RESOLUTION: Sierra Club California opposes any restrictions on the use of clotheslines or other passive solar drying devices for drying clothes, except for health and safety reasons.
Background
1. Clothes dryers use an estimated 6 to 10% of residential electricity use, equating to a total of 1.5-2% of total domestic energy use, by our estimation.
2. Line drying prolongs the life of clothing and reduces household electricity bills.
3. Line drying saves lives. Over $90 million in property damage and 400 injuries and 5 deaths are caused each year by fires that start with dryers.
4. In his 2009 State of the State address, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger encouraged people to use clotheslines to reduce energy consumption, yet millions of Californians living in common interest developments regulated by Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and governed by homeowner associations face potential fines for using clotheslines.
5. In 2007 Attorney Tina Rasnow got a resolution passed by the California Conference of Delegates of Local Bar Associations, calling to amend the California Civil Code to provide similar protection to passive solar energy devices as the law currently provides to active solar energy devices (for example, solar panels). This would essentially prohibit the enforcement of existing prohibitions against clotheslines found in some local ordinances and CC&Rs, much as existing racial covenants in real estate are rendered unenforceable by a State law banning discrimination in housing. For the text of the resolution see http://www.cdcba.org/pdfs/R2007/01-01-2007.pdf
Arguments for:
1. Reducing dryer use would cause a significant drop in California’s emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants.
2. Use of clotheslines would reduce the need for additional natural gas power plants.
3. Line drying saves money. The average family can save over $85/year by using a clothesline instead of a dryer.
4. Line drying saves lives and property by reducing fires.
Arguments against:
1. Many people think laundry on a line is unsightly.
2. Homeowners and condominium associations should have the right to enforce aesthetic requirements.
Implementation:
1. Sierra Club California Legislative Committee and staff will work with legislators to introduce legislation that would perhaps (1) define clotheslines as a “Passive Solar Device”, and (2) ban all prohibitions against such devices, including clotheslines, while permitting common interest developments to put reasonable limitations on where they may be located to protect health and safety (for example, not across a walkway or where it could block traffic visibility). This could be done with the addition of a simple clause to California Civil Code Section 801.5, as shown below.
2. Have local governments require that utilities include a bill insert detailing dryer electricity use (so that customers become aware how much electricity their dryers are using.
3. Chapters do action alerts and newsletter articles to urge members to hang clothes on the line.
Who has approved this resolution? CNRCC Energy-Climate Committee & Sierra Club California (Questions/revisions to Kent Lewandowski, 510-625-5831,
Example Legislative Language - from California Bar Conference RESOLUTION 01-01-2007 (http://www.cdcba.org/pdfs/R2007/01-01-2007.pdf):
Amend California Civil Code Section 801.5 (a) by adding the underlined language.
As used in this section, "solar energy system" means either of the following:
(3) Any device whose primary purpose is to provide for the collection, storage, and distribution of solar energy for electricity generation, drying, illumination, space heating or cooling, or for water heating.
****
Other Potential Model Legislation: AB2473 - New Solar Rights Act (Wolk, D-Davis)– passed in 2004 (http://www.californiasolarcenter.org/legislation.html)
California State Assemblymember Lois Wolk in the 8th Assembly District sponsored AB 2473 (Wolk - Chapter 789, Statutes of 2004) to strengthen the existing Solar Rights Act. The key improvements made were to eliminate aesthetic solar restrictions for installations that cost less than $2,000. In addition, the act limited building official's review of solar installations only to those items that relate to specific health and safety requirements of local, state and federal law. This law became effective on 1/1/2005. It is the intent of this law that “local agencies not adopt ordinances that create unreasonable barriers to the installation of solar energy systems, including, but not limited to, design review for aesthetic purposes.” Local authorities shall approve applications through permit issuance and can only restrict solar installations based on health and safety reasons. It is thus intended to encourage installations by removing obstacles and minimizing permitting costs.
