Proposed changes to the Massachusetts Sanitary Code have local landlords running hot.

They claim they were not consulted prior to the announcement of those changes, and that the changes are unclear and an unfair burden on rental property owners.

Few people are familiar with the significance or contents of the state sanitary code, but a single violation of this code entitles tenants to withhold rent from landlords until the violation has been remedied. The older the property, the more likely a violation exists, and landlords fear tenants will use some of the proposed changes to unfairly avoid paying rent.

Proposed changes would muddle the language of the regulations and make it more difficult to comply, said Douglas Quattrochi, executive director of MassLandlords.

“We found out about the proposed changes late in the process and submitted our 11-page testimony at 8 p.m. [on Oct. 6], three hours after the 5 p.m. cutoff,” he said. “I would not be surprised if they completely ignored our input because we were late. I don’t think they’re interested in our input, though I hope I’m wrong. We’d like to be their go-to organization in the industry. There’s a lot of conversation that goes on behind the scenes; we want to be a resource for public officials.”

MassLandlords’ testimony is not among the public testimonies posted on the Department of Public Health’s website, and they are not the only organization to allege exclusion from or insufficient inclusion in the process.

“The Small Property Owners Association, the Greater Boston Real Estate Board and MassLandlords learned about the revisions and hearings by informal channels, just days before the hearing in Boston, hardly time to read 80 changes and evaluate them,” Skip Schloming, former director of the Small Property Owners Association, wrote in his testimony.

Emails seeking comment from tenants’ rights group the Boston Tenants Coalition bounced back and phone calls were not returned.

Through a spokeswoman, the Department of Public Health declined to be interviewed, but did send the following emailed statement:

“The proposed updates and improvements to the state sanitary code were part of the Department of Public Health’s regulatory review process required by the Governor’s Executive Order 562 and were not initiated by tenant complaints. As with any proposed regulatory change, the department held public hearings and established a public comment period. DPH solicited comments from property owner associations, tenant associations, local health organizations, legal service organizations and state agencies during three public hearings held in Boston, Worcester and Northampton in September and October. The public comment period commenced June 22 and ended Oct. 6. Once a final draft of the proposed regulatory changes is completed, DPH will present the proposed regulations to its Public Health Council for final approval. The proposed changes clarify regulatory requirements, especially for local health authorities who enforce these minimums standards.”

Quattrochi pointed out the sanitary code is defined by the state as “the minimum standards of fitness for human habitation,” but this recent round of changes goes far beyond that scope. As an example, he pointed to the change that would require “a smooth, nonabsorbent, easily cleanable” backsplash extending 24 inches above the countertop for bathroom and kitchen sinks, something even most high-end single-family homes don’t have.

“It’s been said that the state wants Cadillac homes for Chevrolet people,” he said. “It’s a really hard conversation to have. It’s already the case that most rental properties don’t satisfy the sanitary code. Most landlords are good people who try to comply. Look at the age of the housing stock in this state. The slightest wiggle in an electrical outlet is a violation and therefore rent is not owed.”

Another example is a proposal to require a mechanical fan vented to the exterior in bathrooms, even if there is an exterior window in the room. This requirement was added to the building code in the last decade or so, but the current sanitary code requires a mechanical vent fan only in bathrooms which lack an exterior window.

“It makes good sense to have that in the building code,” Quattrochi said. “Climate change is real, it’s having an impact. We’re seeing an increase in air quality issues. But this is the kind of thing where there ought to be a grandfathering of older units where installing vents can be impractical.”

Pest management was another new requirement that MassLandlords and many others who submitted public comment took issue with. Buildings with four or more units would have to implement and maintain an “Integrated Pest Management” plan that consists of at least three annual inspections, eliminates the point of entry for pests, ensure the residence is clean and sanitary to minimize attraction to pests, tell occupants what their role in pest management is and monitor the presence of pests.

On top of that, the owner must maintain a record documenting inspection results, occupant complaint, the date, location, product name and name of people applying pesticides as well as any modifications to the original IPM plan. The proposed regulation doesn’t say whether an owner can do this themselves or not, but only a licensed pesticide applicator can lawfully apply pesticides.

“This adds a lot to the list of things an owner has to do already and you’ve got the issue of the unit count, which is arbitrary,” Quattrochi said. “The building I live in has a fieldstone foundation and a mouse problem and it would be exempt from this requirement. If we had been part of the conversation, we’d have made sure it doesn’t burden people who don’t have a pest problem, and we’d help them clearly define what the standards are.”

The proposed changes to the Sanitary Code and public comments can be viewed on the state’s website.