California’s push to regulate indoor temperatures in rental units
One of the biggest reasons housing providers lose an unlawful detainer (eviction) action, if not find themselves defending a costly lawsuit against them, is a tenant’s assertion that the rental unit is not in habitable condition. Interestingly, proper cooling is not part of California’s implied warranty of habitability codified in California Civil Code Section 1941.1. This may change.
While this doctrine requires functioning plumbing, heating, and electrical systems, it does not require landlords to provide air conditioning. It does require proper ventilation.
Where housing providers get into trouble is when air conditioning is provided at the inception of the tenancy and then it becomes inoperable or is stripped away. Failure to maintain and repair the air conditioning system can come with consequences. It is worth reminding our community that whenever a tenant enjoys a service, be it AC, parking, laundry, and whatnot, it can lead to grievances that can instigate a petition to a local rent board that results in a corresponding decrease in rent.
Lawmakers in Los Angeles County have drafted an ordinance requiring rental housing providers to maintain an indoor temperature of no more than 82°F. Will other locales follow suit?
Local governments rarely come up with original anti-housing proposals. Instead, they take notice of what other cities and counties are up to. Whether it is increased relocation payments for no-fault evictions, right-to-counsel programs, protections against Ellis Act evictions, and the like, municipalities will commonly adopt new landlording rules that are imported from elsewhere.
Aimed at protecting vulnerable Angelenos from extreme heat, the Los Angeles ordinance could compel landlords in unincorporated areas to install cooling systems on their own dime. That’s right - housing providers would be unable to pass through compliance costs onto tenants.
Upgrading tired or energy-inefficient buildings would prove to be a herculean and expensive undertaking with no path to recouping those expenses. If the ordinance passes, we have no reason to believe that it will not get the attention of politicians beyond Southern California and indeed, this challenge has already percolated to the state level.
The state legislation of AB 2684 mandates local governments to update hazard mitigation plans by January 1, 2028, including extreme heat mitigation measures. This is troubling for owners who could be asked to retrofit older buildings lacking modern HVAC systems. Other concerns abound, as the California Apartment Association points out.
Parting thoughts
Ever-increasing demands are being placed on landlords and there is no end in sight. A troubling trend we have seen is the inability to pass through costs to a tenant after significant expenses have been incurred by owners, even the requirement that a tenant be offered the opportunity to re-rent a unit at the same rate as before costly and substantial work has been performed.
We don't have to worry so much now about proposed AC requirements that will likely take years to be put forth, debated, and refined, but the measures floated do signal an ominous movement of foisting new responsibilities on already burdened and overregulated housing providers.