The Brief

A new California law clarifies that landlords — not tenants — are responsible for cleaning rental homes covered in debris from disasters, such as the Palisades and Eaton fires that devastated parts of L.A. County earlier this year.

On Friday, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 610, which stipulates that when natural disasters cause damage to rental housing, “it shall be the duty of a landlord” to remove “hazards arising from the disaster, including, but not limited to, the presence of mold, smoke, smoke residue, smoke odor, ash, asbestos or water damage.”

The law addresses the confusion many renters grappling with the aftermath of the January fires have faced. Many apartments were left standing but choked with toxic ash. Some landlords refused to clean the debris, leaving tenants unable to return home.

In the months since the fires, some local officials gave unclear or non-committal answers about tenants’ rights and landlords’ clean-up responsibilities.

LAist reporting informed push for legislative change

State Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, a Democrat representing a district that includes Pasadena and Altadena, said the legislation she introduced was driven by tenant complaints her office received, as well as LAist’s reporting on the lack of clarity over clean-up procedures in rental housing.

“The reporting that you all had done over at LAist was also really helpful,” Pérez said. “We're hearing directly from constituents and have heard all of these concerns. And here's reporting from journalists in the Los Angeles area to further support these claims that I’m making that this is a major issue.”

An analysis of the bill presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee cited stories by LAist and reporting from the Los Angeles Times to show that existing law had left tenants confused about how to get their homes cleaned.

The backstory

Last month, L.A. County settled a lawsuit brought by tenants in Altadena who alleged that county public health officials had failed to protect tenants dealing with post-fire damage to rental homes. The county agreed to enforce cleaning requirements for landlords.

The city of Pasadena is facing a similar lawsuit.

Shortly after the Eaton Fire, Pasadena health officials told residents that ash spewed into homes was hazardous and should be professionally remediated. But city code inspectors told renters that the presence of ash did not violate local habitability codes because those codes did not explicitly contain the word “ash.”

City housing officials told tenants worried about the lack of clean-up that they could sue their landlord.

SB 610 will change how city officials communicate to tenants and landlords around these issues in the future, said Lisa Derderian, Pasadena’s spokesperson.

“This law makes important changes in the obligations of a landlord to the tenant that will play out in messaging,” Derderian said in an email to LAist. “The city takes habitability concerns for any cause seriously and inspects accordingly.”

Similar challenges played out in the city of L.A. During a February web meeting, L.A. housing official Robert Galardi told renters they were responsible for cleaning inside their own units, a claim that was contradicted by a housing department spokesperson later that month when LAist asked about the city’s guidance.

In response to LAist’s questions, Housing Department spokesperson Sharon Sandow said “landlords must remediate hazardous ash debris in rental units.”

Clearing up confusion created by gaps in the law

The law also requires landlords to let tenants move back in at their pre-disaster rental rate and mandates that landlords return rental payments for months when tenants were unable to live in the unit.

Landlord groups said most property owners already have taken responsibility for cleaning their rental housing units.

Debra Carlton with the California Apartment Association said the new law clarifies but does not broaden the scope of what landlords must do in the wake of a natural disaster. The law makes it clear that landlords will not have to rebuild destroyed properties.

Carlton said the law “reaffirms common-sense standards for addressing debris and smoke damage before a unit is reoccupied.”

Tenant advocates said the law’s passage is a victory for tenants who’ve long argued that the responsibility for cleaning rental properties lies with the landlords who own those properties.

Katie Clark — an organizer with the Altadena Tenants Union, a group created in the wake of the Eaton Fire — said SB 610 finally clears up the confusion around this issue.

“This closes that gap,” Clark said. “There is no nuance. There is no room for misunderstanding. [Ash] is absolutely now included in habitability questions.”

Some renters already have moved on 

The change may be coming too late for some renters. More than 10 months after the fires, one couple told LAist they have given up on returning to their previous home.

Marah Eakin, Andrew Morgan and their kids finally settled into a new home in July after being forced to live out of suitcases after the Eaton Fire spewed ash into their Pasadena rental home in January.

(

David Wagner

/

LAist

)

Marah Eakin and Andrew Morgan were renting a home in Pasadena that had smoke damage from the Eaton Fire. They said their landlord never agreed to clean the home, despite testing they said they paid for that revealed high levels of lead.

“We didn't see an end in sight,” Eakin said. “For a while, we were moving every five days, every week, and that was terrible.”

The couple said they and their 7-year-old twins moved nine times before settling down in July with a long-term lease on a home in Altadena. Morgan said the instability was especially tough on their kids.

“When they say that they miss the old house, some other old stuff, it's just heart-wrenching,” he said.

Trevor Barrocas, a property manager with Cornerstone R/E Management, told LAist that Eakin and Morgan’s landlord submitted a claim to California’s Fair Plan insurance program requesting remediation, but the claim was initially denied.

“The property has still not been fully remediated,” Barrocas said in an email to LAist. He said efforts to clean the property are ongoing.

“The property owner has waited through months-long delays by CA Fair Plan for answers, approvals and direction,” Barrocas said. “The unprecedented circumstances and result of the January fires have… been felt by landlords, homeowners and tenants alike.”

