere included) using each of the national, state and local fair housing protected classes, which are:
Color
Religion
National origin
Sex (included)
Familial status (included)
Disability (this has evolved to “a person that uses an assistive device”)
Age (included)
Ancestry
Sexual orientation
Gender identity
Marital status (included)
Military status
Domestic violence victims
Source of income
Genetic information
Pregnancy
HIV/AIDS
Fair chance/reentry/criminal record history
Also, this was a random survey, but it would be great if future studies included both random and non-random sampling methods to attempt to control for potential biases by focusing on specific characteristics or group control (e.g., age, disability/accessibility needs, multi-generational households, number of respondents per each race, etc.).
“The way to right wrongs is to turn the light of truth upon them.” — Ida B. Wells
Lee Davenport is a licensed real estate broker, trainer and coach. Follow her on YouTube, or visit her website.
Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the power of the Inman Community, and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!
For example, what’s the first full generation of women (in other words, everyone in the generation) to be born with the legal right to not need a male co-signer to own a home with a mortgage and open a realty firm (or another business) with a line of credit?
Gen. Z women (those born between 1997 and 2012) were the first full generation of women to be born with the U.S. legal right to both personal credit (legalized in 1974 via the Equal Credit Opportunity Act) and business credit (legalized in 1988 via the Women’s Business Ownership Act) without a male co-signor.
“Geriatric Millennials,” a.k.a. the elders of the Millennial generation born in the early 1980s, incredibly did not have the right to business credit without a male co-signer at birth. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974 and the Women’s Business Ownership Act of 1988 — both fair lending protections — are just two instances of how far U.S. laws have expanded to be more diverse, inclusive and equitable in most of our lifetimes.
In other words:
“DEI isn’t a problem to solve; instead, it solves problems.” — Janet M. Stovall
Frankly, the expansion of fair housing protections (at the local, state or federal) for everyone (women or not) to the following 19 categories — DEI before we called it DEI — in just our lifetimes is remarkable considering where the U.S. was when many of us were born.
Race
Color
Religion
National origin
Sex (federal and local)
Familial status (federal and local)
Disability (this has evolved to “a person that uses an assistive device”) (federal and local)
Age
Ancestry
Sexual orientation
Gender identity
Marital status
Military status
Domestic violence victims
Source of income
Genetic information
Pregnancy
HIV/AIDS
Fair chance/reentry/criminal record history
Despite these impressive advances, if you are on social media, some viral posts may make it seem like DEI will DIE in the coming weeks.
Despite a clever attempt to reorder the DEI acronym, a recent survey tells a different tale: While 5 percent of business leaders surveyed have eliminated 2025 DEI funding, 95 percent plan to continue DEI funding and subsequent initiatives. Of that 95 percent, 65 percent plan to leave their DEI budgets as is, and 22 percent plan to double down and increase their DEI budgets.
In the face of recent political trends and backlash, such numbers are encouraging and speak to the value that diversity, equity and inclusion have brought during most of our lifetimes. According to McKinsey’s multi-year study of workplace diversity:
The business case for gender diversity on executive teams has more than doubled over the past decade, moving from a 15 percent likelihood of outperformance to a 39 percent likelihood.
Companies with representation of women exceeding 30 percent are significantly more likely to financially outperform those with 30 percent or fewer. Similarly, companies in the top quartile for ethnic diversity show an average 27 percent financial advantage over others.
Companies with greater diversity in both gender and ethnicity on their boards of directors are more likely to outperform financially. Companies in the top quartile for board-gender diversity are 27 percent more likely to outperform financially than those in the bottom quartile. Companies in the top quartile for ethnically diverse boards are 13 percent more likely to outperform than those in the bottom quartile.
There is a strong correlation between diversity in influential company leadership roles and multiple indicators of holistic impact across workforce, community and environmental components.
I’ll repeat for the people in the back: “DEI isn’t a problem to solve; instead, it solves problems.” – Janet M. Stovall
How do we continue to welcome and retain in this political climate?
As great as the above statistics are, they are rather nebulous, describing some faceless, nameless businesses that probably vaguely, if at all, resemble the work that we do.
The companies (like Apple, Patagonia, Costco, etc.) that have been outspoken so far on maintaining and expanding DEI initiatives are also the companies that have quickly been able to point to specific internal data that contributes directly to their bottom lines.
