Water Quality Assn. v. County of Santa Barbara

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 340·44 Cal. App. 4th 732·52 Cal. Rptr. 2d 184·96 Daily Journal DAR 4450·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2756
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 17, 1996Docket Nos. B089470, B090201California4,664 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

A state statutory scheme regulates the types of water softening appliances consumers may use.

May local entities enact ordinances which prohibit water softeners permitted by the state statute? No, they are preempted by the state statute.

The City of Santa Maria (City), and the Laguna County Sanitation District et al. (District), appeal from the judgment of the trial court in favor of respondents, the Water Quality Association (WQA). The judgment declared certain aspects of the ordinances void because they conflict with the state statute. We affirm the judgment.

Facts

In 1978, the state Legislature enacted a statutory scheme entitled water softening or conditioning. (Health & Saf. Code, § 116775 et seq. [formerly § 4045 et seq.], the Act.) Section 116775 reads, in pertinent part, as follows; “The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the utilization of the waters of the state by residential consumers for general domestic purposes, . . .is a right that should be interfered with only when necessary for specified health and safety purposes. The Legislature further finds that variation in water quality, and particularly in water hardness, throughout the state requires…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.