Why not share it with LASD too since Mountain View residents also attend those schools? Some Mountain View kids are getting the benefit of this additional money and others are not.

@parent - The shared revenues come from the Shoreline Community District which is not located in the LASD Boundaries but in the Mountain View Whisman and MVLA Union High School boundaries.
City Council should be applauded for this generous and voluntary sharing.

With regard to what MV-LASD parent said, I think you are not seeing the big picture.

The Mountain View City Council has approved MANY building projects in the NEC (North of El Camino) area. These projects have the potential to bring hundreds of new students into those areas. All of of these projects are within the LASD boundaries, yet the MVCC has yet to address the strain that puts on LASD. As a matter of fact, when they were asked by LASD to help deal with the effect of projects THEY approved, they, in effect, said it wasn't their problem.

As a resident of Mountain View with a child that attends LASD schools, I find this callous attitude toward dealing with a problem that they largely created very disturbing. It is embarrassing to have my city causing problems for the district my child attends.

If the MVCC was concerned with the issue THEY helped create, I would expect they would put some effort into solving it. Rather than approving more and more high density housing, they should work toward assisting LASD in obtaining an appropriate school site in the NEC area.

As parent stated, why should some MV kids benefit from this sharing and others not?

@psr - I agree with you and have been pushing for the City Council to do more to help the MV Kids attending schools in LASD (in particular for facilities).

That said, if the Shoreline Community District didn't exist, the property taxes would flow into the Mountain View Whisman and MVLA Union High school districts NOT into LASD. Hence it just seems fair that these revenues be shared only with those districts.

I think the main point is that MVCC should be using city resources to deal with city problems. They have created an issue in the El Camino/San Antonio area, yet they won't deal with the problem. The more of us that voice that to them, the better. I'm glad ANY school will benefit, but ALL MV kids should benefit because they all have parents that have to deal with the MV city government.

I find the second-class treatment that my area (which is actually Monroe Park, although the MV Voice doesn't recognize that as an area in MV, although it exists) receives from the city upsetting. I used to do more shopping in MV than I do now because of it. I now tend to shop in Los Altos because my own city direct resources away from my area, choosing to use it only as a cash cow.

I hope that changes, but until it does, I will continue to spend in Los Altos as much as possible.

Perhaps all MV children should be in MVWSD. That way the city would not have any conflicting motivations toward funding them and providing them with adequate facilities.

@LASD parent : Although that might be a nice idea from 50,000 feet above, do you really think that is fair to the people that bought into the area for the schools and, in some cases, a particular school? I'm sure you remember the uproar a few years ago, when LASD changed the district lines and sent some kids from Almond to Springer. Would you really want to recreate that on a massive scale? Wouldn't getting a few city officials to agree to work together for everyone's benefit be a LOT more reasonable? Why should those funding the schools be made to suffer?

Oh, there it goes. that suggestion that the MV kids should be bumped from the LASD. Predictable.

The fact is, it isn't the MVCC's responsibility to provide space for schools. It is up to the LASD, which serves parts of MV and LA. Just like it isn't the responsibility of the LACC to provide school space in South Los Altos for the Cupertino School District.

Missing $4,363,322. According to the "County of Santa Clara Compilation of Tax Rates & Information" for 2012-2013 (pg. H-10), the QUASI Redevelopment agency property would have paid MVWSD $7,237,322.40 in this tax year. That's of factor of 2.5X more than offered (and accepted 4-1). Or 40 cents on the property tax dollar.
Long live the Gov. who eliminated general statute RDAs! With the LCFF school funding reform, MVWSD will in future years be getting the old Castro Street RDA $$.

This issue was first reported by the Mercury News. Look up 2004 stories -- "Mountain View’s Shoreline sees rising tide of prosperity: Tax District’s proceeds stay at home" and "Mountain View's haves and have-fewers."

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?