Nonprofit that helps homeowners says prospective members must vote in November election in order to join
Denver 7 News
DENVER A nonprofit that provides housing counseling to homeowners across the country is requiring potential members to vote in the November election in order to join.
The Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA) specializes in helping people buy their first homes.
We'll help them achieve affordable home ownership on outstanding mortgage terms," said the CEO and Founder of NACA, Bruce Marks. We really have an attitude that says, 'If you build it, people will come.' So people come to NACA because it's the place to come for affordable home ownership, long-term affordable home ownership.
NACA has more than 3.7 million members throughout the country, including 19,792 in Colorado.
Someone who wants to be a homeowner or is a homeowner, their voice has to be heard. And the way their voice is heard is through voting," said Marks. As a condition for NACA membership, as an eligibility condition, you have to vote if you're legally able to do so.
Marks said members will not be kicked out of NACA if they do not vote. Instead, people who wanted to join the organization would not be allowed to without voting.
People who are current members may be required to vote to maintain their membership in the future. It's still too early to say what future elections will look like for NACA members, according to Marks.
"This is a voluntary organization. It's not required that you join NACA, but if you want to get the benefits of NACA, and you want to have true, affordable, long-term homeownership and engage in your civic responsibility, then it's a requirement that you vote," Marks said. We're not taking sides. We're not saying who to vote for. We're just saying have your voice heard.
Marks said he is not concerned about the legality of this requirement and that NACA attorneys have reviewed it.
Other election law experts have concerns, including Terrance Carroll, who leads the government and political law practice at Sherman & Howard.
"I was like, 'Whose bright idea was this?' Not thinking it was a really a bright idea because it's actually one of those things that comes right up to the line, and it's unclear how illegal or legal it actually is," said Carroll. It just seems like if you can't pay someone to vote, you shouldn't be able to deny someone something for not voting."
Carroll cannot speak exactly to the legality of the policy but said it's too close for comfort.
It just seems like a bad idea all the way around," said Carroll. "Although, the notion that you want your members to be engaged in the political process is certainly admirable, but there's probably better ways to do this."