Don't give real estate folks special treatment

I find some of the hand wringing over real estate sales price disclosure a little hard to believe. Yes, I understand the tactics of opponents who tell us that the sky will begin falling if we adopt full disclosure. It's a classic technique — set up a straw man, tell us how scary he is, and then tell us how to knock him down. In this case, some tell us that full disclosure will hamstring the real estate market.

Forty-three states currently employ full or partial disclosure. Only seven states have no public information about real estate sales. Idaho is one of them.

Has anyone ever heard that such disclosure caused market disruption? Clearly not, or the opponents of full disclosure would have cited them as examples of the problem they say we will face. A red flag should go up when we get warnings of such dire consequences and we should look for an ulterior motive. In this case, the real estate profession wants to maintain the status quo. Nondisclosure gives them a monopoly on home selling prices, making it difficult for outsiders to get accurate market price information. That tends to drive buyers and sellers to real estate agents and away from private sales by owners.

Another issue with nondisclosure is the potential inequity it can cause because of inaccurate property tax assessments.

So the question for us is, should the real estate profession enjoy special benefits at the expense of the rest of us?

BOB WYNHAUSEN

Sandpoint