WHAT IF YOUR CITY PAID YOU TO USE LESS WATER?
That rebate process is a pain, for sure. I remember swapping out all our old showerheads for low-flow ones and thinking the rebate would be a quick win. Nope. Between the forms, the receipts, and waiting for someone to actually process it, I started wondering if it was even worth the hassle. I get why some folks just skip it altogether.
Honestly, if they could just look at your water bill and credit you automatically for using less, that’d be a game changer. It’s not like they don’t have the data already. The city tracks usage every month anyway. Why make people jump through hoops? I know a couple neighbors who would’ve upgraded their stuff if it wasn’t such a headache.
I get that they want to make sure people aren’t gaming the system, but at some point, you gotta trust folks a little. Or at least make it less of a project to get a few bucks back. It’s not like we’re talking about thousands here.
Anyway, props for sticking with it and actually getting your rebate. Most people I know just give up halfway through. If they ever streamline this stuff, I bet you’d see way more people making changes around their homes.
WHAT IF YOUR CITY PAID YOU TO USE LESS WATER?
Yeah, the paperwork is a killer. I’ve done a couple of those rebates for clients and it’s always more complicated than it needs to be. The idea of just getting a credit based on your bill makes way more sense. But I do wonder if people would just let their lawns die for a month, get the rebate, then go back to old habits... Still, the current system feels like it’s designed to discourage participation. There’s gotta be a smarter way to handle it.
WHAT IF YOUR CITY PAID YOU TO USE LESS WATER?
I get where you’re coming from about the paperwork—last year I tried to get a rebate for swapping out my old toilets, and it felt like I was applying for a mortgage. But honestly, I’m not convinced just handing out credits based on usage is the answer either. People game the system. My neighbor let his grass go brown during the rebate period, then cranked up the sprinklers as soon as he got his check. The city can’t really track what’s actually changing long-term.
I think if they want real results, they should focus more on permanent changes—like paying folks to rip out lawns or install drip irrigation. That way, you’re not just rewarding a temporary dip in usage. Otherwise, it’s just a cycle of people doing the bare minimum for a quick buck. Maybe not everyone would cheat, but enough would that it’d mess up the whole point.
