Hearings spotlight pocket‑listings bill as fair‑housing measure; industry groups split
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Stakeholders told the committee SB 6,091 would curb pocket listings and expand access to housing markets by requiring brokers to concurrently market listings to the public; supporters (Zillow, Habitat, Fair Housing Center) said the bill promotes transparency, while broker groups and rental representatives raised scope and technical concerns such as the word 'lease'.
The committee reopened its public hearing on substitute Senate Bill 6,091 on Feb. 18 to hear a broad range of stakeholders about whether brokers should be barred from marketing residential property to exclusive groups unless listings are simultaneously made available to the public.
Anna Boone, who leads government relations for Zillow in Washington, said "Zillow strongly supports SB 16 91," arguing the bill is meant to "ensure Washington maintains an open and competitive real estate marketplace where consumers, not private networks, control their home searches." Bill Clark, speaking for Washington Realtors, emphasized that the substitute removes language tying the prohibition to the Washington Law Against Discrimination and clarified that public marketing does not force homeowners to allow on‑site access.
Supporters from housing advocates and fair‑housing groups, including Ryan Donahue of Habitat for Humanity and Adria Buchanan of the Fair Housing Center of Washington, said pocket listings and private exclusive networks can limit access to housing opportunities and reinforce segregated networks. "When homes are only marketed through private listings, access is no longer based through openness or merit, but on proximity of the right networks," Donahue said.
Industry witnesses offered a range of perspectives. James Fisher and Bill Clark from Washington Realtors said the association supports the bill’s transparency goals and noted existing diversity training programs for realtors. Daniel Bannon of the Rental Housing Association of Washington registered opposition only if the bill’s remaining reference to "lease" is retained; he warned that including lease language could unevenly apply the rule to rental housing providers who hold broker licenses while excluding other rental operators.
Committee members asked whether the bill's requirement for concurrent public marketing would still permit targeted outreach to cultural or language communities and whether differential incentives to an exclusive group (for instance, extra perks) would be permitted. Testifiers said the bill allows private marketing when done concurrently with public availability and that existing agency and fair‑housing duties help govern broker conduct and terms.
The committee closed testimony on the bill with no immediate vote; staff and members indicated technical amendments (for example, clarifying the scope of "lease") might be considered.