AB 1572 - Prohibition on Nonfunctional Turf Irrigation Starts January 1, 2027
Beginning January 1, 2027, California cities, counties and special districts will be prohibited from using potable water to irrigate nonfunctional turf on properties they own, unless the property is located in a disadvantaged community. With the deadline approaching, local governments should identify affected properties and begin implementing a property-by-property compliance plan.
What Does AB 1572 Prohibit?
AB 1572 prohibits the use of potable water — not the continued existence of turf itself. “Nonfunctional turf” is turf that is not located in a recreational use area or community space. The statute expressly includes turf in street rights-of-way and parking lots, as well as turf behind fencing or other barriers that permanently prevent access for recreation or assembly.
Functional turf may continue to be irrigated with potable water. This includes turf in areas designated to accommodate recreation or community gatherings, such as sports fields, playgrounds, picnic grounds, pet exercise areas and spaces used for civic or social events. The prohibition also does not apply to irrigation with recycled water or to potable water needed to maintain trees and other perennial non-turf plantings or address an immediate health and safety need.
Turf Inventory
Compliance should begin with a coordinated inventory by appropriate personnel. The inventory should identify each property, classify each turf area as functional or nonfunctional, assign the applicable compliance date and identify the corrective action and responsible department. Potential responses include discontinuing potable irrigation, converting the landscape or supplying the area with recycled water.
This review should extend beyond obvious sites such as city halls and administrative buildings. Landscaped medians, parkways, parking lots, utility facilities and vacant parcels may contain nonfunctional turf and can easily be missed if departments rely only on a list of key facilities.
A Public Right-of-Way Is Not Necessarily Publicly Owned
A local government’s property interest in a right-of-way is not always clear. California law generally presumes that an owner whose property is bounded by a street owns to the center of the street, subject to the public easement, unless a deed, subdivision map or dedication document shows otherwise.
Neither maintenance responsibility nor the location of a curb or sidewalk necessarily resolves ownership. If an adjacent homeowner owns the underlying fee and the city holds only an easement, the parkway is not city-owned property merely because it lies within the public right-of-way. Conversely, if the city owns the right-of-way in fee, the January 1, 2027 deadline generally applies even if an adjacent owner maintains the landscaping. Local governments may therefore need to review deeds, tract maps, assessor records and dedication documents before classifying ambiguous parkways.
Disadvantaged-Community Properties Have a Later Deadline
Properties owned by a local government in a disadvantaged community are not subject to the prohibition until January 1, 2031 or until a state funding source is available to fund landscape conversions, whichever is later. A disadvantaged community is a community with an annual median household income below 80 percent of the statewide annual median household income.
This means some local governments may have different deadlines for different properties depending on where each property is located within their jurisdiction. Agencies relying on the exception should use median-household-income data for a census geography that reasonably represents the area containing the property.
Planning Departments Should Build Compliance Into Project Review
Cities and counties should also address AB 1572 prospectively through plan check, landscape review and project approvals. The prohibition applies to other commercial, industrial and institutional properties beginning January 1, 2028, and to covered homeowners’ association common areas beginning January 1, 2029. A project that complies with current requirements may therefore become subject to the prohibition once the applicable deadline takes effect.
When the retail water supplier is independent of the city or county, planning staff should coordinate with the supplier and refer covered landscape and irrigation plans for review under the supplier’s AB 1572 rules. Checklists and conditions of approval should identify the proposed water source and distinguish functional from nonfunctional turf. This will ensure new projects do not install potable irrigation systems for landscapes that cannot lawfully use them.
What Local Governments Should Do Now
Local governments should promptly complete an inventory, investigate uncertain property interests, map disadvantaged-community properties and their applicable deadlines. It is also important to budget, schedule necessary conversions, and coordinate with retail water suppliers. Noncompliance may result in civil liability and penalties.
For questions regarding AB 1572 compliance, contact Nicholaus Norvell, Samuel Johnson and/or William Shepherd.
