LexLint.ioBeta

Know the law your code answers to.

Law / United States / Minnesota / Minneapolis

Prohibition on Use of Rent-Setting Algorithms (Ord. No. 2025-010)

Minneapolis Code of Ordinances sec. 244.2070

In force since .

An AI prohibited practices rule binding private bodies.

Private right of action
Yes
What it reaches
capability
Obligation class
Prohibition
Audit expectation
none

What it requires

  • A landlord operating in Minneapolis must not use any device that draws on nonpublic competitor rent or occupancy data to set rents or occupancy levels for a dwelling unit
  • This ordinance does not separately restrict selling, licensing, or otherwise supplying such a device to a Minneapolis landlord

These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.

In the frameworks

NIST AI RMF
  • MAP 3.3Targeted application scope is specified and documented based on the system’s capability, established context, and AI system categorization.
NIST AI 600-1
MIT mitigations Draft
  • 1.5Safety Decision Frameworks
  • 3.3Access Management
FINOS AIGF
ETSI EN 304 223
  • 5.1.2-1Business need and security risks written down and assessed before deciding to build an AI system.
  • 5.1.4-5End-users told which uses of the system are prohibited.

Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law

Identifiers refer to ETSI EN 304 223 V2.1.1 (2025-12), © ETSI 2025, all rights reserved. ETSI owns the standard; no ETSI text (titles or sentences) is reproduced here. The standard is free to download from ETSI.

Who enforces it

Settledness

As of
Open questions
  • Does a product that draws on "non-public competitor data" from a single competitor fall within "algorithmic device" in Minneapolis Code section 244.40, where the definition reaches data "concerning local or statewide rents or occupancy levels"?
  • Does the exclusion for "any report publishing existing rental data in an aggregated manner" in Minneapolis Code section 244.40 apply to a report that lets an owner or operator infer competitors' rents for future leases, given the condition "without recommending rents or occupancy levels for future leases"?

What it makes you log

Logging duty

The section bars using an algorithmic device to set rents or occupancy levels, and states no duty to keep a log or record of that use.

Kind
None
As of

What this law does

Drafted with AI

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made

Research summary

Legal information, not legal advice. This is LexLint's own research summary of a public legal source, and it creates no attorney-client relationship. For decisions that matter, consult qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. About LexLint

A landlord (owner or operator) may not use an algorithmic device, defined to include software that uses nonpublic competitor rent or occupancy data, when setting rents or occupancy levels for a dwelling unit in Minneapolis. The section does not separately prohibit selling, licensing, or otherwise supplying such a device. A tenant may bring a civil action to recover compensatory damages and reasonable attorney's fees.

When LexLint raises it

When your app profile says your app makes housing decisions.

Back to the example  ·  Lint your app

Page updated .