Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Cooling Public Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers consider bill to require air conditioning when apartments are built or renovated, drawing public‑health and industry debate
Summary
House Bill 339 would require air conditioning in new or substantially altered rental apartment units, using ASHRAE Standard 55 to define acceptable indoor conditions; public‑health groups and tenants’ advocates urged passage, while building and landlord groups raised implementation and cost concerns and urged use of existing county standards.
The committee heard House Bill 339, a proposal to require air conditioning in certain rental apartment units after new construction or substantial renovation and to use ASHRAE Standard 55 to define acceptable thermal conditions.
Sponsor Delegate Mary L. Layman said the bill responds to increasing extreme heat and scientific evidence that lack of cooling worsens health risks for infants, older adults and people with chronic conditions. “This bill is not about providing comfort,” she said. “It is a tool to preempt public‑health crises before they happen.” She said the measure avoids a single fixed seasonal window and instead uses ASHRAE’s scientifically derived temperature guidance to set a target that varies with occupant vulnerability.
Public‑interest and legal‑aid groups testified in favor. Albert Turner of the Public Justice Center said cooling is not currently a required life‑safety feature under Maryland escrow law and called HB 339 “a step in the right direction” to protect older adults and children. Zephyr Shaff of Maryland Legal Aid described a pending tenant case in Baltimore where a judge declined to find a lack of cooling violated law because no cooling standard exists locally; she said the bill would change that in buildings that are renovated under the bill.
Technical witnesses from ASHRAE supported including Standard 55. Stephen Hammerling, ASHRAE’s senior manager for standards, said the standard describes “specific requirements and methods for achieving satisfactory thermal conditions” and urged the committee to adopt an engineering‑based approach rather than a single‑number rule.
Public testimony from housing advocates and renters’ groups stressed equity. Tim Hung of the Montgomery County Renters Alliance and other tenant witnesses said renters—especially children, the elderly and low‑income households—are at elevated heat risk and that access to cooling should not be a luxury.
Industry and landlord groups opposed the bill as drafted or urged changes. The Apartment and Office Building Association and the Maryland Building Industry Association said ASHRAE technical language is intended for HVAC professionals and questioned whether it should be embedded in statute; they urged the committee to consider existing local ordinances (Montgomery and Prince George’s counties) as models and to avoid imposing standards that would retroactively trigger costly upgrades. Witnesses also sought clarity on whether window units would satisfy the standard if they can meet the ASHRAE‑based target.
Committee members pressed ASHRAE and advocates about how compliance would be measured in practice; ASHRAE representatives said the standard sets target indoor conditions and that compliance could be verified by measuring indoor temperature in each dwelling unit. Lawmakers asked about cost, triggers for applicability (new construction vs routine maintenance), and interaction with local ordinances; sponsor and stakeholders said they expect further drafting work in subcommittee before a final vote.
No formal vote was taken in the hearing.