Likewise, if you are committed to ensuring that your real estate firm, association or other organization continues to welcome AND retain professionals from all walks of life (how I define diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging initiatives), then we must do a better job of documenting the age-old question, “What’s in it for me?”
For sales or membership organizations (like real estate firms and associations), growth is the key for organizational survival.
Quantifying ‘What’s in it for me?’
Whether you host homebuyer workshops, mortgage/credit counseling classes, new agent orientations or fair housing training courses, there is a simple way to start collecting your own data in order to make more informed decisions, address underrepresentation and demonstrate your commitment to equal opportunity in housing and within our profession.
What’s the last event your organization had?
Did it track robust demographic data to help identify who is well-represented versus underrepresented?
Did it capture retention sentiments and personal stories to identify both room for improvement and milestones accomplished?
With an array of online forms that automatically tabulate data, it is fairly simple yet impactful to adhere to a pre-event (ideally electronic) checklist and offer a post-event (ideally electronic) survey. By intentionally monitoring and capturing a wide range of demographic information from each event you host, you can better assess whether the events you host are truly accessible, welcoming and retention-supporting to all members of your surrounding community.
Furthermore, the Ivy Planning Group, which recently hosted Attorney Olivia Sedwick, recommends that the more data you collect, measure and retain to identify gaps, the more likely there is legal standing for you to address those gaps in representation (so you don’t “catch a case”).
One of my mottos is “collaboration over competition,” so below are the templates I have proposed in the various organizations with which I work and volunteer in order to give you a starting point that your group may modify as you see fit.
Pre-event: Diversity, equity and inclusion checklist suggestions:
Diversity of event planning committee (include a checklist of the demographics below)
Diversity of speakers and presenters (include a checklist of the demographics below)
Accessibility features implemented (e.g., ramps, closed captions in webinars, etc.)
Family-friendly amenities provided (e.g., flexible scheduling to not interfere with school nights, etc.)
Event registration forms include space for participants’s accommodation requests
The number of accommodations requested and fulfilled (or not and why)
Language diversity in event materials and presentations
Representation in marketing materials and event imagery
Social media engagement with diversity and inclusion-related event content
Diversity of vendors and suppliers
Post-event electronic survey to show attendee demographic breakdown (e.g. percentage of attendees from different geographic locations, etc.), responses on inclusivity and belonging, and participant satisfaction (see suggestions below and review who is not present/represented)
Bonus: Incorporation of diversity and inclusion topics in event programming
Post-event: Diversity, equity and inclusion survey suggestions:
Demographic data: Multiple choice (capture suggested demographics; may be anonymous). Feel free to shorten as this includes various fair housing protected classes that are tracked in some states/locales):
Age
Gender identity
Race
Ethnicity
Sexual orientation
Accessibility needs status
Socio-economic background/income range
Education level
Geographic location
Language preferences
Religion or belief system
Caregiving responsibilities
Neurodiversity
Professional status: Realtor or not (community member, mortgage lender, etc.)
Immigration status
Marital status
Parental status
Health status (chronic condition, etc.)
Criminal record status
Military status
Domestic violence victim status
Source of income
Retention sentiments (compare this with retention rates)
On a Likert scale of 1 to 5, survey:
Were your unique perspectives and lived experiences valued during interactions at the event?
How comfortable were you discussing delicate topics openly during the event related to one or more aspects of your previously stated demographics?
How much did you feel you belonged at this event?
Were there clear opportunities for networking and connecting across diverse groups at the event?
Did you feel represented in the marketing materials and imagery used for this event?
Did the event provide adequate accessibility accommodations for your needs?
Did the speakers/presenters reflect diverse identities and perspectives?
Did attending this event increase your awareness or understanding of diversity and inclusion topics?
Do you feel more equipped to address diversity and inclusion issues in your work/community?
Would you recommend future events by our organization based on your experience of diversity and inclusivity today?
Open-ended survey questions (allowing personal stories to humanize the feedback):
What are some key takeaways from the event that you will apply in your daily work/life?
What resources or further training would be helpful to support your inclusion and belonging at our organization?
Any additional feedback or suggestions on how we can enhance diversity and inclusivity at future events? Feel free to explain any answers from your previous ratings.
