HOA HELL,™ a groundbreaking book for California homeowners by Michael B. Kushner

Order Now
CALL US TODAY (949) 767-3910

Drought-Resistant Landscaping & California HOAs: Your Legal Rights Explained

by | HOAs, Real Estate

CALIFORNIA HOA RESTRICTIONS ON DROUGHT-RESISTANT LANDSCAPING

OVERVIEW

Civil Code section 4735 protects the rights of California homeowners to install drought-resistant landscaping. But far too many HOAs either don’t know that or don’t care. And while the law was designed to curb aesthetic overreach and support responsible water use, far too many boards continue to violate the law blocking homeowners from planting drought-resistant landscaping while others actually try to pressure homeowners to remove already-approved grass, flowers, or shrubs. And when water restrictions hit, the confusion only gets worse.

This confusion doesn’t just come from rogue boards. Many HOAs rely on outdated governing documents (passed prior to the passage of Civil Code § 4735), and many HOA boards rely on ignorant managers who don’t understand the law. The statute itself draws a bright line: HOAs can’t prohibit water-efficient landscaping based on aesthetics. But enforcement remains wildly inconsistent, and most homeowners don’t realize how much legal protection they actually have.

This article breaks down what Civil Code section 4735 actually requires, what your HOA can and can’t do under California law, and how to push back effectively when your board overreaches. You’ll learn how to identify when your HOA is crossing the line, how to demand compliance, and how to protect your rights before the dispute turns into a fine (or worse, a lawsuit). This article is based on a full-length episode of my HOA HELL podcast, which you can watch by clicking here.

WHAT CIVIL CODE § 4735 ACTUALLY SAYS, AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR YOU

California Civil Code section 4735 protects your right to conserve water by planting drought-tolerant landscaping. The statute doesn’t merely “encourage” water-wise design. It explicitly prohibits HOAs from banning it based on aesthetic grounds. This is a massive departure from the powers granted to HOAs in their governing documents and in other parts of the Davis-Stirling Act (where the business judgment rule normally grants HOA boards tremendous leeway in establishing the aesthetic standard for their communities).

Under Civil Code section 4735, your HOA cannot:

  • Prohibit low-water landscaping choices. That includes planting native or water-wise species, artificial turf, or using gravel or bark, and it applies even if the new landscaping changes the visual appearance of your yard.
  • Fine you for letting your lawn die during a declared drought emergency. If a state or local mandate restricts watering, and your lawn turns brown, the HOA can’t penalize you for complying with that mandate.
  • Require you to undo drought-resistant changes after the emergency ends. If you replaced your lawn or installed hardscape features during a drought, the HOA has no legal right to demand that you reverse those improvements once watering restrictions are lifted.

These protections apply even if your neighbors complain or your board dislikes the appearance. The law prioritizes water conservation over uniform aesthetics. That doesn’t mean homeowners can plant anything, anywhere, without permission. HOAs can still require architectural approval for visible changes. But they cannot flatly deny your proposal just because they don’t like the look of succulents, gravel, or artificial turf.

Even more importantly, Civil Code section 4735 bars HOAs from punishing you for not watering your lawn if you’re complying with a government-imposed drought mandate. If the state or city limits irrigation, your HOA can’t fine you because your lawn turned brown. They can’t require you to keep it green if doing so violates an official water restriction.

WHERE HOAS GET IT WRONG, AND WHY HOMEOWNERS PAY THE PRICE

Civil Code section 4735 may be clear on paper, but in practice, far too many HOAs still get it wrong. Some boards outright ignore the statute. Others twist its meaning, treating it as a mandate to require water-efficient landscaping, not a protection that prevents aesthetic restrictions. In practice, most enforcement problems fall into one of two categories: boards that go too far and boards that don’t go far enough.

Boards That Go Too Far

These are the HOAs that treat 4735 as a green light to rewrite the community’s entire landscaping playbook. They cite public policy. They claim aesthetic discretion. They pretend to be environmental stewards. But in reality, they’re using the statute to force changes that it never authorized.

Along those lines, some HOAs have:

  • Demanded that homeowners tear out previously approved landscaping and replace it with drought-tolerant alternatives even when there’s no drought emergency in effect.
  • Required artificial turf or bark mulch in front yards, regardless of whether the original landscaping was code-compliant and well-maintained.
  • Adopted rules that mandate specific plant ratios (e.g., “no more than 10% turf”) with no support in the CC&Rs or other governing documents.

In each of those cases, the HOA misunderstood and overstepped its authority. Civil Code section 4735 allows voluntary water-conscious landscaping. It does not authorize HOAs to require it. Boards cannot unilaterally impose sweeping mandates that force aesthetic conformity under the guise of environmental stewardship, unless they’ve been given clear authority to do so in their governing documents—and even then, the rule must pass legal muster under Civil Code section 4350 (e.g., it must be reasonable, adopted properly, and consistent with other laws).

