BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE HUMAN
SERVICES COMMITTEE
Senator Elaine K. Alquist, Chair
BILL NO: AB 2836
A
AUTHOR: Karnette
B
VERSION: April 27, 2006
HEARING DATE: June 13, 2006
2
FISCAL: Judiciary/Appropriations
8
3
CONSULTANT:
6
Hailey
SUBJECT
Fire protection: residential care facilities for the
elderly
SUMMARY
Requires residential care facilities for the elderly,
licensed for four, five, or six residents, to have
installed and maintained an operable automatic fire
sprinkler system approved by the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) for family dwellings.
ABSTRACT
Existing law:
1. Establishes the licensing of community care facilities,
for which the State Department of Social Services (DSS) is
responsible.
2. Establishes licenses for various types of facilities,
including residential care facilities for the elderly
(RCFEs) for six or fewer persons.
3. Establishes that a residential facility that serves six
Continued---
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
2
or fewer persons shall be considered a residential use of
property.
4. Exempts residential facilities from local fire
ordinances provided that the facility otherwise qualifies
for a license, permit, or similar authorization."
5. Requires the State Fire Marshal (SFM) to establish
separate fire and panic safety standards for specified
facilities, and that the Marshal is responsible for the
promulgation of regulations for the prevention of fire and
protection life and property against fire in buildings that
house six or fewer person of any age that are placed there
by order of a government agency for their protection.
6. Defines, through statute and regulation, "ambulatory"
(able to exit without assistance), "non-ambulatory"
(needing assistance to exit), and "bed-ridden" (needing
assistance to turn in bed) for purposes of licensure and
the regulation of health and safety.
7. Requires DSS and SFM, in consultation with the
Department of Developmental Services, to promulgate
regulations for residential care facilities for the
elderly, relating to fire and safety standards for
bedridden residents. Requires the regulations to clarify
requirements for facilities serving six or fewer persons,
at least one of whom is bedridden, and a process for
approving alternate means of meeting the standards.
8. Permits bedridden persons to be admitted to and remain
in residential facilities that secure and maintain an
appropriate fire clearance. Requires a fire clearance to
be issued to a facility with a bedridden person if it meets
fire safety requirements or has alternative methods of
protection that have been approved.
9. Prohibits a local fire official from imposing fire
safety requirements stricter than the applicable state ones
for facilities serving six or fewer clients.
10. Specifies that care facilities housing more than six
persons have automatic sprinkler systems.
11. States that all building standards adopted or proposed
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
3
by a state agency shall be submitted for approval to the
California Building Standards Commission.
This bill:
1. Defines "facility," for the purposes of this bill, as a
residential care facility for the elderly, as defined in
subdivision (k) of Section 1569.2 of the Health and Safety
Code, with four or more residents.
2. Mandates that any facility meeting this definition that
is newly licensed on or after January 1, 2010, have an
operating automatic fire sprinkler system equivalent to a
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 13D system, for
family dwellings.
3. Mandates that any facility meeting this definition that
has a valid license as of January 1, 2010, have an
operating automatic fire sprinkler system equivalent to an
NFPA 13D system, for family dwellings, installed and
maintained by January 1, 2014.
4. Directs the SFM to adopt regulations by January 1,
2008, to implement this bill, including addressing those
fire safety features no longer required of a licensee after
a sprinkler system is installed and maintained.
4. Directs public water agencies to continue to treat the
facility as a residence entitled to residential water rates
and prohibits them, and other local government agencies,
from requiring the facility to install a new water meter or
new connections to the water system as a consequence of
installing a sprinkler system
5. Caps at $200 the fee for inspections, by the local fire
marshal, related to the installation and maintenance of the
sprinkler system.
7. Caps at $200 any separate fee imposed by local building
commissions or departments of local government.
8. Directs local government building and fire agencies to
coordinate inspections when possible to minimize fees
imposed on residential facilities.