As always, to incentivize participants to complete post-event surveys, be sure to tie it to something of value, such as completing the survey for continuing education credits, door prizes, access to the event recording, a discount on the next event, etc.
Let’s make it a habit to standardize our planning (with a simple DEI checklist) and share measurable outcomes along with personal feedback and stories from each event as part of our diversity, equity and inclusion efforts with a simple post-event survey. The likely results: The data will more easily cut through misinformation and political apathy to demonstrate the tangible and lawful benefits of DEI efforts to welcome and retain professionals and clients from all walks of life.
Lee Davenport is a licensed real estate broker, trainer and coach. Follow her on YouTube, or visit her website.
Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain powerful insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.
“Why do we even need a diversity and inclusion council?”
For this question, I say “thank you.” This is a question that I have heard from some Realtors in various parts of the nation (some of whom have started rollbacks due to the current political climate), particularly before I teach a fair housing course.
For those of you familiar with basketball, it is like a layup question. I often jokingly say, I did not plant this person or pay them to ask this question because it perfectly leads into the course sections of “How did we get here, Where are we today and Where do we go from here?” which help us to contextualize how rampant unfair housing has been, including the exclusion of real estate professionals based on various demographics.
In other words, I encourage all diversity and inclusion advocates whenever you are posed with, “Why do we even need a diversity and inclusion council?” (or some variation), to answer the meta-questions of
How did we get here?
Where are we today? and
Where do we go from here?
It never fails that, after class, the same questioners typically say how they had no clue and plan to share all they have learned.
Neighbors
I have written before about the historical context of fair housing in ‘There goes the neighborhood’: The history of race and U.S. homeownership, so I will not revisit those particular points. Instead, let’s review just one (of many) historical figures who is the personification of why professional diversity and inclusion matters.
The short answer to “Why do we even need a diversity and inclusion council?” is, “Not everyone only sees green.” I am quick to acknowledge that some who ask this are asking from a place where in their transactions, they are focused on the deal and not the external traits of people (they have no malintent).
Here are examples of what seem to be earnest comments to this point on one of my posts:
Social media comments on Dr. Lee’s posts.
However, make no mistake, that is not everyone’s reality (which I have documented in numerous articles and videos over the past several years.
We work for those people who are not in a protective bubble; that’s why we need to continue to prioritize diversity and inclusion among professionals. Ultimately, this all means we must steer clear of the McNamara Fallacy and honor the experiences of people who have been treated unfairly in real estate over the percentages of those who have not.
Do you know who the ‘Fathers of Fair Housing’ are?
Also, you might readily know that former Vice President Walter Mondale was a co-author of what became the historic 1968 Federal Fair Housing Act. But do you know who also wrote it?
It was none other than a Martha’s Vineyard regular, Senator Edward Brooke (R-MA). He was the first black attorney general of Massachusetts and the first black U.S. Senator of the 20th century.
Notably, the election and professional inclusion of Brooke’s diverse experience has been consequential to many of us having someplace to call home, whether purchased or leased, regardless of our:
Race
Color
Religion
National origin
The above are the original protections in the 1968 Act, which has been amended to now include some or all of the following, depending on the local market:
Sex (federal and local)
Familial status (federal and local)
Disability (this has evolved to “a person that uses an assistive device”) (federal and local)
Age
Ancestry
Sexual orientation
Gender identity
Marital status
Military status
Domestic violence victims
Source of income
Genetic information
Pregnancy
HIV/AIDS
Fair chance/reentry/criminal record history
Senator Edward Brooke and ‘The American Problem’
Senator Edward Brooke meets with President Lyndon B. Johnson
Senator Brooke grew up in Washington, D.C., and, because of the tragedy of Pearl Harbor, Brooke, like many, joined the military.
While stationed in Italy, Brooke fell in love, got married, and returned to the U.S. to start and raise a family. Naturally, his family wanted to buy a home.
With the G.I. Bill, homeownership was well within his means. But, like many Black, Asian and Hispanic/Latino WWII military veterans, although the G.I. Bill benefits were theirs to use because of their valiant service, lenders, real estate agents and homesellers were under no obligation to work with people of color.
Senator Brooke, like 1.2 million Black veterans, was denied access to his G.I. Bill homeownership benefits for his first attempted home purchase only because he was Black — while conversely, access to the G.I. Bill helped to create and expand the white middle class.
