Update as of 2/11/2026: Portland has since passed its ordinance.
Cities nationwide are confronting a new frontier in housing policy: AI-driven rent tools. Senior Director Stephanie Rojo explains how cities across the country are responding and what it means for equity and AI rules.
—
Over the past year, local governments have taken an increasingly active role in regulating AI-driven rent-setting tools. What began as a city-level response to concerns about housing affordability, technology regulation, and tenant protections has grown into an expansive wave of municipal action.
San Francisco spurred this momentum in August 2024 with a first-of-its-kind ban on the use of algorithmic rent-setting software. Since then, cities like Jersey City, San Diego, and Providence have passed their own bans. Jersey City’s ordinance goes further by allowing tenants to sue landlords who violate the prohibition, making it one of the most robust measures adopted to date.
Other cities, including Minneapolis and Philadelphia, have also passed measures aimed at restricting or eliminating the use of algorithmic pricing tools in rental housing. In Santa Monica, legislation is currently being drafted, while Berkeley, an early adopter, now faces a legal challenge from RealPage, which argues that the city’s ordinance violates its First Amendment rights.
Not all proposals have advanced. In Portland, a proposed amendment to the affordable housing code that would prohibit algorithmic pricing has stalled amid political opposition and enforcement concerns. Similar efforts in San Jose and Boston have yet to gain meaningful traction. Meanwhile, several state Attorneys General have filed lawsuits against RealPage, alleging that its rent-pricing software has contributed to unfair rent increases and market manipulation.
At the same time, local efforts face new uncertainty at the federal level. A provision in the recently passed House tax bill would impose a ten-year moratorium on state and local regulation of AI systems, including rent-setting technologies. While the measure still faces hurdles in the Senate, it could override many of the laws cities have already adopted.
Still, many local officials and tenant advocates argue that city-level regulation is essential to address the real-world impacts of AI on housing markets. With federal and state enforcement still evolving, cities continue to fill regulatory gaps and set standards that reflect local priorities.
As with any disruptive industry, the decisions made by cities now will establish important precedents for balancing technological innovation with fair housing practices as AI continues to shape the rental market and the broader housing landscape.