SB-282 (Wiener) Residential heat pump systems: water heaters and HVAC: installations.

Would make any provision of the governing documents or architectural guidelines void and unenforceable if it prevents the replacement of a fuel-gas-burning appliance with an electric appliance, or prohibits or restricts the use of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system.

Current Status: Pending

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

The Davis-Stirling Act makes void and unenforceable any provision of the governing documents or architectural or landscaping guidelines or policies that prohibits, or has the effect of prohibiting, the use of low water-using plants as a group or as a replacement of existing turf.
This bill would add Civil Code Section 4737 to make void and unenforceable any provision of the governing documents, architectural guidelines, or policies if the provision prevents the replacement of a fuel-gas-burning appliance with an electric appliance. The bill would also make any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, and any provision of a governing document, that effectively prohibits or restricts the installation or use of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system, void and unenforceable.
Share:
View more info on SB 282
from the California Legislature's website

Related Topics

Related Statutes

Related Case Law

  • Rancho Sante Fe Association v. Dolan-King
    (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 28

    [Architectural Control; Architectural Standards] A HOA’s architectural standards could be used to define undefined architectural restrictions/terms contained in the CC&Rs.

  • Bear Creek Planning Committee v. Ferwerda
    (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1178

    [Architectural Control; Architectural Standards] A HOA had the authority to adopt architectural standards beyond those set forth in the CC&Rs based upon empowering language in the CC&Rs governing the same.

  • Ekstrom v. Marquesa at Monarch Beach Homeowners Association
    (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1111

    [Architectural Control; Board Powers] An association’s board of directors may not adopt rules that are in conflict with the CC&Rs.

  • Cohen v. Kite Hill Community Association
    (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 642

    [Architectural Control; Duty to Act in Good Faith] When exercising its architectural control authority, an association owes a fiduciary duty to its members to act in good faith, and to not make decisions that are arbitrary or capricious.

  • Dolan-King v. Rancho Sante Fe Association
    (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 965

    [Architectural Control; Judicial Deference] An association may grant discretionary authority to an Architectural Committee to apply subjective, aesthetic criteria for approving member applications for proposed architectural improvements.