Only two Democratic lawmakers voted against Gov. Gavin Newsom’s budget proposal last year curtailing healthcare for undocumented immigrants. Sen. Maria Elena Durazo was one them.

Now, Durazo, a Democrat from Los Angeles, is proposing legislation that would reverse many of those immigrant healthcare cuts and reinstate Medi-Cal eligibility for all income-qualifying residents regardless of citizenship.

Senate Bill 1422 would ensure that all immigrant adults age 19 and older could enroll in Medi-Cal. It would not reverse limits placed on dental benefits that last year’s state budget included, nor would it eliminate the $30 monthly premium required of the same population starting in July 2027. The state budget last year did not cut benefits for children without legal status.

“We are no healthier as a community than the person least able to access care. When we accept a two-tier healthcare system, we borrow trouble,” Durazo said Monday.

Durazo argues that immigrants without legal status contribute billions in taxes each year and many of them now cannot benefit from programs those dollars support. The state spends about $12 billion annually on immigrant health care.

A shrinking budget, a growing fight

Whether Newsom will sign such a measure is unclear but seemingly unlikely. Grappling with a deficit for the fourth straight year — even as revenue grows — Newsom has already proposed cuts to other programs. Marissa Saldivar, a spokesperson for the governor, said his office would not comment on Durazo’s legislation.

His January budget proposal made few changes to the state’s Medi-Cal program, which enrolls more than 14 million Californians, but it underscored the ongoing fiscal challenges. One major threat comes from President Donald Trump’s federal tax reform package, which imposed new limits on the provider taxes that nearly every state uses to support their low-income healthcare programs. California’s tax on health insurers is particularly large, generating about $7 billion annually for the general fund — a figure that the state finance department estimates will decrease to about $6 million next year.

Medi-Cal spending has nearly doubled to $200 billion during Newsom’s two terms, adding to the state’s structural deficit, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office. That amount includes about $119 billion in federal dollars.

Both Democrats and Republicans criticize Newsom’s handling of healthcare for immigrants without legal status. Republicans blame Newsom’s gradual expansion of Medi-Cal eligibility to immigrants for the program’s growing costs. Democrats are angry he partially reversed course, and some also take issue with his most recent budget proposal, which they say would needlessly extend some federal Medicaid cuts.

Assemblymember Mia Bonta, a Democrat from Oakland, has introduced a bill that would bar the state from imposing federal work requirements on enrollees whose healthcare is paid for solely with state funds, a group that includes immigrants without legal status. State officials estimate work requirements will cause roughly 2 million Californians to lose Medi-Cal largely due to administrative hurdles.

The fight over healthcare spending has become one of the defining issues heading into this fall’s elections.

The state’s largest healthcare labor union is pushing a billionaire’s tax to raise revenue for healthcare, a measure that has drawn opposition from Silicon Valley’s wealthy elite and divided state Democrats. Meanwhile, party leaders are also trying to unseat a number of vulnerable congressional Republicans, including Rep. David Valadao whose Central Valley district has the highest share of Medicaid recipients in the country.

For the first time since Los Angeles County began tracking the data, fewer unhoused residents died on the streets in 2024, according to a report released Tuesday.

About 2,208 people experiencing homelessness died in the county that year, 300 fewer than the previous year, according to the report from the county Department of Public Health.

The report also showed the mortality rate — which is the number of deaths per 100,000 unhoused residents — decreased by 10%.

Health officials credit drug overdose prevention efforts for some of that decline, including greater distribution of naloxone, a medication that can reverse the effects of an opioid overdose.

There was a 21% decrease in the drug overdose death rate among unhoused residents, according to the report.

Still, an average of six people experiencing homelessness died each day in L.A. County throughout 2024. People without stable housing face mortality rates over four times higher than the general population.

Authorities note that number is still too high.

"These disparities reflect systemic barriers — lack of safe housing, limited access to culturally responsive healthcare, unsafe environments, and the ongoing effects of trauma, discrimination, and social inequities," Barbara Ferrer, director of the L.A. County Department of Public Health, wrote in the report.

She said she expects the work to get harder, with major state and regional funding reductions to some homeless services this year.

“Just as we are beginning to see positive momentum on homeless mortality reduction, we are at risk of losing precious ground,” Ferrer continued.

County health officials made several recommendations in the report, including providing more access to shelter and housing, mental health and substance use treatment services.

Drug overdose deaths 

The annual report relies on state death records, county medical examiner data and population estimates from the region’s annual point-in-time homeless count.

More than 75,000 people were estimated to be experiencing homelessness in L.A. County in 2024, according to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority’s official count that year.

Despite some decreases, drug overdose remained the leading cause of death among people experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles County and accounted for 40% of all deaths among that population.

In 2024, 884 unhoused people died of drug overdoses in L.A. County. That was down from 1,140 deaths in 2023, according to the report.

Unhoused residents were 46 times more likely to die of drug overdose than the general population. The report notes the overdose death rate is still about twice as high as it was in 2019.