9. States that no liability shall be imposed on an owner
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
4
of a facility for a violation of these provisions by a
third party to whom the facility is leased or rented for
operation.
FISCAL IMPACT
According to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations,
there is a minor absorbable workload to the State Fire
Marshal to adjust licensing and inspection regulations
accordingly.
In addition, over time the cost of care could increase. To
the extent these higher costs result in the closure of
small facilities and a shortage of available beds in RCFEs,
residents could be forced to move to more expensive,
medically-focused assisted living facilities. In the event
that this happens, state costs could increase.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
The author's purpose
In December of 2002, a fire at a residential care facility
within the City of Torrance killed three residents.
According to news reports, the three victims were not
ambulatory. The facility was not equipped with an
automatic fire sprinkler, but it did meet all safety
standards required of it.
According to the sponsors, automatic fire sprinklers will
suppress fires before they become deadly, and they will
slow and lessen the ferocity of fires, giving residents of
care facilities time needed to evacuate or be rescued by
facility staff or by the responding firefighters.
Facilities covered by the bill
According to DSS, California currently has 5,200
residential care facilities for the elderly with six or
fewer beds.
The Health and Safety Code defines residential care
facility for the elderly as a housing arrangement chosen
voluntarily by persons 60 years of age or over, or their
authorized representative, where varying levels and
intensities of care and supervision, protective
supervision, or personal care are provided, based upon
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
5
their varying needs, as determined in order to be admitted
and to remain in the facility. Persons under 60 years of
age with compatible needs may be allowed to be admitted or
retained in a residential care facility for the elderly as
specified.
Uncertain data on fires
The State Fire Marshal receives data from local fire
departments and fire districts that choose to report. Of
the state's more than 900 departments, fewer than 300
report to the SFM. During the 11-year period from 1992
through 2002, the SFM received reports of 650,000 fires, or
which 217 were in residential board and care facilities
(0.03 percent). These 217 fires resulted in seven deaths
and 20 injuries. (Three of the 20 injuries were to
firefighters.) Property loss for these fires was estimated
at $2 million and content loss was an additional $750,000,
according to SFM data.
The SFM cautions on the use of these data in evaluating the
need for AB 2836 in part because the reporting does not
break out statistics on the residential facilities for the
elderly that are covered by the bill. Another SFM report
for the same 11 years identifies four deaths, rather than
seven, in "fires in residential boarding and health care
facilities."
The Community Residential Care Association of California
believes that the fire in 2002 in the City of Torrance is
the only such deadly fire in more than 10 years in a
facility covered by AB 2836. By comparison, according to
data provided by the California Fire Chiefs Association of
California, there are between 60 and 70 deaths in
California each year caused by fires in all single family
dwellings.
Data on cost
Two years ago, the California State Pipe Trades Council
provided the Legislature with comment on part of the
difficulty of estimating the cost of installing an
automatic fire system in a single-family home. "The
fluctuation in pricing depends on architectural features,
pipe routing limitations, city rulings, and other factors
above the baseline average. Pricing [often] does not
include connection fees from the water departments or the
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
6
cost of the water meter." Indeed, estimates provided by
supporters of a somewhat similar bill two years ago ranged
from $2 per square foot to $6 per square foot, plus permit
and inspection fees.
In an effort both to control costs and to minimize cost
fluctuations from region to region, AB 2836 does the
following:
Directs the use of a lower-cost sprinkler system,
approved by the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA) for use in residential dwellings - NFPA 13D.
According to the supporters of the bill, this system
has sprinklers installed in only those parts of a
house where residents live rather the entire building,
including attics, garages, closets, and storage areas.
In addition, the supporters contend that this system
is designed to run from normal water pressure, and
would not require a new water connection or meter.
Directs local agencies, including water districts,
to treat this system as a residential system, rather
than a commercial one, to set any fees or rates
accordingly, and not to impose the installation of
larger connecting pipes or new meters.
Directs local fire agencies and local governments
to minimize the number of inspections - and resultant
building inspection fees.