Let’s focus on that last one for a second. A blanket mandate is especially likely to fail the “reasonableness” test if it applies retroactively. Forcing a homeowner to remove previously approved landscaping, often installed at great expense, simply because the board wants to promote drought tolerance will rarely be upheld. But a rule that applies only to future projects or new installations is much more likely to pass legal scrutiny. We’ve seen associations in hot, dry areas like Palm Springs, adopt rules that require artificial turf or desert-style plantings for new landscaping changes, and those rules are generally enforceable. What makes them reasonable is that they don’t penalize homeowners who made prior, board-approved investments. They simply set a clear standard going forward. And, of course, their governing documents authorized them to impose such environmental mandates.

Boards That Don’t Go Far Enough

Some HOAs go in the opposite direction. They continue to deny low-water landscaping requests based on purely aesthetic standards. They reject artificial turf because it “doesn’t match the neighborhood.” They tell homeowners to water their lawns, despite active state or city conservation mandates, and then fine them when the grass turns brown.

These boards either don’t understand 4735 or assume it doesn’t apply to their community. And that ignorance creates serious legal risk. If an HOA imposes penalties that violate the statute, those penalties are going to be unenforceable. And if the dispute escalates to litigation, the HOA may be on the hook for the homeowner’s attorneys’ fees under Civil Code section 5975.

HOW TO SPOT AND CHALLENGE ILLEGAL LANDSCAPING RULES

If your HOA tries to block drought-resistant landscaping or penalize you for reducing your water use, your first step is to determine whether the board is acting within its legal authority. Civil Code section 4735 gives homeowners a powerful legal foundation—but to enforce that right, you need to understand what makes a landscaping rule valid versus unenforceable.

Start by reviewing your HOA’s governing documents—especially the CC&Rs, Rules and Regulations, and Architectural Guidelines. These documents outline what the HOA can and cannot regulate. If there’s no mention of water conservation, drought-tolerant landscaping, or aesthetic guidelines that specifically address plantings or turf, the board likely lacks the authority to impose rigid mandates.

But even if those documents do contain landscaping standards, they still must comply with state law. A rule or restriction that violates Civil Code section 4735 is invalid—even if it appears in your HOA’s official documents.

Here are some questions you should ask:

  • Does the rule prohibit artificial turf or native plantings? If yes, it violates section 4735.
  • Does the rule impose a fine or other penalty for letting your lawn die during a drought emergency? If yes, it violates section 4735.
  • Did your HOA adopt the rule without proper notice or member input? If it wasn’t enacted in compliance with Civil Code section 4350, for example, it may be invalid regardless of content.
  • Does the rule require you to remove previously approved landscaping? Unless you installed it without approval, it most likely violates Civil Code section 4350.

If any of these apply to your situation, your next step is to push back—strategically, and in writing.

WHAT TO DO IF YOUR HOA OVERSTEPS

If your HOA board tries to block or punish lawful drought-resistant landscaping, don’t just give up—or worse, comply with an illegal demand. Instead, take the following steps to challenge the board’s actions and protect your rights.

  1. Demand specific authority. Demand that the board cite the exact section of the CC&Rs, Rules, or other governing documents that explicitly authorizes their position. Ask for it in writing. If they can’t point to it, their rule likely doesn’t have legal backing.
  2. Demand compliance with Civil Code sections 4735 and 4350. In your written response, cite both statutes. Explain why the HOA’s policy violates state law—either because it bans water-wise landscaping outright, imposes aesthetic-based restrictions, penalizes you for following a state or local watering mandate, or requires you to tear out (at your own expense) previously approved landscaping in favor of drought-resistant landscaping.
  3. Request Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR). If you think it will accomplish anything, and if the HOA refuses to budge, you can trigger a free, mandatory meeting with one or more board members by requesting IDR under Civil Code section 5910. The HOA must comply if you request it in writing, and they cannot charge you for it.
  4. If none of that works, call us at MBK CHAPMAN. We represent homeowners throughout California in disputes just like these, and we’ll hold your HOA accountable.

Even if you choose not to take legal action right away, stay professional and strategic in all your communications. Avoid personal attacks, threats, or inflammatory language. Assume every email and letter will one day be read in open court.

When it comes to HOA disputes, especially those involving environmental mandates, timing and documentation are everything. Following the steps above gives you the best chance of resolving the issue without escalating it, but if escalation becomes necessary, you’ll be ready.

CONCLUDING THOUGHT

California Civil Code section 4735 was meant to protect homeowners during times of drought. But too many HOAs are using it (or ignoring it) to push agendas, enforce unreasonable demands, or punish homeowners who are simply trying to follow the law.

If your HOA tries to force you to rip out existing landscaping, denies your request to install water-wise features, or fines you for letting your lawn turn brown during a water emergency, there’s a good chance they’re breaking the law. The Davis-Stirling Act gives you clear rights, but it’s up to you to assert them.

HOA boards don’t get to act as enforcers of state policy unless their governing documents explicitly give them that power, and even then, their actions must still comply with California law. No amount of environmental advocacy or aesthetic preference allows your board to disregard Civil Code section 4735’s reasonableness requirement.

If you’re being pressured, threatened, or fined by your HOA over landscaping choices that conserve water, don’t let it slide. Call us at MBK CHAPMAN, and we’ll set your HOA straight.