Senate Bill Policy Committee Analysis s2

SB 655 Page 1 Date of Hearing: July 15, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ed Chau, Chair SB 655 (Mitchell) – As Amended July 7, 2015

SENATE VOTE: 22-13

SUBJECT: Housing standards: mold.

SUMMARY: Adds to the list of substandard housing conditions visible or otherwise demonstrable mold growth, and specified. Specifically, this bill:

1) Adds to the list of substandard housing conditions visible or otherwise demonstrable mold growth, as determined by a health officer or a code enforcement officer, excluding the presence of mold that is minor and found on surfaces that can accumulate moisture as part of their properly functioning and intended use.

2) Defines mold as microscopic organisms or fungi that can grow in damp conditions in the interior of a building.

3) Provides that an obligation shall not arise under Civil Code Section 1941 or 1942 to repair a dilapidation relating to the presence of mold until the lessor has notice of the dilapidation.

4) Provides that a landlord may enter a dwelling unit to repair a dilapidation relating to the presence of mold provided the landlord complies with existing law related to entry of a tenant's dwelling unit.

EXISTING LAW:

1) Lists various conditions that, if they exist in a building containing dwelling units to an extent that there is a danger to the life, limb, health, property, safety, or welfare of the public or the occupants of the building, require that the building be declared substandard (Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3).

2) Includes inadequate sanitation on the list of conditions that can mean a building is substandard, and specifies that inadequate sanitation includes, but is not limited to, the following:

a) Lack of, or improper water closet, lavatory, or bathtub or shower in a dwelling unit;

b) Lack of, or improper water closets, lavatories, and bathtubs or showers per number of guests in a hotel;

c) Lack of, or improper kitchen sink;

d) Lack of hot and cold running water to plumbing fixtures in a hotel;

e) Lack of hot and cold running water to plumbing fixtures in a dwelling unit; SB 655 Page 2

f) Lack of adequate heating;

g) Lack of, or improper operation of required ventilating equipment;

h) Lack of minimum amounts of natural light and ventilation required by the code;

i) Room and space dimensions less than required by the code;

j) Lack of required electrical lighting;

k) Dampness of habitable rooms;

l) Infestation of insects, vermin, or rodents as determined by a health officer or, if an agreement does not exist with an agency that has a health officer, the infestation can be determined by a code enforcement officer upon successful completion of a course of study in the appropriate subject matter as determined by the local jurisdiction;

m) General dilapidation or improper maintenance;

n) Lack of connection to required sewage disposal system;

o) Lack of adequate garbage and rubbish storage and removal facilities, as determined by a health officer or, if an agreement does not exist with an agency that has a health officer, the lack of adequate garbage and rubbish removal facilities can be determined by a code enforcement officer.

(Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3)

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill does not appropriate money or cause any significant reduction in revenues.

COMMENTS:

Background: Current law lists various conditions that, if present in a residential building to an extent that there is a danger to public health and safety, require that the building be declared substandard. Inadequate sanitation is one of those conditions, which the law specifies includes, but is not limited to, 15 different conditions. Each jurisdiction's code enforcement department is typically responsible for inspecting buildings and determining whether a building is substandard. Health officers are responsible for inspecting for infestations of insects, vermin, or rodents, and lack of adequate garbage and rubbish storage or removal facilities, although if an agreement does not exist with an agency that has a health officer, a code enforcement officer may determine these conditions. Generally, if a code enforcement officer determines there is a code violation, the officer will issue the landlord or property owner a “notice to repair,” which provides the landlord or property owner a reasonable amount of time to make the correction.

Since mold is not specifically listed as a substandard condition, jurisdictions across the state treat mold complaints differently, with some taking no enforcement action whatsoever. SB 655 would specify that mold is a health and safety concern, and provides clear authority to code enforcement and other public officers to issue notices to require landlords and property owners to SB 655 Page 3 abate mold growth. This bill differentiates between mold growth that is minor and found on surfaces that can accumulate moisture as part of their properly functioning and intended use and mold growth that results from other conditions.

Purpose of the bill: According to the author, "mold is not explicitly referenced in state code, causing local enforcement agencies to be uncertain about their authority to address this common complaint. This uncertainty leads to widely inconsistent enforcement approaches to mold across the state, ranging from taking no enforcement action to limiting enforcement to water-related issues that are identified in the code to, in a few places, enforcing mold issues as a general nuisance.

"Because of the growing evidence linking mold to adverse health impacts, state code needs to be updated to provide local enforcement agencies with clear authority to address mold complaints. This authority should include the ability to require both the cleaning or removal of moldy materials and the remediation of underlying sources of moisture. Current state code provides local enforcement agencies with the authority to address moisture issues. SB 655 would add mold as a substandard condition in Health and Safety Code 17920.3."

Statement from the California Department of Public Health: In 2001, the Toxic Mold Protection Act (SB 732, Ortiz, Chapter 584) required the CDPH, formerly the Department of Health Services, to determine the feasibility of setting Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs) for mold in indoor environments. In its 2005 report to the legislature, the CDPH concluded that “sound, science-based PELs for indoor molds cannot be established at this time.”

