Will our water-use hawks complain about the lawn? Or is it OK since it's for "existing residents"?

The entire community benefits when we have sufficient greenspace for everyone to enjoy. Water remains a precious commodity, but the amount spent on this lawn is relatively trivial. And if we have drastic enough drought conditions, the water can be turned off and the lawn allowed to die. Can we do that after 30% more households have moved into MV? Turn off their water alone during times of drought? Of course we can't, that would be inhuman.

It is not evil or hypocritical for residents in a community to desire both greenspaces and an adequate water supply, one that does not force draconion cuts on households during times of drought and wildfires. I checked the article because I thought that the park must have extravagant water features or something. Nope, it does not, as far as I can see.

We're in a pretty drastic drought already. Maybe the lawn at Mora Park is small, but I don't understand why we still water the golf course.

ivg, in the past when serious droughts have been experienced residents have been forced to cut their water usage, or else pay penalties. Citizens cut their water usage, and then voila, the price of water goes up for doing the right thing because we are all using less water and of course that makes sense. Use less water -> pay the same price or more.

Up until now, MV residents are only subject to voluntary measures. However, some changes are being considered - Web Link

"The Mountain View City Council will hold a public hearing on June 28, 2022 to consider declaring a Stage 2 water shortage emergency condition. Under a Stage 2 water shortage, customers are assigned specific irrigation days based on their street address. The proposed irrigation schedule is listed below:

Even addresses – Irrigation allowed Tuesdays and Fridays.
Odd addresses – Irrigation allowed Mondays and Thursdays."

Even a Stage 2 water shortage emergency is mild in comparison to what residents have been subjected to in the past. It is not clear what the penalty will be for those who violate the proposed schedule. If there are no penalties, the program is still de facto voluntary.

However, some of us have let our yards die and we don't flush our toilets every time because that is what we have been trained to do based on past droughts. Is this disgusting? Yes it is. Is this "the right thing" to do? We have been trained to think that it is.

The best part is that when more severe emergency measures are enacted, and everyone is forced to cut their usage by x% or else pay penalties, those of us who are already doing our best to cut back on water usage to the bare bones will be penalized. When you have already killed your lawn and you aren't flushing your toilets, it's very difficult to cut back an additional amount on top of it.

If you have ever visited our Shoreline Golf Course, you would know it is irrigated with reclaimed water from the Palo Alto treatment plant. This water is not suitable for drinking, or many other domestic uses. Our local golf courses don't have any impact on our drought responses.

just as Old Steven / The irrigation water from 'tertiary treatment' (waste water) is a resource that MV City has tried to use for decades. It usually works! In the North Bayshore area it has also been used extensively for street median plantings. Unfortunately, redwood trees need a diluted version, because they can't stand the high salinity over decades.
- If North Bayshore development Is Required to use ("purple pipe"?) recycled water for toilets and general landscaping .... (saves ?M gallons of drinkable water per year?)