BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: Ab 1793
SENATOR ALAN LOWENTHAL, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: salda?a
VERSION: 4/20/10
Analysis by: Mark Stivers FISCAL: no
Hearing date: June 15, 2010
SUBJECT:
Common interest developments: artificial turf
DESCRIPTION:
This bill prohibits a common interest development from enforcing
any provision of its governing documents that prohibits or has
the effect of prohibiting the use of artificial turf or any
other synthetic surface that resembles grass.
ANALYSIS:
A common-interest development (CID) is a form of real estate
where 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 homeowner's association (HOA). The
Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act provides the
legal framework under which common interest developments 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 Nahrstedt v. Lakeside
Village (1994), the California Supreme Court interpreted this
provision to mean that CID governing documents "should be
enforced unless they are wholly arbitrary, violate a fundamental
AB 1793 (SALDANA) Page 2
public policy, or impose a burden on the use of affected land
that far outweighs any benefit."
The Davis-Stirling Act also provides that a provision of the
governing documents is void and unenforceable if it prohibits or
has the effect of prohibiting 1) the use of low water-using
plants as a group, 2) compliance with a local government's
water-efficient landscape ordinance, or 3) compliance with
a local government's regulation or restriction on the use of
water. A CID may enforce landscaping rules contained in its
governing documents to the extent that they fully conform with
these requirements.
This bill further prohibits a CID from enforcing any provision
of its governing documents that prohibits or has the effect of
prohibiting the use of artificial turf or any other synthetic
surface that resembles grass. A CID may enforce landscaping
rules contained in its governing documents that establish design
standards and quality standards for the installation of such
surfaces to the extent that they fully comply with this
requirement.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose of the bill . According to the sponsor, the San Diego
County Water Authority, landscape irrigation makes up 70% of
the average household water use. In the San Diego region,
grass lawns alone use up to 46 gallons of water per square
foot per year. The use of artificial turf in landscaping is
one method of reducing water consumption while still allowing
property owners to incorporate expanses of green into their
landscaping.
In 2009, the legislature enacted SBX7 7 (Steinberg), Chapter 4
of the Seventh Extraordinary Session, requiring that
California reduce water consumption by 20% per capita by the
year 2020. According to the author, water suppliers are
committed to meet this target. The purpose of this bill is to
expand the available means of conserving water by removing
impediments to the use of artificial turf and landscaping in
CIDs.
2.Building on current law . Current law voids CID landscaping
rules that prohibit the use of low water-using plants as a
group or compliance with a local government's water-efficient
landscape ordinance. Because artificial turf is not a plant
AB 1793 (SALDANA) Page 3
per se and local ordinances do not specifically require
artificial turf, the law does not protect a homeowner's use of
artificial turf. This bill expands the protections of current
law that encourage water-efficient landscaping.
3.Arguments in opposition . Opponents support the use of
water-efficient plants in CIDs but believe this bill goes too
far by prohibiting restrictions on the use of artificial turf.
The bill does not take into account the desires and aesthetic
preferences of the community. Opponents believe that these
decisions are better left to a development's board of
directors or even to a vote of the membership itself.
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 69-1
HCD: 7-0
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on
Wednesday,
June 9, 2010)
SUPPORT: San Diego County Water Authority (sponsor)
Association of California Water Agencies
Association of Synthetic Grass Installers
Cucamonga Valley Water District
East Bay Municipal Utility District
El Dorado Irrigation District
Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California
Olivehain Municipal Water District
One individual
OPPOSED: Cordova Homeowners Association
Executive Council of Homeowners
Sun City Palm Desert
Sun City Roseville Community Association
56 individuals