Caps the inspection fees at $200 apiece.
Recent legislation - new regulations now in effect
In 2000, the Legislature passed SB 1896 (Ortiz, Chapter
817), which required the SFM and DSS each to promulgate
regulations applicable to all residential facilities
licensed by DSS, regulations that would permit residents to
remain in home-like settings, and, at a minimum, would
guide fire safety in a residence of six or fewer clients,
at least one of whom is bedridden. These regulations,
promulgated in 2005, clarify the fire and life safety
requirements for a fire clearance for the facility, and
they identify procedures for requesting the approval of
alternative means of providing equivalent levels of fire
and life safety protection.
Social trends, provider rates, and recruitment of providers
As individuals live longer and as institutional care falls
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
7
into disfavor with both the law and social mores, the need
for community care facilities increases. Autumn Solutions,
a San-Diego-based statewide organization that specializes
in helping consumers find long term care insurance, reports
increasing demand for assistance to stay in one's own home
followed by people's desire to find a small-group
residence, with a home-like atmosphere. Simultaneously,
Autumn Solutions reports, freezes in state reimbursement
rates for residential care have made the recruitment of new
providers difficult.
Housing law
California law treats a residential care facility of up to
six beds as a residential use of property. As such, local
governments cannot impose certain zoning ordinances that
treat these care facilities differently from residences.
Federal and state fair housing law also contributes to the
issues raised by this bill: one class of residents - such
as elderly persons or persons with disabilities - cannot be
treated distinctly by special requirements that apply only
to those classes but not to all classes of residents. Such
conditions or restrictions may result in the denial of
equal housing opportunities.
Similar legislation this session
SB 516 (Ortiz) is nearly identical to AB 2836. SB 516 was
introduced last year, passed out of the Human Services
Committee on a vote of 4-2, and was held on the suspense
file of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Arguments in support
Fire departments in support of the bill cite national
statistics that point to a 95 percent fire survivability
rate in homes equipped with an automatic sprinkler system
and smoke detectors. According to the National Fire
Protection Association, there is no record of a fire
killing more than two people in a completely fire sprinkled
building where the system was properly maintained.
Virtually all letters of support include this statement:
"residential fires account for more than 78 percent of all
deaths from fires. The combined protection of smoke
detectors, alarm, and fire sprinklers could reduce the fire
death rate by nearly 82 percent."
The Ventura Fire Chiefs' Association supports the bill
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
8
because of its belief that California has not yet developed
adequate codes and standards to meet the growing needs of
the residential care facilities now being located in
single-family dwellings.
Several letters of support state that having a sprinkler
system installed will help residential care facilities for
the elderly find proper insurance at a lower cost.
Arguments in opposition
Opponents argue that the bill requires significant expenses
that providers will not be able to absorb, and these
requirements may force some to go out of business.
Inadequate housing for elderly persons, many who have
disabilities, is already a significant problem that the
bill will worsen.
Opponents also argue that providing residential care for
the elderly in a facility of six or fewer beds is protected
by statute as a residential use of property. Mandating
5,200 residences to have a sprinkler system, while not
requiring all residential properties in California to
install a sprinkler system, violates federal and state law,
including the federal Olmstead decision (persons with
disabilities have a right to live in the community) and
state case law dismissing ordinances that imposed blanket
fire safety standards on only one set of residential
facilities. Opponents express the belief that the current
building standards in California provide substantial
protections for residents.
Protection and Advocacy also voices concerns that, if
enacted, AB 2836 will open the door to other legislation
requiring sprinklers in additional residential facilities,
legislation that will result in fewer community housing
options for disabled persons now residing in those
facilities.
Protection and Advocacy requests an amendment that would
provide funds or incentives to encourage rather than
require installation of fire safety equipment, including
sprinklers.
The Consumer Attorneys of California argue against the
provision giving immunity to a landlord.
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
9
COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS
What is the extent of the present risk?
