California · Davis-Stirling Act

The lawn you are allowed to let die.

California's drought law reaches inside the CC&Rs twice: once to void the covenants that require a green lawn, and once to stop the fine that would otherwise arrive when a member obeys a water restriction instead.

Four kinds of covenant that are simply void

§ 4735(a) opens notwithstanding any other law and reaches further than the declaration: a provision of the governing documents or of architectural or landscaping guidelines or policies is void and unenforceable if it does any of the following —

1. Prohibits, or imposes conditions that have the effect of prohibiting, the use of low water-using plants as a group or as a replacement for existing turf.
2. Prohibits, or has the effect of prohibiting, artificial turf or any other synthetic surface resembling grass.
3. Has the effect of prohibiting or restricting compliance with a water-efficient landscape ordinance adopted under Government Code § 65595(c).
4. Has the effect of prohibiting or restricting compliance with any water-use restriction adopted under Water Code § 353 or § 375.

Note what the first two protect. Not a single drought-tolerant shrub, but low water-using plants as a group, and expressly as a replacement for existing turf — which is the whole lawn-conversion case. And artificial turf is named in its own paragraph, because that was the covenant associations most often pointed to.

§ 4735(b) leaves the rest of the landscaping rules standing, to the extent they fully conform with subdivision (a). The association still has a rulebook; it no longer has those four provisions in it.

There is one exception, in § 4735(d), and it is narrow: the protection does not apply to an owner who receives recycled water from a retail water supplier and fails to use it for landscape irrigation. Having an alternative supply and not using it is different from conserving.

And you do not have to put it back

§ 4735(e) is one sentence and it is the one owners most often do not know about. An owner who installed water-efficient landscaping measures in response to a declared state of emergency shall not be required to reverse or remove them when the emergency ends.

So the conversion is permanent at the owner's option. An association sending letters after a drought lifts, asking for the turf back, is asking for something the statute says it may not require.

Pressure washing

§ 4736(a): a provision of the governing documents is void and unenforceable if it requires pressure washing the exterior of a separate interest, or of any exclusive use common area appurtenant to it, during a state or local government declared drought emergency.

§ 4736(b) defines the term so the provision cannot be argued around: the use of a high-pressure sprayer or hose and potable water to remove loose paint, mould, grime, dust, mud and dirt from surfaces and objects — buildings, vehicles and concrete are named. Potable water is the hinge. A requirement met with recycled or non-potable water is not what this section voids.