There is too much misinformation on both sides of the argument. But yes, you can be fined. A LOT! And they can put you in jail.
I read the entire code, and a person can be fined $1000 initially and up to $10,000 plus $500 per day for not complying with the water conservation code.
Under the guise of preventing a water shortage (which is quite important), the state has given themselves, local water suppliers, and the courts broad powers to fine and even jail residents for using “too much” water in their homes. It is another area that the government is expanding control over citizens.
Should we conserve water? Of course, we should. Should we educate California residents on the potential dangers of not being careful with this most important resource? You bet! But the water code in California is quite restrictive and sets the per capita residential indoor water use at a ridiculously low level. It also uses subjective language in the code and allows for the creation of arbitrary “water conservation programs”.
So what’s the problem with the new code?
If the State of California, the county you live in, the city you live in, or the water company that serves your home decides to develop a “water conservation program”, you are required to follow the rules of the program or face fines and jail. In other words, if the water company that serves you says you can only water your lawn on Tuesdays and Thursdays and you water on Wednesday, the water company can fine you $1000 and send you to jail for up to 30 days. Additionally, they can further fine you up to $10,000 plus $500 per day. In order to fine you more than $1000 the court must find all of the following:
(A) The residential user had actual notice of the requirement found to be violated.
(B) The conduct was intentional.
(C) The amount of water involved was substantial.
That all sounds good, right?
As a hypothetical, if the city determines as part of their water conservation program that you may not shower and do laundry on the same day, the following could land you with a $10,000 fine or more.
For (A) they just have to mail you, email you, or otherwise be able to prove you were notified of the rules of the water conservation program.
For (B) you intentionally took a shower and did laundry
For (C) Since “substantial” is subjective if you used more than their ridiculously low standard of 55 gallons per person on that day they can call that substantial.
or this
As a hypothetical, if the city determines as part of their water conservation program that you may not water you lawn except one day a week, the following could land you with a $10,000 fine or more.
For (A) they just have to mail you, email you, or otherwise be able to prove you were notified of the rules of the water conservation program.
For (B) you programmed your irrigation timer to water two days a week
For (C) Since “substantial” is subjective, they can say it’s substantial because you watered twice as often as they said you could.
I could come up with hundreds of hypothetical scenarios for “water conservation programs” cities, counties, the state of CA, or your local water department could create. Essentially, the state has given themselves, cities, counties, water companies, and others the power to make rules at their whim which could cause residents to receive ridiculous fines and jail time. This is overreaching and giving the state too much power over the individual. Yes, of course, we need to be water-wise! But the state is using this to create more expansive power for itself. The water code could be more reasonable in its water usage allowances and less subjective in the language.
Don’t believe me about these things? Below is the section that talks about it in the CA water code. I’ve also included links to the full text of the CA water code below the quoted text.
(a) From and after the publication or posting of any ordinance or resolution pursuant to Section 376, a violation of a requirement of a water conservation program adopted pursuant to Section 376 is a misdemeanor. A person convicted under this subdivision shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 30 days, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both.
(b) A court or public entity may hold a person civilly liable in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for a violation of any of the following:
(1) An ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to Section 376.
(2) A regulation adopted by the board under Section 1058.5 or Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 10609) of Part 2.55 of Division 6, unless the board regulation provides that it cannot be enforced under this section or provides for a lesser applicable maximum penalty.
(c) Commencing on the 31st day after the public entity notified a person of a violation described in subdivision (b), the person additionally may be civilly liable in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) plus five hundred dollars ($500) for each additional day on which the violation continues.
(d) Remedies prescribed in this section are cumulative and not alternative, except that no liability shall be recoverable under this section for any violation of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) if the board has filed a complaint pursuant to Section 1846 alleging the same violation.
(e) A public entity may administratively impose the civil liability described in subdivisions (b) and (c) after providing notice and an opportunity for a hearing. The public entity shall initiate a proceeding under this subdivision by a complaint issued pursuant to Section 377.5. The public entity shall issue the complaint at least 30 days before the hearing on the complaint and the complaint shall state the basis for the proposed civil liability order.
(f) (1) In determining the amount of civil liability to assess, a court or public entity shall take into consideration all relevant circumstances, including, but not limited to, the nature and persistence of the violation, the extent of the harm caused by the violation, the length of time over which the violation occurs, and any corrective action taken by the violator.
(2) The civil liability calculated pursuant to paragraph (1) for the first violation of subdivision (b) by a residential water user shall not exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) except in extraordinary situations where the court or public entity finds all of the following:
(A) The residential user had actual notice of the requirement found to be violated.
(B) The conduct was intentional.
(C) The amount of water involved was substantial.
(g) The civil liability imposed pursuant to this section shall be paid to the public entity and expended solely for the purposes of this chapter.
