I agree, it is a slippery slope. That is exactly my point. Abolishing all building codes and zoning ordinances is not even remotely close to entering into this argument. What we are talking about is the government telling private property owners that they cannot sell their house until they meet their requirements for fixtures in their home. I believe education and incentives to retrofit are the best course of action. I for one do not want the government in my life anymore than it already is and I don’t think criminalizing the selling of your home is appropriate.

You can sell your house if it has lead paint in every room, you can sell your house if it is ravaged by termites, but under this ordinance you could not sell your home unless you had the right kind of toilets. Also, if you wanted to buy a house simply to tear it down and build a new home (which would have low flow fixtures), the seller would first have to retrofit the toilets in order to sell the home, just so you could tear the entire house down. It is a poorly written ordinance and bad public policy.

Joe…I appreciate the discussion. I think in the long run, we agree we should retrofit as many older toilets as we can to conserve. We simply disagree on the level of government intrusion we wish to see.

As far as examining existing DeKalb government and school buildings goes, I think that’s a very good idea.

You are correct that WM did say it, and I am glad that we disagree with his statement.

When I brought up the windows and insulation argument, I meant to add in order to sell your house. How much different is it for the government to be able to say, you can’t sell your home if you have these kind of toilets, than for them to tell say that you cannot sell your home unless you have certain kinds of windows, certain types of appliances and a certain level of insulation?

All of these things use natural resources and depending on the current situation different natural resources are brought into the spotlight. I don’t think anyone in this discussion is denying we have a problem or believes water conservation is a bad idea.

Why don’t we examine the DeKalb County Government Buildings and all of DeKalb County Schools to see if their toilets have been retrofit? If they want to legislate with a heavy hand and place criminal penalties on its citizens, shouldn’t they take the lead and first fix leaking pipes and retrofit all of their fixtures? I guarantee you they waste more water than all of your neighbors combined!

An incentive program is a win-win for the county, the consumer and the general public. We all chip in and we all reap the benefits without threat of criminal penalties!

But I do disagree with that point. My personal experiences with Realtors is that, with only a few exceptions, they do care. But there are times — such as with this issue — that Realtors as a collective can be a little shortsighted.

But I also believe this is not overreaching by the government. That’s a bit of a hyperbolic argument, especially when you consider this in the context of a home sale. If a home has more toilets, it has a greater impact on the water system.

If a home’s water use had no impact on the rest of the system, then there would be no need for regulation. That I have neighbors using more water than they need to use has an impact on me, even if I buy low-flow toilets and shower heads.

That’s why I like the approach of having both the regulation, and a tax credit (or rebate) of some sort. The two together would really speed up the process of getting people to convert, and it would place everyone on a level playing field.

If this is a good idea, what about all of those homes with single paned windows. Next time gas is an issue like water is now, will the government then make you replace all of your windows, have an insulation inspector make sure you are in compliance and make everyone buy all new energy star appliances?

This is the point. Is the best way for government to act, by reaching it’s long arm into your home and dictating if your home is eligible for sale or not, or is the best way for government to act, by offering education on the benefits of conservation and offering the tools to it’s citizens to be effective?

Realtors do not give a damn about communities. They sell, they get out. long term problems and solutions to fix them? Don’t ever look at realtors for help or step up. It’s all about the commission, and nothing else.

and move some state & government offices out of the ATL…

By the way, let’s also assume Mike Wright’s numbers are correct.

3.5 million gallons per day (notice he doesn’t mention the “per day”)

4% of that number is reached in year one, as 4% of houses are sold. So in the first year, DeKalb is looking at a savings of 140,000 gallons per day.

That’s 51.1 million gallons of water saved in the first year of the ordinance. That’s certainly worth something.

I would agree with Mike Wright that incentives to change out bathroom fixtures would also be a good idea. Both of these ideas are just two tools in a much bigger toolbox.

And the problem we’re discussing — the water shortage — requires a lot of tools be used. If we don’t, the value of real estate throughout the metro area will take a bigger fall than a mortgage crisis could inflict. I would think that to a REALTOR(R), the prospect of losing a lot of money in commissions would spur some real action behind empty claims of “strong” support for conservation efforts.