In 2011, the CDPH released a “Statement on Building Dampness, Mold, and Health.” In that statement, the CDPH stated:

“While PELs remain elusive, mounting scientific evidence on dampness and mold, much of it published since 2005, supports an alternative, evidence-based approach to the assessment of health risks from indoor dampness and mold. Human health studies have led to a consensus among scientists and medical experts that the presence in buildings of (a) visible water damage, (b) damp materials, (c) visible mold, or (d) mold odor indicates an increased risk of respiratory disease for occupants. Known health risks include: the development of asthma, allergies, and respiratory infections; the triggering of asthma attacks; and increased wheeze, cough, difficulty breathing, and other symptoms. Available information suggests that children are more sensitive to dampness and mold than adults.”

The statement also notes that consensus does not justify a differentiation of some molds as “toxic molds.” The only evidence that is “related consistently to adverse health effects are: the presence of current or past water damage, damp materials, visible mold, and mold odor, not the number or type of mold spores, nor the presence of other markers of mold in indoor air or dust.”

The CDPH concludes that the presence of water dampness, visible mold, or mold odor in schools, workplaces, residences and other environments is unhealthy. The CDPH therefore recommends addressing water damage, dampness, visible mold, and mold odor by (a) identifying and correcting the source of water that may allow microbial growth or contribute to other problems, (b) the rapid drying or removal of damp materials, and (c) the cleaning or removal of mold and moldy materials as rapidly and safely as possible, to protect the health and well-being of building occupants, especially children. SB 655 Page 4 Other local legislation: The City and County of San Francisco enforce mold issues as substandard conditions constituting a nuisance. Specifically, mold and mildew that rise to the level of a nuisance is defined as "any visible or otherwise demonstrable growth of microscopic organisms or fungi (mold or mildew) that feeds on damp conditions in the interior of a residential building, sufficiently chronic or severe to cause a health hazard or damage a residential structure or part thereof, excluding the presence of mold or mildew which is minor in nature caused by inappropriate housekeeping practices or the improper use of natural or mechanical ventilation" (San Francisco Housing Code Sections 401, 1001).

Arguments in support: Supporters of the bill contend that mold is a common complaint of California tenants. The California Association of Code Enforcement Officers, a co-sponsor of the bill, notes that under existing law code enforcements' authority over mold and moldy materials is "murky at best." The bill's other co-sponsor, Regional Asthma Management and Prevention (RAMP), points to the significant health impacts associated with mold, and notes that a 2007 study estimates that 21% of the nation's asthma cases are attributable to dampness and mold in the home. Supporters also cite a 2014 report indicating that 12.2% of Californians experience excessive moisture in their homes, with renters in low-income communities and communities of color disproportionately impacted by unwanted dampness in their homes.

Arguments in opposition: Opponents primarily represent statewide and regional associations of apartment owners and homeowners associations. Opponents question the need for the bill, and contend that existing law relating to substandard housing and habitability already allows tenants to bring claims against their landlords when unhealthy living conditions relating to mold exist. The San Diego County Apartment Association contends that mold as a substandard condition will lead to abusive litigation practices, and tenants will have the right to sue for substandard housing conditions when any mold is present, including mold that is not harmful. Opponents also point to the lack of a consensus within the scientific and medical communities regarding which molds pose serious health risks, and argue that this bill does not present a workable standard for code enforcement or for property owners who want to stay in compliance with the law.

Related legislation:

SB 488 (Hueso, Chapter 89, Statutes of 2013): Permits the determination of pest infestations and inadequate garbage storage and removal facilities to be made by a local code enforcement officer if an agreement for the services of a local health officer does not exist.

SB 732 (Ortiz, Chapter 584, Statutes of 2001): Required the Department of Health Services, currently the CDPH, to consider the feasibility of adopting permissible exposure limits to mold in indoor environments and to adopt such standards if feasible.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Association of Code Enforcement Officers (co-sponsor) Regional Asthma Management and Prevention (co-sponsor) American Lung Association in California California Pan-Ethnic Health Network (CPEHN) SB 655 Page 5 Cardno, Inc. Center for California Homeowner Association Law City of Emeryville City of Fremont East Bay Community Law Center (EBCLC) of Berkeley Esperanza Community Housing Corporation Healthy Homes Collaborative Housing California Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance (KIWA) San Francisco Asthma Task Force Society for Allergy Friendly Environmental (SAFE) Gardening St. John's Well Child and Family Center Wilma Chan, District 3 Supervisor, Alameda County Board of Supervisors One Individual

Opposition

Apartment Association of Orange County Apartment Association, California Southern Association California Apartment Association California Legislative Action Committee (CLAC) California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors (CALPASC) Community Association Institute (CAI) East Bay Rental Housing Association Nor Cal Rental Property Association North Valley Property Owners Association San Diego County Apartment Association

Analysis Prepared by: Rebecca Rabovsky / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085