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.”

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.

LAX officials are considering a proposal Tuesday to increase the fees rideshare companies are charged to access the airport.

Currently, rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft generally pass a $4 to $5 airport fee along to their customers. You might see this listed as a line item on your receipt as an “LAX Airport Surcharge.”

But the Los Angeles World Airports Board of Commissioners could vote to increase that fee by as much as $2 to $8 depending on where the rideshare picks you up or drops you off.

The idea behind the proposal is to encourage the use of the long-awaited, much-delayed and over-budget Automated People Mover once it opens and decrease congestion in the central terminal area, the area of the airport that’s also known as the horseshoe.

David Reich, a deputy executive director for the city agency that manages the airport, told LAist that if the proposal is approved, LAX doesn’t plan on increasing the fee until after the Automated People Mover opens, which could be later this year.

The proposed increases

When the Automated People Mover opens, there will be new curb space for drop-off and pick-up. Known as the “ground transport center,” this new curb space will be a 4-minute trip from the terminal area via the Automated People Mover, according to Reich.

LAX-it will shut down as a rideshare and taxi lot once the train opens, Reich said.

If the proposal is approved, getting an Uber or Lyft to and from the ground transport center will come with a $6 airport fee.

Even once the Automated People Mover opens, you will still be able to get rides directly to and from the curbs along the horseshoe, but they will come with a $12 fee.

The proposed increases would also apply to taxi and limousine services, which currently operate under a slightly different fee structure than rideshare companies.

The increased fees are expected to generate as much as $100 million in the first year the Automated People Mover is usable, according to a report to the board.

Why the different fees for the different locations?

In a report to the board, Reich said the Automated People Mover represents a "significant investment” that aims to “fundamentally reshape how vehicles move through the airport.”

The idea behind having a higher fee for direct access to the curbs along the horseshoe is to encourage “use of new, high-capacity infrastructure” and preserve central terminal access for trips “that most require it.”

Uber is trying to fight the increases

Uber is trying to mobilize the public to fight the proposed fee increases.

“Raising the LAX rideshare fee from $5 to $12 at the curb would punish travelers, working families, and seniors who depend on affordable, reliable transportation,” Danielle Lam, the head of local California policy for Uber, said in a statement.

On Monday, Uber sent an email to passengers who recently used the rideshare service, urging them to write to city officials to “stop this massive fee hike.”

Lyft has not responded to a request for comment.

Ten state lawmakers who are members of the L.A. County delegation sent a letter on Monday to the board expressing their “strong opposition” to the proposed increases.

“Many Angelenos rely on a mix of options, including rideshare services and friends or family dropping off loved ones,” the legislators wrote in the letter. “Managing congestion cannot realistically rely on steep fee increases for certain transportation options.”

Eight of the 10 legislators who signed the letter have received campaign contributions from Uber or Lyft, according to an LAist analysis of state campaign contribution data.

Other ways to access the airport

Now is probably a good time to remind folks that there are other ways to get to the airport that don’t involve rideshares, taxis or even lifts from families and friends.

The FlyAway bus offers regularly scheduled rides from the airport to Union Station in downtown L.A. and Van Nuys. You can see the schedules here. 

Last year, the countywide transportation agency unveiled the LAX/Metro Transit center, which is accessible from the C and K rail lines and several bus routes. For now, an LAX shuttle is bringing travelers from the station to the airport. It will be one of the stops on the Automated People Mover once it opens.