Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, February 4, 2011, 1:57 PM
Town Square
City concedes to schools a multi-million dollar compromise
Original post made on Feb 4, 2011
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, February 4, 2011, 1:57 PM
Comments (5)
Posted by Elly
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Feb 4, 2011 at 2:25 pm
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Feb 4, 2011 at 2:25 pm
Seems reasonably fair -- however, it is something that we'll want to look into long term. I'm not sure if Shoreline should be "sunsetted" completely, but it's ridiculous that the Shoreline tax district has been running a surplus these past few years, while special ed. teachers and aides disappear, classes mushroom to 30+ students in lower grades and parents have to teach and finance classes in order for local kids to get a quality education.
Posted by James
a resident of Whisman Station
on Feb 4, 2011 at 3:20 pm
a resident of Whisman Station
on Feb 4, 2011 at 3:20 pm
Seems a pitance considering the many billions of dollars of income generated there.
Posted by Steven Nelson
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Feb 5, 2011 at 9:55 am
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Feb 5, 2011 at 9:55 am
(me again) The Political Process produces compromise. Shoreline could be "incompletely" sunsetted by a guarantee of 1/10 of the future property taxes there (takes statute change).
Where is that Assemblyman Paul Fong??? Not here when education needs him!
The JPA is just a contract agreement. Anything done by the city is only covered by that contract. As in this offer - they may increase the amount (for a set period) - or, and this is EXTREMELY CRITICAL, they may terminate all the $ after two years by a simple majority vote of just the Shoreline Board. (4 people) They only need to quote 'fiscal emergency' and the terms of the JPA contract allow them to bail. I've been studying this over 2 years, have read the contract, as have others, and it is SO CLEAR that even a non-lawyer can understand.
That contract (JPA) specifically refers to the "perpetual nature" of Shoreline District. It also 'subordinated' any payment to schools to future bonded indebtedness (read "next boutique hotel") that 4 members of the Council decide to borrow for. [This is decided by our elected representatives - the Council - but these bonds are NOT VOTED ON by the people - who must directly approve school bonds]
Mothers of Mountain View - do your kids deserve Full Funding for your schools? Share Shoreline - do you want to continually fight this funding battle? Instead of a "marriage with common property rights" this is a 'live together' arrangement - with none of the long-term legal guarantees.
This may be as far as the Political Process can take things. Do you think I'll compromise?
Posted by MV
a resident of Shoreline West
on Feb 5, 2011 at 4:01 pm
a resident of Shoreline West
on Feb 5, 2011 at 4:01 pm
Looks like they ae throwing a bone instead of rightly eliminating this "special ta district".
Posted by oops!
a resident of another community
on Feb 7, 2011 at 10:41 am
a resident of another community
on Feb 7, 2011 at 10:41 am
@ James
For future reference - correct spelling is pittance
Don't miss out
on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Post a comment
Stay informed.
Get the day's top headlines from Mountain View Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.
