Advocates press for state ban on algorithmic rent‑setting, citing DOJ cases and local harms

Researchers, consumer advocates, civil‑liberties groups and tenants described algorithmic rent‑setting software as a driver of upward price pressure across rental markets and asked the legislature to act quickly to prohibit coordination via pricing algorithms.

Witnesses cited the Department of Justice’s antitrust litigation as evidence that some large property managers shared sensitive non‑public data with third‑party vendors whose algorithms recommended uniformly higher rents. Antitrust and algorithm experts testified that traditional antitrust standards—designed for human conspiracies—can be slow to address algorithmic hub‑and‑spoke coordination, and they urged state statutes that make the practice explicitly unlawful or provide faster civil remedies for affected renters.

Tenant witnesses and journalists described instances where dynamic‑pricing software recommended large increases and encouraged holding units vacant until a higher‑paying renter could be found. Witnesses argued a narrow, well‑targeted prohibition would not ban pricing software generally but would forbid data sharing and algorithmic coordination that function as price‑fixing.

Consumer and digital‑rights organizations recommended statute designs that align with recent laws in New York and California and include enforcement through the Attorney General and private rights of action for tenants.

Committee members asked technical questions about how to define prohibited coordination in statute and whether exemptions should cover independent market‑analysis tools.

No vote was taken at the hearing; sponsors asked the committee to issue a favorable report to allow additional drafting and to ensure the state has an enforceable remedy while federal litigation proceeds.