To add insult to injury, Brooke also faced real estate discrimination while vacationing. “He was known around here as Uncle Ed. He was friends with everybody. He taught kids how to swim at the Inkwell,” fondly remembered Dresser, who has been a Vineyard resident for decades.
Brooke started vacationing on Martha’s Vineyard in the early 1950s and continued to maintain a presence there for the rest of his life. His house is on the African American Heritage Trail in Oak Bluff.
Brooke wanted to have a social group since the East Chop Beach Club would not at that time allow Black vacationers or residents to join. Brooke tried to form a social group that Black islanders, along with anyone else, could access, but the town resisted and would not allow him to purchase additional real estate for such gatherings.
The blatant denial of his earned military benefits, plus his continuous experiences with real estate discrimination, set the tone for his whole career as an attorney, leading him to not only champion fair housing laws, which are foundational to diversity and inclusion in real estate, but to cowrite the landmark 1968 legislation.
The Brooke Amendment
The next year, the senator’s name became the moniker for the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1969, known as the “Brooke Amendment,” which limited out-of-pocket rent expenditure by a tenant in federal publicly assisted housing programs to 25 percent of one’s income (raised to 30 percent in 1981).
From the National Archives.
You probably recognize this percentage because it is still often the universal benchmark for measuring U.S. housing affordability – the Brooke Amendment was its first use.
As a fair housing educator, what an honor it was to see the summer home of one of the “Fathers of Fair Housing,” the late Senator Edward Brooke. He spent his career advocating for fair and affordable housing partly because of the good and not-so-good he experienced in D.C., New England and Martha’s Vineyard.
Ultimately, Sen. Brooke helped to shape our modern experience of Martha’s Vineyard as a summer breeze, a healing balm, and a slice of heaven, and helped codify our modern form of federal fair housing for all.
An American problem
Sen. Edward Brooke | Feb. 17, 1967, Time Magazine
When asked by Time Magazine in 1967 about the housing crisis, Brooke asserted, “It’s not purely a Negro problem. It’s a social and economic problem … an American problem.” This holds true today.
Let’s continue his non-partisan legacy (he was a Republican senator, while his co-author Mondale was a Democrat); let’s continue to advocate for fair housing for all, including the proactive inclusion of real estate professionals from all walks of life.
Dr. Lee Davenport is a real estate coach/educator and author who trains real estate agents to provide access and opportunity in real estate. Connect with her on Instagram.
Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain powerful insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.
May I be transparent? As a fair housing educator, I had hoped that our biggest 2025 issue would be people simply not being familiar with the process of reporting illegal unfair housing. That’s a simple solution (not easy, but simple). We simply have to consistently raise awareness of what unfair housing looks, feels and sounds like and then, how to report it, which is basic fair housing education.
Not in my worst nightmares did I ever anticipate us being in a position where unfair housing, even a modicum, would return to being legal. But here we are.
What do I mean?
The rollback of federal Fair Housing protections
“The ache for home lives in all of us, the safe place where we can go as we are and not be questioned. Fair housing is a civil right; it’s about more than property—it’s about dignity and justice.” — Dr. Maya Angelou, poet
Former President Biden signed Executive Order 13988 on Jan. 20, 2021, preventing and combating discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. There were numerous effects from this EO, but in regard to real estate, this was an historic directive that temporarily engrafted two new federal fair housing protections:
sexual orientation
gender identity/expression
Within weeks of that EO, HUD, one of the fair housing enforcers, began investigating. The federal government had caught up with what we, as Realtors, leading the way comparatively, had codified in our ethical code the decade prior. But executive orders are notoriously not permanent.
‘But wait, weren’t these protections included in 1974 when sex was added as a fair housing protected class?’
Unfortunately, no. The 1974 addition of “sex” as a protected class under the Fair Housing Act initially referred only to biological sex (male/female), reflecting narrower societal and legal understandings at the time.
Regardless, to my shock, it felt like a gut punch to read on Inauguration Day 2025 that President Trump had rescinded this monumental executive order. This rollback meant that community members and real estate professionals no longer have a federal path to recourse should they not be welcomed into a home for no other reason than their gender and who they love.
Thankfully, there are approximately 25 state/territory laws (including Washington, D.C.) that have explicit laws on the book, but what about the remaining states and territories? Seventy-nine percent.
