The softener ban issue in California took another dramatic turn over the last two months.
.....In 1999, the legislature passed a compromise bill that allows local entities to restrict the sales and installation of self-regenerating water softeners (SRWS) provided they:

1. Were out of compliance with waste discharge or waste water recycling permit
   
2. Restricted all other sources of brine
   
3. Did an independent study to quantify those sources
   
4. And found, from the available evidence, that restricting softeners was necessary for the entity to comply with standards.

.....Four months after these key provisions of SB 1006 took effect (January 1, 2003), the WateReuse Association and the Association of California Water Agencies introduced AB 334—which not only eliminated the provisions of present law meant to protect the home water treatment industry from arbitrary bans—but actually eliminated the entire legislative framework that had regulated water softeners since 1978.
.....One again, WQA and PWQA went into action. Following is a summation of the key elements involved in this latest California legislative campaign: message, building a strong coalition, grassroots lobbying, and maintaining cohesion. These lessons learned in this campaign can be applied to similar action anywhere.

Message
Our message was brief and clear:
.....“Current law works. It worked recently in Santa Clarita. Why change current law only four months after it has become effective.”
Within this message, we correctly assumed legislators already knew the benefits of soft water to home and business, but we did emphasize the loss of jobs and possible impact on commercial/industrial operations if AB 334 was passed.

Building a strong coalition
.....