(h) An order setting administrative civil liability shall become effective and final upon issuance of the order and payment shall be made. Judicial review of any final order shall be pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(i) In addition to the remedies prescribed in this section, a public entity may enforce water use limitations established by an ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to this chapter, or as otherwise authorized by law, by a volumetric penalty in an amount established by the public entity.
(Amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 14, Sec. 2. (SB 606) Effective January 1, 2019.)
There is a lot of misinformation out there in internet land, but it is very easy to read for yourself the text of the water code and the 2018 amendment to the water code online. The problem is most people just repeat what they hear on the news, social media, or from their friends without actually taking the time to read the water code for themselves.
The section of the California water conservation code can be found here:
(Go ahead, read it yourself.)
And here is the Bill that the governor signed in 2018 that modified the water code
(Read it, I dare you!)
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB606
Aside from all of this mumbo jumbo, there are things you can do to make your home more efficient and to get a better understanding of your water usage.
One of the best things I’ve found is to install a device that can monitor your water usage. There are a few options out there, but one of my favorites is FLO by Moen with the FloProtect bundle. Features of this bundle:
- Allows you to see your home water usage by minute, hour, day, week, and month
- Shows you your water usage by fixture
- Insurance Verification Letter & Water Damage Deductible Guarantee
- Alerts you via the app if there is a leak
- You can shut off your water through the app in an emergency
- Proactive Monitoring + Water Concierge service
By using this device you can protect yourself from flooding in your home and it will help you identify where you use the most water so that you can make intelligent decisions on water conservation in the home. If you have a shower head that has too high of a flow rate it will show you. If you have a broken sprinkler line it will be easy to identify. If you have a toilet that runs intermittently it will tell you so.
Another device is a wifi-enabled irrigation controller (if you have a yard with sprinklers). I have the Rachio at my house, but several companies make similar units. This will help you monitor and manage your irrigation more effectively. Irrigation is almost always the biggest consumer of water in a single-family residence with a yard.
Lastly, you can make sure you have water-saving fixtures in your house. Replacing old inefficient toilets with the new high-efficiency toilets is a huge benefit. But making sure you have low flow kitchen and bathroom faucets, and low flow showerheads are also important.
If you are pro-active about being water-wise in your own home these restrictive California water conservation codes will not be a concern of yours. Let us know if you would like more information on how to be more water-wise.
Mitch Clemmons
Founder, Clemmons Services, Inc
DBA Mitch Clemmons Plumbing
DBA Trusty Plumbers
Can you be fined for using too much water in your house?
There is too much misinformation on both sides of the argument. But yes, you can be fined. A LOT! And they can put you in jail.
I read the entire code, and a person can be fined $1000 initially and up to $10,000 plus $500 per day for not complying with the water conservation code.
Under the guise of preventing a water shortage (which is quite important), the state has given themselves, local water suppliers, and the courts broad powers to fine and even jail residents for using “too much” water in their homes. It is another area that the government is expanding control over citizens.
Should we conserve water? Of course, we should. Should we educate California residents on the potential dangers of not being careful with this most important resource? You bet! But the water code in California is quite restrictive and sets the per capita residential indoor water use at a ridiculously low level. It also uses subjective language in the code and allows for the creation of arbitrary “water conservation programs”.
So what’s the problem with the new code?
If the State of California, the county you live in, the city you live in, or the water company that serves your home decides to develop a “water conservation program”, you are required to follow the rules of the program or face fines and jail. In other words, if the water company that serves you says you can only water your lawn on Tuesdays and Thursdays and you water on Wednesday, the water company can fine you $1000 and send you to jail for up to 30 days. Additionally, they can further fine you up to $10,000 plus $500 per day. In order to fine you more than $1000 the court must find all of the following:
(A) The residential user had actual notice of the requirement found to be violated.
(B) The conduct was intentional.
(C) The amount of water involved was substantial.
That all sounds good, right?
As a hypothetical, if the city determines as part of their water conservation program that you may not shower and do laundry on the same day, the following could land you with a $10,000 fine or more.
For (A) they just have to mail you, email you, or otherwise be able to prove you were notified of the rules of the water conservation program.
For (B) you intentionally took a shower and did laundry
For (C) Since “substantial” is subjective if you used more than their ridiculously low standard of 55 gallons per person on that day they can call that substantial.
or this
As a hypothetical, if the city determines as part of their water conservation program that you may not water you lawn except one day a week, the following could land you with a $10,000 fine or more.
For (A) they just have to mail you, email you, or otherwise be able to prove you were notified of the rules of the water conservation program.
For (B) you programmed your irrigation timer to water two days a week
For (C) Since “substantial” is subjective, they can say it’s substantial because you watered twice as often as they said you could.
