Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, May 26, 2011, 12:45 PM
Town Square
Shoreline Community takes on $26.5 million in new debt
Original post made on May 26, 2011
Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, May 26, 2011, 12:45 PM
Comments (6)
Posted by Duke
a resident of Old Mountain View
on May 26, 2011 at 1:23 pm
a resident of Old Mountain View
on May 26, 2011 at 1:23 pm
This question has been asked several times on this forum in the recent past... What are the latest S&P or Moody's ratings for M.V. G.O. bonds? My guess is AAA for S&P.
Posted by Tony
a resident of Waverly Park
on May 26, 2011 at 1:44 pm
a resident of Waverly Park
on May 26, 2011 at 1:44 pm
What would be the basis for Mr. Nelson's threatened lawsuit? While he may think it unwise to issue the bonds, it seems perfectly legal.
Posted by Leslie
a resident of Sylvan Park
on May 26, 2011 at 2:30 pm
a resident of Sylvan Park
on May 26, 2011 at 2:30 pm
Some of the money should go into rehabbing Micheals. It is looking very run down. Especially the lobby and bathrooms. It is a great location and resource for Mountain View but not as a shabby shadow of itself.
Posted by Peter
a resident of Old Mountain View
on May 26, 2011 at 2:58 pm
a resident of Old Mountain View
on May 26, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Instead of stopping by Michael's you could always continue on to the lake. There is a nice cafeteria/restaurant down there - with great seating overlooking the lake...
Posted by taxpayer
a resident of Waverly Park
on May 27, 2011 at 10:30 am
a resident of Waverly Park
on May 27, 2011 at 10:30 am
Why don't we just use the $40 million we received fro Google to pay this. This is fiscally responsible - no additional interest cost of $32 million in the next 29 years.
Posted by Steven Nelson
a resident of Cuesta Park
on May 27, 2011 at 10:41 am
a resident of Cuesta Park
on May 27, 2011 at 10:41 am
WARNING TO SCHOOLS/PARENTS - the official bond documents show that Shoreline is planning to cut off your new money after 3 years!!!
The rating for the bonds is not as high as AAA but were estimated as A. The reason is that they are not backed by the City or general property tax revenue - only the "tax increment" by this special redevelopment district. My warning to the Shoreline Board/Council and the bond attorney - is that "threatened litigation" against that particular source of income (25% tax diversions from the elementary district) would / if successful / possibly limit the ability to repay. At over 300% tax diversion revenue/ debt payment ratio (statue limits to < $125%) at this point would not really be a problem if MVWSD got back its rightful (IMO) taxes. But .. San Jose's regular redevelopment district overborrowed and now has almost NO operational money
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.
