The Edge July/August 2025

FROM THE HILL

NALP Advocacy Update: Attempts to Restrict “Non-Functional” Turf During the 2025 State Legislative Cycle

THE STATE LEGISLATIVE CYCLE IS WINDING DOWN AT THIS point in the year and we saw another deluge of bills attempting to restrict the types of pesticides, fertilizers and gas-powered equipment used by the landscape industry. Thanks to the successful engagement by NALP members and our partners in state associations, we were able to fend off the majority of those bills but we are now seeing a significant uptick in bills that want to restrict the installation of turf in residential and commercial settings, specifically in those states located within the Colorado River Basin that have significant drought issues.

introduced further clarified that “functional turf” includes: TURF THAT: ■ (C) stabilizes soil, prevents erosion from wind or water, sequesters carbon, mitigates heat island effects, provides vegetative buffer strips from watersheds, captures and filters urban pollutants, or pro motes community planning and safety; ■ (D) is a native plant, has been hybridized for arid conditions, or has been designated as low water use by the Utah State University Extension; and ■ (E) is watered to the plant’s needs and does not require overhead spray irrigation. Unfortunately, despite signifi cant negotiations, we could not come to an agreement on this language with water municipal ity managers, and the legislation died in committee. However, there is a commitment between both NALP and water manage ment stakeholders to further this conversation this summer in an ticipation of bringing a mutually agreed-upon bill back in 2026. While we highlighted both Colorado and Utah, we saw efforts on non-functional turf restrictions in both Texas and New Mexico fail, while attempts to restrict non-functional turf in Arizona and New Jersey remain pending. We do not anticipate this issue will go away in the future, and NALP has made responsible wa ter use while maintaining healthy green spaces a top advocacy priority. Stay tuned as we roll out efforts on this initiative in the very near future. TE

■ provides vegetative buffer strips from watersheds ■ captures and filters urban pollutants ■ promotes community plan ning and safety In Colorado, this cycle we saw an attempt in HB 1113 to ban the installation of “non-functional” turf on new residential proper ties. After significant lobbying efforts, NALP was able to secure a deal that did not necessarily change the definition of “func tional” versus “non-functional” turf but at least acknowledged the needs for certain types of turf through an exception. The exception includes: TURF THAT IS: ■ A native plant ■ Has been hybridized for arid conditions; or ■ A low-water grass The justification for this carve-out is simple. Significant advancements are being made with species of turf that are being engineered for low water use or have been hybridized for arid conditions and use minimal water. We also highlighted the advancement in irrigation and water use strategies being used throughout the landscape industry. In Utah, this cycle, we went on the offensive to more clearly define “water-wise” landscaping along with expanding the defini tion of “functional turf.” SB 305 as

Whether it’s watering restric tions, incentives to remove turf or just straight bans on turf, this is a trend that is certainly not go ing away. At NALP, we lobby on behalf of the industry to manage landscapes responsibly, and we acknowledge the importance of “right plant, right place.”We un derstand that Kentucky bluegrass probably is not the right plant to place in a median at a big box store in Las Vegas, but the critics of turf have shifted the pendu lum to the extreme end of the debate without acknowledging the benefits of turf in urban and suburban environments. Much of the debate about turf focuses on “functional” versus “non-functional” turf. Unfortu nately, many policymakers define “functional turf” as turf: “located in a recreational use area or other space that is regu larly used for civic, community, or recreational purposes” This definition focuses on where people are actively using the turf, not the actual function of the turf. Turf not deemed functional is deemed “non-func tional.” States that improperly define “functional turf” fail to ac knowledge that what they deem “non-functional” turf is severing multiple benefits and functions, such as: ■ stabilizes soil ■ prevents erosion from wind or water ■ sequesters carbon ■ mitigates heat island effects

By Andrew Bray Senior Vice President of Government Relations and Membership This article was written on May 29, 2025. For the most current information contact the NALP government relations team.

BE IN THE KNOW Subscribe to our weekly government affairs newsletter, The Advocate at landscape professionals.org/ advocate

40 The Edge // July/August 2025