SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE
Senator Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No:
Author:
Version:
Consultant:
AB 1164
Gatto
6/30/15
Weinberger
Hearing Date:
Tax Levy:
Fiscal:
7/8/15
No
Yes
WATER CONSERVATION AND LOCAL ORDINANCES (URGENCY)
Prohibits cities and counties from enacting and enforcing any ban on the installation of synthetic
grass or artificial turf on residential property.
Background and Existing Law
On January 17, 2014, pursuant to his powers under state law, including the California
Emergency Services Act, Governor Brown issued a proclamation of a state of emergency due to
drought conditions. On April 1, 2015, Governor Brown issued an executive order that, among its
many provisions intended to improve government response to the drought and promote water
conservation:
 Directs the State Water Resources Control Board to impose restrictions to achieve a
statewide 25% reduction in potable urban water usage through February 28, 2016, which
will require water suppliers to California's cities and towns to reduce usage as compared
to the amount used in 2013.
 Directs the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to lead a statewide initiative, in
partnership with local agencies, to collectively replace 50 million square feet of lawns
and ornamental turf with drought tolerant landscapes.
In response to the Governor’s executive order, DWR is in the process of establishing a program
to reduce lawn irrigation by replacing residential turf and promoting low water-use landscapes.
The police power is the inherent authority of sovereign governments to regulate private behavior,
consistent with constitutional rights and procedures. The California Constitution delegates the
police power to cities and counties to "make and enforce within [their] limits all local, police,
sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws" (Article XI,
Section 7). Courts have interpreted the police power as including the power to regulate the
physical of appearance of the environment within a community, including ordinances that
enforce aesthetic standards. Exercising their authority under the police power, some California
local governments have adopted ordinances that ban residents from using synthetic grass or
artificial turf to replace real grass lawns.
Water conservation advocates want the Legislature to invalidate local prohibitions against
artificial turf and provide funding to DWR for programs to implement the Governor’s executive
order.
AB 1164 (Gatto) 6/30/15
Page 2 of 3
Proposed Law
Assembly Bill 1164 prohibits a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county, from
enacting any ordinance or regulation, or enforcing any existing ordinance or regulation, that
prohibits the installation of synthetic grass or artificial turf on residential property.
AB 1164 makes a continuing appropriation of $300 million from the General Fund to the
Department of Water Resources to be expended in equal shares of $100 million for each of the
2015–16, 2016–17, and 2017–18 fiscal years to provide matching funds to any city, county, city
and county, public water agency, or private water agency to provide incentives to residents to
replace water inefficient landscaping with drought tolerant landscaping.
State Revenue Impact
No estimate.
Comments
1. Purpose of the bill. According to the Department of Water Resources, landscape irrigation
represents 43 percent of urban water use. Installing synthetic grass or artificial turf to replace
conventional lawns can directly reduce outdoor water use to help meet statewide water use
reduction goals. California’s prolonged drought requires that no possible water-savings options
should remain unavailable to the state’s residents. AB 1146 provides an urgent response to
emergency drought conditions by allowing property owners throughout the state to install watersaving synthetic grass and by supporting DWR’s programs to promote water-conserving
landscapes.
2. Middle ground? The severe drought conditions confronting California make it difficult to
justify local ordinances that completely prohibit a resident from installing water-conserving
synthetic turf. However, health concerns and aesthetic preferences may warrant some local
regulation of what types of turf that residents are allowed to install. The Committee may wish to
consider amending AB 1164 to allow local ordinances that prohibit specific types of turf that
don’t meet specified health or aesthetic standards, as long as those local prohibitions don’t
effectively ban the use of any type of synthetic turf within a local jurisdiction.
3. Related legislation. AB 349 (Gonzalez, 2015) would void, or make unenforceable, any
provision of a common interest development’s governing document or architectural or
landscaping guidelines or policies that prohibit the use of artificial turf or any other synthetic
surface that resembles grass. AB 349 is currently awaiting a hearing in the Senate Judiciary
Committee. In 2011, Governor Brown vetoed SB 759 (Lieu), which contained language
identical to AB 349. The Governor’s veto message stated:
Under this bill, homeowners associations that govern Common Interest Developments would
be forced to approve the installation of Astro Turf. 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.
4. Charter cities. The California Constitution allows cities that adopt charters to control their
own “municipal affairs.” In all other matters, charter cities must follow the general, statewide
laws. Because the Constitution doesn’t define “municipal affairs,” the courts determine whether
AB 1164 (Gatto) 6/30/15
Page 3 of 3
a topic is a municipal affair or whether it’s an issue of statewide concern. AB 1164 says that it
applies to all cities, including charter cities. To support this assertion, the bill includes a
legislative finding and declaration that the bill's provisions are a matter of statewide concern
because allowing property owners to install synthetic grass or artificial turf will advance the
state’s long-water conservation goals in response to prolonged drought conditions.
5. Urgency. Regular statutes take effect on January 1 following their enactment; bills passed in
2015 take effect on January 1, 2016. The California Constitution allows bills with urgency
clauses to take effect immediately if they're needed for the public peace, health, and safety. AB
1164 contains an urgency clause declaring that it is necessary for its provisions to go into effect
immediately to enable California residents to replace water inefficient landscaping with drought
tolerant landscaping as quickly as possible.
6. Double-referred. The Senate Rules Committee has ordered a double-referral of AB 1164 -first to the Senate Governance & Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over bills relating to
local governments’ police powers, and then to the Senate Natural Resource & Water Committee,
which has jurisdiction over bills relating to the Department of Water Resources’ programs to
replace residential turf and promote drought-tolerant landscaping.
7. Gut-and-amend. As passed by the Assembly, AB 1164 contained provisions relating to the
evaluation and rating of the overall quality of the state highway system. The Senate Governance
& Finance Committee never heard that version of the bill. The June 22 amendments deleted AB
1164's contents and inserted the current language relating to local agencies’ synthetic turf
ordinances and DWR’s drought-tolerant landscaping programs.
Assembly Actions
Not relevant to the June 30, 2015 version of the bill.
Support and Opposition (7/2/15)
Support: American Planning Association; California Association of Realtors; Metropolitan
Water District of Southern California; Three Valleys Municipal Water District.
Opposition: Unknown.
-- END --