Many of the deaths involved fentanyl, a synthetic opioid, but for the first time they accounted for a lower percentage than in the previous year — 59% in 2024 and 70% in 2023, according to the data.

Most overdose deaths involve multiple drugs, according to the county. The percentage of deaths in which methamphetamine was a factor remained relatively steady — 80% in 2024 and 79% in 2023.

Overdose deaths involving only methamphetamine rose from 19% in 2023 to 27% in 2024.

Other causes of death

The Public Health Department is tracking other leading causes of death for unhoused residents. In 2024, the rates for coronary heart disease and homicide among unhoused Angelenos went down, while transportation-related deaths and suicides went up.

• Coronary heart disease: The second leading cause of death among L.A. County’s unhoused population continued to be coronary heart disease, which accounted for 14% of unhoused deaths in 2024. The previous year, it was 15%.
  
• Transportation-related deaths: Traffic-related injury remained the third leading cause of death among all unhoused L.A. County residents, accounting for 11% of those fatalities. That’s up from 8% the previous year. After a two-year plateau, the traffic injury mortality rate increased by 25% to 315 deaths per 100,000 unhoused people. About 230 unhoused pedestrians or cyclists were killed in traffic collisions in 2024. They were 24 times more likely to die from traffic-related injuries than the overall L.A. County population.
  
• Homicide: Homicide was the fourth leading cause of death among unhoused people in L.A. County in 2024. That year, 105 unhoused people were victims of homicide, according to county data. That’s compared to 124 the previous year. Unhoused Angelenos were 14 times more likely to die by homicide than the general population.
  
• Suicide: The suicide rate among L.A.’s homeless population increased by 21% in 2024. County data show 80 unhoused L.A. County residents died by suicide in 2024. That was 4% of all recorded deaths among unhoused residents, up from 3% the previous year. Unhoused residents were 13 times more likely to die by suicide than Angelenos in general.

Public Health recommendations

The Department of Public Health made several recommendations to prevent premature deaths and continue slowing the mortality rate among unhoused people in the region.

They included:

• Ensuring access to affordable housing and health insurance.
• Ensuring that housing options support harm reduction, overdose prevention and substance use treatment.
• Expanding comprehensive primary and preventive care services for unhoused people.
• Conducting a detailed analysis of 2024 traffic injury deaths among unhoused residents to inform policy interventions. 

Read the full report here. 

More Californians filed claims for paid family leave last year than ever before since the state started offering the benefits two decades ago.

In 2025, more than 355,600 workers in the state took time to care for a sick family member or bond with a new child, up 16% from the year before, according to data LAist requested from the California Employment Development Department.

That change coincided with increased payments for workers who use paid leave. Workers in California can get up to eight weeks of paid leave — and now recoup 70–90% of their regular wages, up from 60–70% the year prior.

“The program continues to grow,” said Anne Chapuis, a spokesperson for EDD. While she said 2025 represents their largest year to date, the rise or fall of claims “can sometimes be attributed to a combination of factors including awareness, demand, and eligibility.”

California became the first state to enact a paid family leave program in 2004. At the time, workers only got 55% of their wages and six weeks of paid leave.

Jenya Cassidy, executive director of the advocacy group California Work & Family Coalition, said her organization is still working to understand why there’s a rise in claims, but have anecdotally heard of people taking it because of the increase. The group co-sponsored the 2022 legislation that increase payments, after hearing that many low-income earners couldn’t afford to take leave. Research has shown that paid family leave benefits help a mother and baby’s health.

“Sixty percent of their income wasn't enough to pay their bills, and so many people are living on the edge in this state especially,” Cassidy said.

She said there was also more publicity about the paid family leave program last year because of the payment increase.

“There was a little bit of hubbub about this wage replacement [increase], so I do think raising awareness about the affordability of taking it is a key thing,” she said. “People hearing it anecdotally, seeing it in the news, I think that kind of has an impact.”

The state Employment Development Department says the paid family leave program, which started in 2004, continues to grow.

(

EDD

)

There are also cultural and general shifts around family leave, said Jessica Mason, senior policy analyst for economic justice at the National Partnership for Women & Families.

“For millennials and Gen Z, there's a little bit more of an assumption that everybody's going to be doing caregiving, everybody's going to be involved in parenting, and those norms do kind of shift over time,” she said.

For example, more dads in California are taking paid leave time, recent state data show.

Mason recently worked on a report that found 1 in 3 private sector workers nationwide now have access to a paid family leave program, with 14 states having paid family leave laws. But because California is such a big state, it plays a huge role in that statistic, she said. The program covers more than 18 million residents.

“In California, about 97% of the private sector workforce is potentially eligible for paid leave … that's really at the top end of all of the states,” she said.

How the state's paid family leave program works

The family leave program in California is paid through the State Disability Insurance program. Workers pay into the program through a deduction on their paycheck usually labeled as “CADSI.”

To be eligible for paid family leave in California, a worker needs to have earned at least $300 in wages in a “base period” (5-18 months before a claim).

Eligible workers who make less than about $66,000 a year can get 90% of their wages, and workers who make above that recieve 70% while on leave.