H.B. 400 Landscaping Water Amendments

What this bill does

The bill would require cities in the Great Salt Lake drainage that lack a water-efficient landscaping ordinance for new construction to adopt one. It does not say what the ordinance must contain and sets no enforcement penalties.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 7 yes, 3 no, 2 absentHouse Political Subdivisions Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 18, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Feb 18, 2026 House Political Subdivisions Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (23 turns)

  1. Committee chair1:40:09

     Thank you, Representative Owens. You can stay there.

  2. Rep. Doug Owens1:40:12

     We will go to HB 400 Landscaping water amendments. Yes. Thank you. Madam Chair and committee members got a handout that'll be coming around now. Uh, this was a bill that has passed previously, uh, the Water Legislative Water Development Committee Commission, and also the Water Task Force. This is a water conservation bill. And what it says is it asks, it requires, I should say, cities who are in the drainage of the Great Salt Lake who have no water efficient ordinance for new construction to enact one. It states that it's a requirement, but it has no enforcement teeth whatsoever. It just has the carrot of, uh, pointing out that if they want to, they can enact an ordinance that will allow their citizens to get funding to take out old grass and replace it with water efficient landscaping. But it doesn't say what ordinance they need to enact. And again, it has no enforcement teeth, although it does state that they're required. The sheet you just got handed is a list, uh, developed, uh, updated just a couple days ago from water resources in the Department of Natural Resources of the municipalities in the drainage of the Great Salt Lake with no water efficient ordinance for new construction. And so those are the cities that would need to be asked, required to take action, but again, no enforcement teeth. Um, and it gives the, an opportunity for a discussion for the League of Cities and towns to say to these cities, Hey, you know that you need to attend to this issue. There's a law in the books now. Um, what's going on in, in the, and, and by the way, those 80 plus municipalities, I think there's about 85 on that list, those cities, uh, house 30%, 33%, a third of the population living in the drainage of the Great Salt Lake is living in one of those municipalities. Meaning there's a lot of development going on with no water efficient ordinance. And, uh, I think this would make a good idea to get those cities to do that. And the reason is what we're doing is converting ag water to municipal and industrial usage. Uh, and the, the depletions are heavily focused on outdoor water usage. And I'm sorry for throwing statistics at you. It's quite a, quite a splash of cold water compared to the puns with the last presentation. But this is the last number I want to throw at you. When, when water's delivered to a house, 60% of the water is used outside over the year, and that's a hundred percent depleted. 40% of the water delivered to a house goes inside and is only about 5% depleted, five to 10%. 'cause all that water is used inside and goes down the drain, gets treated as sewage and makes its way to the lake. So where we can really have low hanging fruit to grab is with this, uh, uh, having water efficient new construction. It's very expensive to rip out turf and do that kind of stuff to make old landscaping that's not water efficient. Turn it into water efficient landscaping. This is where, when it's going in, it's only a marginal, uh, cost. So this leaves up to the cities what they want to do, but it asks them to do it. Um, and think about water conservation. So it's a small push in the right direction. I think there's no hint that we're requiring rock scapes. I know sometimes when people think water efficient landscaping, they think of a, a vision of what they saw driving through Las Vegas. Sometime it doesn't need to look like that. You can get very efficient, water efficient, uh, traditional looking landscapes using just about a third of the water if you plan it right. So, um, that concludes the presentation on, on this item. Happy to have any discussion you'd like on it.

  3. Committee chair1:44:06

     Okay. Thank you Representative Peterson.

  4. Rep. Peterson (surname only, identity unresolved)1:44:09

     Thank you. I just have a question. Um, so two years ago we passed legislation that required, um, cities of a certain size, 10,000 connections, I think, um, and or population and every county in our state to create a new element in their general plan related to water use and preservation. And, um, so those plans were due December 31st. So I had the opportunity to support a number of communities in writing their plans. And, um, so my question is, they all just went through just now and wrote goals, and a lot of them wrote goals around new development, wrote goals around water efficiencies. If they were in the Great Salt Lake Basin, they had more specific requirements. So my question is, do we know how this is going to coordinate with the work they all just did?

  5. Rep. Doug Owens1:44:58

     The short answer is I do not. I I do remember this coming up previously, uh, in a discussion with somebody that was helping me develop this, uh, over the interim. Um, and I could phone a friend, but I don't know on off the top of my head. I do know that this was checked a few days ago that these cities still don't have an ordinance. I guess there's a, maybe actually there's one issue, which is there's a difference between a plan and a and an ordinance. Yes, definitely. So I, but I haven't checked all those plans in those cities. Uh, I do know that as of last week, this list is accurate in terms of those cities not having that ordinance. And I think if they have it in the plan, this shouldn't burden them. Right. If, if, uh, in other words, if the plan said we're gonna enact in ordinance and we intend to do it, this is just a little goose in the right direction. Okay. Thank You. That's a good, I appreciate that question.

  6. Committee chair1:45:53

     Representative Dunnigan. Thank

  7. Rep. James A. Dunnigan1:45:55

     You. You said that there's no enforcement or something like that. What were you alluding to by whom?

  8. Rep. Doug Owens1:46:01

     Well, there's just no, there's no enforcement teeth whatsoever. It says these, these municipalities shall enact an ordinance, but it does not, uh, allow anybody to come in. It doesn't authorize water resources or any police agency or anybody to go say, Hey, you haven't done that. You need to do it. It doesn't impose any consequence if they don't. It's just trying to be a message from the, uh, the political entity that is Utah saying to our subdivisions, in this day and age, if you're in the drainage of this, of the lake, you better, we'd like you to attend to this.

