Why this lands on associations anyway

The mismatch is structural. The ordinance makes the owner-as-landlord responsible for the indoor temperature. But in a condominium, the exterior wall, the window, the roofline and the balcony — the surfaces where a condenser, a mini-split line set or a window unit has to go — are typically common area or exclusive use common area under the association's architectural control.

So a member acquires a legal obligation with a deadline they do not control, to be discharged using property they do not control, from a board with no obligation under the ordinance at all.

The tenant provision creates a second path with no approval step. A tenant may install portable or non-mechanical cooling after notifying the landlord. Nothing in that provision routes through the association, and portable units frequently vent through a window — which is an alteration question for the association even where it is not one for the tenancy.

Window-vented portable units are likely to appear in 2027 without an architectural application, because the ordinance gives the tenant a route that does not contemplate one.

The bill that would resolve most of this

AB 1684 sits on the Governor's desk and would add Civil Code section 4738, voiding any governing document, covenant, deed or contract provision restricting the installation, upgrade, replacement or use of a cooling system meeting all applicable state and local building codes.

It would bar associations from charging fees for installation or use, mandating a particular system or contractor, claiming rebates, or requiring removal of an existing system — with a civil penalty of up to $2,000 plus actual damages and attorney's fees to a prevailing member. Restrictions survive only where installation would violate law or a required permit is denied.

Associations could still require a licensed contractor where work affects the common area, expressly excluding portable units, window units, swamp coolers, and systems not requiring a permit.

It passed the Senate 38–0 and the Assembly concurred 76–0. It was presented to the Governor on August 27, 2026, and he must act by September 30. It is not law.

If signed, the ordinary operative date is January 1, 2027 — the same month county enforcement begins. Boards in unincorporated Los Angeles County would find their ability to refuse cooling equipment removed at almost exactly the moment their members' obligation to install it starts.

SB 222 would separately add section 4737 covering heat pump HVAC systems and heat pump water heaters, with its own exception structure. A heat pump used for cooling could fall within both.

Where boards stand while this is unresolved

Find out whether the ordinance reaches your community. It applies in unincorporated county territory and in cities that adopt the County Code. Many communities with Los Angeles mailing addresses are in neither.

Decide where equipment goes before applications arrive. Neither the ordinance nor AB 1684 creates a placement right or says where a condenser may sit. That gap is the association's to fill, and it is better filled by a standard adopted in advance than by a series of individual decisions under time pressure.

Do not amend the governing documents yet. Section 4738 would operate on the documents whether or not they are amended. The useful work now is a placement and installation standard; the covenant question resolves itself on September 30.

Look at the electrical capacity. A wave of simultaneous mechanical cooling installations in an older condominium building is a load question before it is an aesthetic one, and that answer takes an engineer and lead time. It is also a reserve and capital planning item if the building's service needs upgrading.

What to watch next

The Governor's decision on AB 1684 and SB 222 by September 30, and then whether individual cities within the county adopt the County Code provision — which is what determines how wide the 2027 obligation actually runs.