California · Davis-Stirling Act

Charging an electric car in a community that would rather you did not.

Two sections, drafted to look like twins. Both void any restriction that effectively prohibits a charging station, both give the association 60 days before silence becomes approval, and both allow "reasonable restrictions" — which they then define in opposite ways.

§ 4745(a) reaches any covenant, condition or restriction in a deed or other instrument of transfer, and any provision of a governing document, that effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts the installation or use of a charging station within an owner's unit or in a designated parking space — a deeded space, a space in the owner's exclusive use common area, or one specifically designated for that owner. Such a provision is void and unenforceable. So is anything else in the documents that conflicts with the section.

§ 4745.1(a) does the same for an EV-dedicated TOU meter — a second electric meter, supplied and installed by the utility, devoted only to vehicle charging and tracking the time of use. It is the thing that lets you buy charging electricity at the overnight rate instead of the household one, and § 4745.1(d) folds the wiring and conduit that connect it to the charger into the protection too, whoever installs them.

"Reasonable restrictions" means two different things

Both sections save provisions that impose reasonable restrictions, and both declare it the policy of the state to promote and encourage charging and remove obstacles to it. Then the definitions part company, and the difference decides most real disputes.

1. § 4745Restrictions that do not significantly increase the cost of the station, or significantly decrease its efficiency or specified performance — § 4745(b)(2). A test of effects, and a short one. Aesthetics appears nowhere in it.
2. § 4745.1Restrictions based upon space, aesthetics, structural integrity, and equal access for all homeowners — but the association shall attempt to find a reasonable way to accommodate the request, unless it would have to spend money to do so — § 4745.1(b)(2). A list of permitted grounds, plus a duty to try.

So an architectural committee refusing a charger because the unit will look wrong has reached for a ground its own section does not offer. Refusing a meter on that ground is available to it — and comes attached to an obligation to look for a way to say yes.

Note what is deemed, because the Act now has two of these clocks and they do different things. Here, silence approves the application outright. On a disaster reconstruction, § 4766(b)(3) says that missing the 30-day deadline makes the application complete — which only starts the clock on the merits. Approval and completeness are not the same prize.

Where the charger goes decides which rules apply

Inside the unit, or in a space that is already yours

This is the case § 4745(a) protects directly. A deeded space, a space in your exclusive use common area, or one specifically designated for you: the restriction is void and the ordinary approval process in subdivision (e) is what remains.

In the common area or exclusive use common area

§ 4745(f)(1) turns the association's discretion into a condition. The owner must get approval first — and the association shall approve if the owner agrees in writing to four things:

1. Comply with the association's architectural standards for the installation.
2. Engage a licensed contractor.
3. Provide a certificate of insurance within 14 days of approval.
4. Pay both the installation costs and the electricity the station uses.

"Shall approve" is the operative word. Where the owner signs up to all four, approval is not a decision the board gets to make.

In general common area that is not anyone's exclusive use

§ 4745(g) is narrower: a station for one owner's exclusive use may be authorised there only if installing it in that owner's designated parking space is impossible or unreasonably expensive. Where it is, the association enters into a license agreement with the owner for the use of the space, and all of subdivision (f) still applies.

Two provisions open the other direction. § 4745(h) lets the association or the owners install a station in the common area for the use of all members, with terms of use the association develops. And § 4745(i) says in one line that an association may create a new parking space where one did not previously exist to make an installation possible — a power boards are often surprised to learn they have.

The obligations follow the station, not the person

§ 4745(f)(2) binds "the owner and each successive owner". Whoever holds the unit carries the cost of damage to the station, the common area or anyone's separate interest arising from installation, maintenance, repair, removal or replacement; the cost of maintaining, repairing and replacing the station until it is removed, and of restoring the common area afterwards; the electricity; and the duty to disclose the station and these responsibilities to prospective buyers.

The insurance obligation is the one that lapses quietly. § 4745(f)(3) requires a liability policy at all times — whether the station is inside the unit or out in the common area — with the certificate delivered within 14 days of approval and annually thereafter by that owner and each successor. A certificate filed once at installation and never again does not satisfy it.

One exemption, in § 4745(f)(4): no liability policy is required for an existing NEMA standard alternating current power plug. Plugging into the ordinary outlet that is already there is not what this regime is about.

What it costs an association to get this wrong

§ 4745(j): an association that willfully violates the section is liable for actual damages and owes a civil penalty to the applicant of up to $1,000. § 4745(k): in an action by a homeowner to enforce compliance, the prevailing plaintiff is awarded reasonable attorney's fees. § 4745.1(h) and (i) repeat both for the meter.

As with the disaster-rebuild sections, the fee award runs one way. The statute gives it to the prevailing plaintiff, and the plaintiff here is the homeowner.

What changes on 1 January 2027

SB 1267 amends § 4745 in three places, and the direction of travel is towards the association. The full difference is set out under the section text below; in summary it adds use to the list of activities whose damage the owner pays for, makes the installer indemnify or reimburse the association for loss or damage caused by the installation, and declares the Legislature's intent that an association which has complied with the section have civil liability protection for injuries and damages emanating from a charging station it does not own — except where the association was grossly negligent.

Until that date the text above is the text that governs. See SB 1267.