BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                     SB 655


                                                                    Page  1





          SENATE THIRD READING


          SB  
          655 (Mitchell)


          As Amended  August 17, 2015


          Majority vote


          SENATE VOTE:  22-13


           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |Committee       |Votes|Ayes                  |Noes                |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Housing         |5-2  |Chau, Burke, Chiu,    |Steinorth, Beth     |
          |                |     |Lopez, Mullin         |Gaines              |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Appropriations  |11-5 |Gomez, Bloom, Bonta,  |Bigelow, Chang,     |
          |                |     |Calderon, Eggman,     |Gallagher, Jones,   |
          |                |     |                      |Wagner              |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |Eduardo Garcia,       |                    |
          |                |     |Holden, Quirk,        |                    |
          |                |     |Rendon, Weber, Wood   |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 


          SUMMARY:  Adds to the list of substandard housing conditions  








                                                                     SB 655


                                                                    Page  2





          visible mold growth, as specified.  Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Adds to the list of substandard housing conditions visible  
            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 or if the tenant is in violation of specified  
            obligations to maintain the premises.


          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. 


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee:


          1)No new costs to the Department of Housing and Community  
            Development.


          2)Non-reimbursable mandated costs related to increased  
            enforcement activity for substandard housing conditions.   
            Local enforcement costs are not reimbursable and can be offset  
            by local agencies' ability to charge fees.








                                                                     SB 655


                                                                    Page  3







          COMMENTS:  


          Background:  Existing law, the State Housing Law, lists numerous  
          conditions that require a building to be declared substandard,  
          if the building contains dwelling units and the presence of the  
          condition is a danger to the life, limb, health, property,  
          safety, or welfare of occupants or the public.  Inadequate  
          sanitation is one of those conditions, which the law specifies  
          includes 15 specified conditions, including dampness of  
          habitable rooms and a lack or improper operation of required  
          ventilation equipment.  Each local jurisdiction's code  
          enforcement department is generally responsible for inspecting  
          buildings and determining whether a building is substandard.


          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.   
          This bill is intended to provide local enforcement agencies the  
          explicit authority to address mold complaints and eliminate  
          unhealthy housing conditions related to the presence of mold.


          Purpose of this 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  








                                                                     SB 655


                                                                    Page  4





          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 [Section] 17920.3."


          Statement from the California Department of Public Health:  In  
          2001, the Toxic Mold Protection Act [SB 732 (Ortiz), Chapter  
          584, Statutes of 2001] 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 noted that consensus does not justify a  
          differentiation of some molds as toxic molds, but concluded that  
          the presence of water dampness, visible mold, or mold odor in  
          schools, workplaces, residences and other environments is  
          unhealthy. 


          Other local legislation:  The City and County of San Francisco  
          enforce mold issues as substandard conditions constituting a  
          nuisance (San Francisco Housing Code Sections 401, 1001).


          Arguments in support:  Supporters of this bill contend that mold  
          is a common complaint of California tenants.  The California  
          Association of Code Enforcement Officers, a co-sponsor of this  
          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  








                                                                     SB 655


                                                                    Page  5





          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 this  
          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. They contend 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.  




          Analysis Prepared by:                                             
                          Rebecca Rabovsky / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085     
                                                                  FN:  
          0001458


















                                                                     SB 655


                                                                    Page  6