That is the percentage of those surveyed by Zillow in 2024 who shared they have experienced unfair housing based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity. As a friendly reminder, in 2024, there was both a federal Executive Order and approximately 25 state/territory laws (including D.C.) in place.
‘But many of us as pros don’t trust Zestimates so how can we trust this data from Zillow?’
Aside from the Zillow study, did you know that fair housing complaints have been on the rise? See the charts from the National Fair Housing Alliance for just the past 10 years as an example of the overall rising trend (although the data supports a slight reprieve understandably during the first year of the pandemic, which began at the end of 2019 and careened into 2020).
It stands to reason that with more fair housing complaints, the investigative and enforcement infrastructure does not need to shrink or be defunded. Yet, the opposite seems to be occurring.
Frankly, one fair housing violation is too many.
Imagine how these forms of unfair housing may continue but now with no form of legal recourse federally or in certain states/territories.
As you can see from this National Fair Housing Alliance visualization, each fair housing/lending complaint agency has been well used by us, the American people.
Additional actions that ‘delete’ fair housing
To complicate matters even further, we may lose some of the reporting and investigative options that we have needed. There have been calls to delete some of these organizations. There have been edicts to pause investigations within others. Plus, a federal funding freeze is currently in limbo.
For example:
1. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): The threat of a looming funding freeze will disrupt at least 100 HUD-based programs such as:
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO): The main enforcer of the Fair Housing Act, which handles unfair housing complaints and partners with state/local agencies.
Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP): Funds private nonprofits to investigate unfair housing through testing and litigation.
Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP): Partners with state/local agencies to enforce fair housing laws.
A social media example of a nonprofit organization, Intermountain Fair Housing Council, whose mission is to ensure fair housing, was impacted by the initial funding freeze on Jan. 27, 2025. The White House press secretary has stated that the freeze has not been rescinded although it has been blocked by a federal judge until Feb. 3, 2025.
2. Department of Justice (DOJ): Cases under current investigation have been paused, which impact these areas:
Housing and Civil Enforcement Section (which includes lawsuits for unfair housing under the Fair Housing Act and Equal Credit Opportunity Act).
Fair Housing Testing Program (which uses undercover testers to uncover unfair housing in housing and lending).
3. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB): Elon Musk has called for the CFPB to be deleted, although the CFPB has helped recover $21 billion for us as American consumers since its 2010 inception through:
Enforcement of fair lending laws (ECOA, HMDA) and investigating discriminatory practices in mortgages, credit cards, and small business loans.
Leading interagency efforts to combat appraisal bias through the Appraisal Subcommittee, which operates the Appraisal Complaint National Hotline (1-877-739-0096), making it easier than ever for homeowners to report discriminatory property valuations.
Boots on the ground: Why have these federal options been necessary for states/territories with laws?
Sadly, in working with different local community members who want to report unfair housing/lending, the local and state governments typically refer us to federal agencies due to their limited local and state resources as well as their limited legal provisions (at times things that are covered federally are not covered locally).
For example, here in the state of Georgia, there are a handful of fair housing investigators (with a limited budget) responsible for the entire state, which has a population of more than 11 million residents. In short, an abrupt dismantling and/or defunding of fair housing-focused EOs, agencies and initiatives — allowing no time for change management — hurts our communities.
I know that many of us — from real estate agents/brokers to mortgage lenders to insurance agents to other professions tangential to real estate — believe that having fair access and the opportunity to lease or own a home is paramount to the American dream.
As a sign of goodwill for our communities, our associations (mortgage, Realtors, insurance, etc.) should be at the forefront of demanding that our elected senators and representatives keep fair and affordable housing an A1 priority on this year’s legislative agendas.
If you want to act now individually, here’s a link to help you connect with your local representatives this weekend to advocate for fair housing to stay a top federal funding priority.
Example of the automated advocacy letter available from the National Fair Housing Alliance at this link this weekend.
“The stakes are too high for government to be a spectator sport. Fair housing is a battle we must fight together, ensuring that everyone has a place to call home, without discrimination or exclusion.” — Barbara Jordan, U.S. House of Representatives former member
Dr. Lee Davenport is a real estate coach/educator and author who trains real estate agents to provide access and opportunity in real estate. Connect with her on Instagram.