The scope of the problem addressed by this bill is unclear
to committee staff. Letters of support for the bill
acknowledge that there are no accurate data sets for the
facilities that this bill covers, and the resulting
supportive arguments rely on extrapolations and logic:
"most deadly fires occur in single-family residences,
infants and elderly persons are most at risk in fires,
providing increased fire protection to elderly persons in
residences is good policy." Is the Torrance fire in 2002
the only such deadly fire in a residential care facility
for the elderly - that is, one fatal fire and three deaths
in the past 12 to 15 years in more than 5,000 facilities?
Should the committee seek better data before imposing a new
requirement and expense on these community care facilities?
New regulations released recently
Should new regulations for the implementation of SB 1896
(Ortiz, Chapter 817, Statutes of 2000), be given a chance
to work before a new set of fire-safety standards are
imposed on residential care facilities for the elderly?
Tax incentives or credits
Of particular concern to the state are those individuals
who reside in residential care facilities for the elderly
and who are either recipients of SSI/SSP (cash aid payments
for aged, blind, and disabled individuals) or clients of
the regional centers (persons with specific disabilities).
DSS has no precise estimate of the number of residents of
these facilities who are on SSI/SSP or who are regional
center clients; however, the percentage could be as high as
half. The committee may want to recommend to the author
that she consider amendments to provide tax benefits to
facilities that install fire safety sprinkler systems and
that also serve SSI/SSP recipients or are regional center
clients.
Additional cost-containment options
Several years ago, the Legislature faced an analogous
challenge when safety advocates sponsored legislation to
require certain safety devices in swimming pools and spas.
Rather than requiring a retrofit of all pools and spas, the
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
10
Legislature required installation of these safety devices
in all new construction and in any renovation costing more
than a threshold amount.
The bill could be amended to require a sprinkler system in
any new residence constructed for the purpose of a licensed
residential care facility for the elderly, and it could be
amended to require that any licensed facility obtaining a
building permit for renovations costing more than a
threshold amount would be required to install sprinklers as
part of the renovation.
POSITIONS
Support: California State Firefighters Association
(sponsor)
City of Torrance Fire Department (sponsor)
Los Angeles Area Fire Marshals Association
(sponsor)
Alzheimer's Association, California Council
Brown and Associates Fire Protection
Consultants
Burbank City Fire Department
Butte County Fire Department
California Fire Chiefs Association
California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform
California State Pipe Trades Council
CDF (California Department of Forestry)
Firefighters
Clovis City Fire Department
Dixon City Fire Chief
Dixon City Assistant Fire Chief
El Dorado Hills Fire Marshal
Elk Grove Community Services District Fire
Department
Eureka City Fire Department
Foster City City Fire Department
Fresno City Fire Department
Gilroy City Fire Chief
Healdsburg City Fire Department
Kelseyville Fire Protection District
Kings County Fire Department
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Marysville City Fire Department Chief
Milpitas City Fire Department
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2836 (Karnette) Page
11
Millbrae City Fire Marshal
Murrieta City Fire Department
Nevada County Consolidated Fire District
Oakdale City Fire Marshal
Oxnard City Fire Department
Petaluma City Fire Chief
Rialto City Fire Department
Rincon Valley Fire Protection District Chief
Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety
Fire Division
Roseville City Fire Department
Sacramento Regional Fire Prevention Officers
Association
San Bernardino City Fire Department
San Bruno City Fire Marshal
San Gabriel City Fire Department
San Jose City Fire Chief
San Marcos City Fire Department
San Miguel Fire Protection District Fire
Marshal
Santa Clara County Fire Chiefs' Association
Sonoma County Fire Marshal
Sprinkler Fitters and Apprentices Local 483
Stockton City Fire Department
Templeton Fire Department
Upland City Fire Department
Ventura County Fire Chiefs' Association
Woodland City Fire Marshal
Oppose: California Association of Realtors
Community Residential Care Association of
California
Consumer Attorneys of California
Protection and Advocacy, Inc.
Society of California Care Home Operators
-- END --