http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/07/some_califor...

Excerpted from the article...

"It sounds like one of those stories that conservatives often use to
make government look bad - the city of Sacramento is fining a household
$746 for letting their lawn die to save water. But the real issue here
isn't government - it's whether California will abandon wasteful and
even elitist 20th century values to meet the needs of the 21st century.

This basic tension according to the Sacramento Bee:

"In order to make the lawn go, I would have had to keep watering it
intensely, and since the drought was declared, I decided that wasn't a
good idea," said Hartridge. "Honestly, I think there's a disconnect
within the city about priorities."

“Two weeks ago, The Bee reported that Sacramento's per capita water use is among the greatest in the world....

“The city's landscaping rule is intended to maintain neighborhood
visual standards to prevent one neighbor's tastes from harming
another's property values.

“The rule was the subject of much conflict last year when amended to
provide gardeners leeway to grow more than grass. Sacramentans can now
grow large trees, shrubs and, yes, even food in their front yards
without fear of reprisal.

“But the rules still require front landscaping to be irrigated,
which means scores of homeowners could be penalized for growing cacti
or other drought-tolerant vegetation.”

Many cities still have bans on using a clothesline to dry your
laundry, even though it saves a lot of energy (and is usually easier on
your clothes!).

Residents ought to be encouraged to live sustainably, and use their
home as it ought to be used - to produce self-sufficiency. We can and
do discuss density and mass transit as part of urban design needs, but
the micro-level issues such as brown lawns and clotheslines matter too.

When I lived in Seattle from 2001 to 2007 I saw a different and
better way to live. Residents there let their lawns die over the
summer. Many grew food in their yards. I learned to use a clothesline
there (because it wasn't kosher to use them in Orange County, sensible
as it'd have been). My neighbors had chickens, who laid delicious eggs
- most summers we never had to buy eggs from a store.

Many California cities have outlawed some or all of those practices
since the 1950s or earlier. It was a class-based move - middle-class
homeowners saw clotheslines and chicken coops as signs of poverty and
low-class behavior, which would invariably drive down property values.
To a homeowner, government merely exists to protect property values,
even at the expense of sustainable practices that help the environment
and the infrastructure.

These practices will also help preserve the middle-class.
California's 20th century middle class was a product of cheap oil,
which made it affordable to live in a suburban home and get your food
from a supermarket. With the end of cheap oil, food inflation is going
to destroy the living standards of working Californians. It just makes
sense to encourage sustainable living.