  9. Rep. James A. Dunnigan1:46:34

     Okay. So if the municipality comes up with an ordinance, so they could certainly enforce that.

  10. Rep. Doug Owens1:46:40

      They may, yes. It's just that we are not pushing beyond the, the initial request. We don't force them

  11. Rep. James A. Dunnigan1:46:47

      Helpful to know. I think Representative Peterson makes a good point. It'd be helpful, helpful to know whether we're doing a duplicative effort here or not with what was already required and from the prior, I mean, I see this list of people that are entities that aren't complying. I don't know. I don't know if we're saying a couple years ago, you have to do this, and now we're saying again, you have to do this, and it's very, very similar. I don't know the answer to that.

  12. Rep. Doug Owens1:47:12

      Well, I I, if I could respond, I I do think the answer part of that answer, uh, was that a plan is not an ordinance. So if they want to just enact what they planned, that's great. If they want to do something different, that's great. They just, we're just saying act rather than do a plan, we're saying and act something.

  13. Committee chair1:47:31

      Thank you. Okay. Representative Kohler.

  14. Rep. Clinton Okerlund1:47:35

      Thank you, uh, representative. I, you and I fight about this. I'm a local control guy, as you know, and I know Midway does this. I run the water, the irrigation side of it, so I've been part of it. Uh, I think these message bills like this probably don't hurt anything, but I'm, I just hate to put something more on 'em and it'll probably pass, but I'm probably gonna vote against it, so There you go.

  15. Committee chair1:48:01

      All right. We'll go to the public for comment. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak to this bill? Okay. We do have one online, um, Joel Williams. And, and just as a reminder, you'll have a minute and a half. Joel Williams.

  16. Joel Williams, Director, Division of Water Resources1:48:24

      Hello, this is, uh, Joel Williams. I'm the director of the Utah Division of Water Resources. Wish I could be there in person this morning, but I had a schedule conflict, but I wanted to comment in support of this bill. We, we appreciate, uh, Representative Owens for the, the forward thinking of this is about new, new growth and the way that we are growing as a state and knowing that, and you'll hear it from our water providers and our water districts, that in order for us to be able to continue growing, we've gotta grow in a waterwise fashion. And, and where most of our water is consumed outdoors on landscapes, if we can encourage, uh, ordinances that that would promote the waterwise landscape on new growth, that it's really gonna help us going forward as a state. And, and there's a lot of, uh, unity in, in this concept, and we wanted to express some support of that. I wanted to also comment to Representative Peterson's good question about the water as part of a general plan. That is an effort that our office has been coordinating with as well. And we view these two as complimentary. Um, that, that cities in their general plans have been starting to think more about water and how they want water to be incorporated into their future growth plans. And that this ordinance, uh, could then help to put that in into place of saying, Hey, for new growth, we would like these, uh, practices to be put in place. And again, the bill doesn't specify what those practices need to be. We're happy to provide recommendations, uh, from the division division, but it would encourage cities to, to consider taking that next step. So I think these are complimentary. Thank you.

  17. Committee chair1:49:55

      Thank you. That concludes our public comment portion. We'll go back, come back to the committee for further discussion. And action. Representative Ward,

  18. Rep. Ward1:50:10

      Um, thank you. I'd make a motion that we pass a house bill 400 out with a favorable recommendation. The motion is to pass out a house bill 400 with a favorable recommendation.

  19. Committee chair1:50:21

      Would you like to speak to that motion?

  20. Rep. Ward1:50:24

      I think to leave broad ability to make an ordinance, but to say, to think about it is a fair line to draw, make some ordinance is a fair line to draw.

  21. Committee chair1:50:33

      Okay. Thank you. Uh, Representative Owens,

  22. Rep. Doug Owens1:50:36

      Thank you for hearing it. Uh, I, I suppose you could look at it as a message Bill. I, I think in this day and age, to have a third of the population of a very fast growing area that drains to the Great Salt Lake, not to have enact an ordinance is frankly a little embarrassing. Um, and, uh, we, we, we need to put water in that lake before the Olympics, get here in eight years and show the world we can manage our situation. I think just having these folks think about it and get something done and into their code is a good, is a good idea. So, and, and I understand local control. I, I do think these are subdivisions of our state and we're committed as a state to, to, um, rescuing the lake. And I think it's a small step in that direction. Thank you.

  23. Committee chair1:51:23

      Okay. Thank you. I need discussion from the committee on the motion to, uh, pass out HB 400 favorably. Right. See none. I'll go back to the maker of the motion. Okay. The motion is to pass out HB 400 with a favorable recommendation. All in favor of that motion, please say, aye. Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Say nay. Nay. Oh, well, the, no. Raise your hands. Okay. We have Representative Peterson, Representative Kohler and Representative Hansen went online. Okay. Gwen was a yes. Okay. Thank you. So that motion passes. 7, 2 3. Thank You. Thank you, Representative Owens.

• Feb 24, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (3 turns)

  1. Speaker (presiding)39:24

     House bill 400 landscaping water amendments by Representative Owens. This bill was heard in political subdivisions with the vote of 7 3 2. Representative Owens Motion to circle

  2. Rep. Doug Owens39:36

     Motion is to circle, would like to speak to it Working on an amendment. Thank you.

  3. Speaker (presiding)39:40

     Thank you. Representative Moss Owens. The motion is to circle discussion to the motion. See none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. The bill is circled matter. May clerk