BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING
Senator Jim Beall, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 349 Hearing Date: 6/23/2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Gonzalez |
|----------+------------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |6/17/2015 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |Yes |Fiscal: |No |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Alison Dinmore |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Common interest developments: property use and
maintenance
DIGEST: This bill voids, or makes unenforceable, any provision
of a common interest development (CID) governing document or
architectural or landscaping guidelines or policies that
prohibit the use of artificial turf or any other synthetic
surface that resembles grass.
ANALYSIS:
A CID is a form of real estate in which each homeowner has an
exclusive interest in a unit or lot and a shared or undivided
interest in common-area property. Condominiums, planned unit
developments, stock cooperatives, community apartments, and many
resident-owned mobilehome parks all fall under the umbrella of
common interest developments. CIDs are governed by a homeowners
association (HOA). The Davis-Stirling Common Interest
Development Act provides the legal framework under which CIDs
are established and operate. In addition to the requirements of
the act, each CID is governed according to the recorded
declarations, bylaws, and operating rules of the association,
collectively referred to as the governing documents.
The Davis-Stirling Act provides that the covenants and
restrictions in the declaration are "enforceable equitable
servitudes, unless unreasonable." In Narhstedt v. Lakeside
Village (1994), the United States Supreme Court interpreted this
provision to mean that CID governing documents "should be
AB 349 (Gonzalez) Page 2 of ?
enforced unless they are wholly arbitrary, violate a
fundamentally public policy, or impose a burden on the use of
affected land that far outweighs any benefit."
Existing law:
1)Voids, or makes unenforceable, any provision of a CID
governing document or architectural or landscaping guidelines
or policies that:
a) Prohibit, or include conditions that have the effect of
prohibiting, the use of low water-using plants as a group
or as a replacement of existing turf;
b) Restrict compliance with a water-efficient landscape
ordinance adopted by a local government; or
c) Prohibit compliance with any regulation or restriction
on the use of water due to severe water shortage.
2)Permits an HOA to apply landscaping rules in the governing
documents, so long as the rules conform with the provisions in
1), above.
This urgency bill:
1)Voids, or makes unenforceable, any provision of a CID
governing document or architectural or landscaping guidelines
or policies that prohibit the use of artificial turf or any
other synthetic surface that resembles grass.
2)Prohibits a CID from requiring a homeowner to reverse or
remove water-efficient landscaping measures upon the
conclusion of a state of emergency due to drought, that were
installed during that state of emergency.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose of the bill. According to the author, this year was
the lowest snowpack ever recorded, and California is in the
fourth year of a historic, prolonged, and potentially
devastating drought. Governor Brown issued an Executive Order
on April 1, 2015, which, for the first time ever in California
history, directs the State Water Resources Control Board to
implement mandatory water reductions across the state to
reduce water usage by 25%. Given the extent of this drought
situation, Californians should explore every option they have
to improve their water efficiency. According to the
AB 349 (Gonzalez) Page 3 of ?
Department of Water Resources, landscape irrigation represents
43% of urban water use, and the installation of artificial
turf or synthetic grass, in lieu of conventional lawns and
landscapes, can directly reduce outdoor water use to help meet
the Governor's mandated 25% statewide water use reduction.
Today, Californians may elect to install artificial turf or
synthetic grass in their single-family residential landscapes.
Many homeowners within CIDs, however, have complained that
their HOAs have stymied their freedom to conserve through
synthetic turf installation by promulgating unreasonable
restrictions, including exorbitant fines for homeowners who
choose to replace their lawns.
2)Permitting artificial grass. This bill would prohibit an HOA
from preventing a homeowner from installing artificial turf or
synthetic grass. Existing law allows an HOA to apply
landscaping rules that are included in the governing
documents, so long as those rules do not prohibit or have the
effect of prohibiting the use of low-water using plants or
prevent a homeowner from complying with a local
water-efficient landscaping ordinance. This bill would extend
those protections to artificial turf or grass. This means an
HOA may establish reasonable restrictions about the type of
artificial grass that a homeowner may use so long as those
restrictions do not, in effect, prevent a homeowner from
installing artificial grass.
3)If at first you don't succeed. In 2011, Governor Brown vetoed
SB 759 (Lieu), which contained identical language as this
bill. The Governor's veto message stated:
The decision about choosing synthetic turf instead of natural
vegetation should be left to individual homeowners associations,
not mandated by state law. For this reason, I am returning this
bill.
Governor Schwarzenegger also vetoed AB 1793 (Saldana), also
containing identical language to this bill, in 2010. The
Governor's veto message stated:
CIDs provide a system of self-governance through a
community association, responsible for managing,
maintaining, and repairing the common areas, and have the
authority to enforce special rules. Decisions such as these
AB 349 (Gonzalez) Page 4 of ?
regarding the use of artificial turf can be made by the
homeowners and amended into their governing documents.
4)Opposition. The Educational Community for Homeowners (ECHO)
opposes this bill because decisions made regarding landscaping
in CIDs is, and should continue to be, made by the community
and their elected board of directors. ECHO therefore resists
attempts by the state to legislate a "one-size-fits-all"
approach to CID governance. Additionally, ECHO is concerned
about possible unknown health impacts that could be caused by
synthetic turf.
5)Double-referral. The Rules Committee has referred this bill to
both this committee and the Judiciary Committee.
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 73-3
HC&D: 7-0
Related Legislation:
SB 759 (Lieu, Statutes of 2011) - would have voided, or made
unenforceable, any provision of a CID governing document or
architectural or landscaping guidelines or policies that
prohibit the use of artificial turf or any other synthetic
surface that resembles grass. This bill was vetoed by Governor
Brown.
AB 1793 (Saldana, Statutes of 2010) - would have voided, or made
unenforceable, any provision of a CID governing document or
architectural or landscaping guidelines or policies that
prohibit the use of artificial turf or any other synthetic
surface that resembles grass. This bill was vetoed by Governor
Schwarzenegger.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday,
June 17, 2015.)
SUPPORT:
AB 349 (Gonzalez) Page 5 of ?
San Diego Water Authority (sponsor)
California Association of Realtors
California Municipal Communities Association
California Landscape Contractors Association (CLCA)
Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
San Diego Coastkeeper
OPPOSITION:
Educational Community for Homeowners
-- END --