I could come up with hundreds of hypothetical scenarios for “water conservation programs” cities, counties, the state of CA, or your local water department could create. Essentially, the state has given themselves, cities, counties, water companies, and others the power to make rules at their whim which could cause residents to receive ridiculous fines and jail time. This is overreaching and giving the state too much power over the individual. Yes, of course, we need to be water-wise! But the state is using this to create more expansive power for itself. The water code could be more reasonable in its water usage allowances and less subjective in the language.
Don’t believe me about these things? Below is the section that talks about it in the CA water code. I’ve also included links to the full text of the CA water code below the quoted text.
(a) From and after the publication or posting of any ordinance or resolution pursuant to Section 376, a violation of a requirement of a water conservation program adopted pursuant to Section 376 is a misdemeanor. A person convicted under this subdivision shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 30 days, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both.
(b) A court or public entity may hold a person civilly liable in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for a violation of any of the following:
(1) An ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to Section 376.
(2) A regulation adopted by the board under Section 1058.5 or Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 10609) of Part 2.55 of Division 6, unless the board regulation provides that it cannot be enforced under this section or provides for a lesser applicable maximum penalty.
(c) Commencing on the 31st day after the public entity notified a person of a violation described in subdivision (b), the person additionally may be civilly liable in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) plus five hundred dollars ($500) for each additional day on which the violation continues.
(d) Remedies prescribed in this section are cumulative and not alternative, except that no liability shall be recoverable under this section for any violation of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) if the board has filed a complaint pursuant to Section 1846 alleging the same violation.
(e) A public entity may administratively impose the civil liability described in subdivisions (b) and (c) after providing notice and an opportunity for a hearing. The public entity shall initiate a proceeding under this subdivision by a complaint issued pursuant to Section 377.5. The public entity shall issue the complaint at least 30 days before the hearing on the complaint and the complaint shall state the basis for the proposed civil liability order.
(f) (1) In determining the amount of civil liability to assess, a court or public entity shall take into consideration all relevant circumstances, including, but not limited to, the nature and persistence of the violation, the extent of the harm caused by the violation, the length of time over which the violation occurs, and any corrective action taken by the violator.
(2) The civil liability calculated pursuant to paragraph (1) for the first violation of subdivision (b) by a residential water user shall not exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) except in extraordinary situations where the court or public entity finds all of the following:
(A) The residential user had actual notice of the requirement found to be violated.
(B) The conduct was intentional.
(C) The amount of water involved was substantial.
(g) The civil liability imposed pursuant to this section shall be paid to the public entity and expended solely for the purposes of this chapter.
(h) An order setting administrative civil liability shall become effective and final upon issuance of the order and payment shall be made. Judicial review of any final order shall be pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(i) In addition to the remedies prescribed in this section, a public entity may enforce water use limitations established by an ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to this chapter, or as otherwise authorized by law, by a volumetric penalty in an amount established by the public entity.
(Amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 14, Sec. 2. (SB 606) Effective January 1, 2019.)
There is a lot of misinformation out there in internet land, but it is very easy to read for yourself the text of the water code and the 2018 amendment to the water code online. The problem is most people just repeat what they hear on the news, social media, or from their friends without actually taking the time to read the water code for themselves.
The section of the California water conservation code can be found here:
(Go ahead, read it yourself.)
And here is the Bill that the governor signed in 2018 that modified the water code
(Read it, I dare you!)
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB606
Aside from all of this mumbo jumbo, there are things you can do to make your home more efficient and to get a better understanding of your water usage.
One of the best things I’ve found is to install a device that can monitor your water usage. There are a few options out there, but one of my favorites is FLO by Moen with the FloProtect bundle. Features of this bundle:
- Allows you to see your home water usage by minute, hour, day, week, and month
- Shows you your water usage by fixture
- Insurance Verification Letter & Water Damage Deductible Guarantee
- Alerts you via the app if there is a leak
- You can shut off your water through the app in an emergency
- Proactive Monitoring + Water Concierge service
By using this device you can protect yourself from flooding in your home and it will help you identify where you use the most water so that you can make intelligent decisions on water conservation in the home. If you have a shower head that has too high of a flow rate it will show you. If you have a broken sprinkler line it will be easy to identify. If you have a toilet that runs intermittently it will tell you so.
Another device is a wifi-enabled irrigation controller (if you have a yard with sprinklers). I have the Rachio at my house, but several companies make similar units. This will help you monitor and manage your irrigation more effectively. Irrigation is almost always the biggest consumer of water in a single-family residence with a yard.
Lastly, you can make sure you have water-saving fixtures in your house. Replacing old inefficient toilets with the new high-efficiency toilets is a huge benefit. But making sure you have low flow kitchen and bathroom faucets, and low flow showerheads are also important.
If you are pro-active about being water-wise in your own home these restrictive California water conservation codes will not be a concern of yours. Let us know if you would like more information on how to be more water-wise.
Mitch Clemmons
Founder, Clemmons Services, Inc
DBA Mitch Clemmons Plumbing
DBA Trusty Plumbers
