Wow.

It's amazing that the city can continue to think that people won't move in to get a good school district, despite the size of the housing units. Just like the city continues to think that new housing won't need the water they sold to Palo Alto, more police and fire protection and other city services, they have now convinced themselves we won't need schools either. I suppose it's easy to ignore reality if you don't want face the fact that the same people who can't afford expensive rent are the same people who can't send their kids to private schools.

I suppose we shouldn't worry though. If the Mountain View schools continue to fritter away money on expensive programs with no record of success, we won't have to concern ourselves that local schools will be a "draw" for those in low-performing areas. Those people might end up better off staying where they are now.

What kind of consultant made projections without knowing how many bedrooms and square footage of the proposed units? Obviously 3 BR units will have more kids than studios.

How does all of this relate to the special tax district out there where schools are entitled to none of the property taxes unless the city decides to give it to them?

@psr

The same people who can't afford expensive rent and private school very likely aren't going to be affording children, either. The studios will be perfect for DINK couples splitting rent, and anything with 2-3 bedrooms are going to be filled with roommates renting the individual bedrooms.

@ YIMBY

You are working under the same assumptions that the council does and they are wrong.

My son had classmates who were part of a family of five living in a 2 bedroom condo. There were single parents with two children in one bedroom apartments. It was worth being crowded for the schools.

I'm not sure where you get your ideas, but the reality is quite different. Not sure it would bother you though. You won't be happy until we are all shoulder to shoulder in this city, so this should be right up your alley.

Notice how that's a notable individual example, rather than a trend?

And I could say that you won't be happy until there's a moat around Mountain View to keep everyone but you out. You're preaching exclusivity and selfishness. Cities grow, you should try to grow with it.

"Growing up" doesn't mean packing 2000 kids into an elementary school. It means planning for growth, that means building roads and schools.

You certainly won't see me advocating that we not plan for growth. The only problem is that the same people who tend to vocally protest new housing due to lack of infrastructure never seem to actually get behind that infrastructure getting built at all, and then the housing never gets built.

North Bayshore is in Mountain View Whisman elementary school district. The
schools do not have the same reputation and deluxe facilities found in LASD which serves the San Antonio Road area of Mountain View.

School operational money from the special taxing district (Shoreline). Francis, I guess the future school boards of MVWSD will continue to beg the city to continue give them a small fraction of the new property tax money from all the new construction, and property tax revenue, out there. Even if a deal is cut, to completely cover all the new facilities without burdening the existing MVWSD tax payers, there will be very little YEARLY money guaranteed to come in to cover the operations of those schools and classrooms.

Oh well - back to state funding based on average attendance, the time of higher local revenue (per student) will be ending.