So they paid their fees early...how is this even a story?

We need an employee tax on companies that employ over 500 people whether or not all their employees are based in MV.

That'll buy maybe 10 properties. And in exchange they build 612,000 sf of office space? Get lost. We need a moratorium on new office and commercial space across the whole Bay Area, not more housing. Let the jobs distribute elsewhere rather than moronically trying to cram them all into the SF Bay Area.

This was an ad for LinkedIn.

The city has to repay it if they don't approve LinkedIn's project! So if the city spends the housing money and then doesn't approve their project they city's on the hook. That's not a pledge. That's a backhanded quid pro quo.

This is great!
Mountain View desperately needs more affordable housing!

This seems the opposit effect from an Opportunity Cost. It seems to be a benefit to have the money sooner - rather than 2 or three years later. Hopefully no COLA, inflation or other adjustments in the agreement. I do not think that Cost of Land is going to decrease here in the next three years. So - not an extreme benefit (come on why not ADDITIONAL $10,000,000) but it sure seems to me a slight early opportunity benefit. (not worth a change of vote!)

@You've gotta be kidding

Appropriate name. Instead of trying to kill the job market in the Bay Area, we could actually build high-density housing along mass transit.

Please clarify what part of displacing jobs from the Bay Area to, say, Longmont CO, Austin TX, etc is a negative? Is it the lower salaries necessary to sustain a given standard of living and associated higher profits? The lower income taxes workers would pay in other states (especially after tax reform kicks in)? The ability of workers to afford a home rather than living in RVs on ECR? Reduced commute time and more time with family for those who live and work both here and elsewhere?

I'd hazard a guess that a tiny percentage of LinkedIn jobs (using this example) actually require a worker's physical presence and couldn't be as easily accomplished with a remote connection overlooking the Columbia River Gorge and Webex. I'd take that opportunity in a heartbeat with a huge salary cut.

Your reference to the massive giveaway by the Republicans to their rich donors as "tax reform" says all that I need to know about you. For everything else you bring up, high-density housing and investment in mass transit alleviate all of those issues.

Give the money back and remain independent.

Ha haha, You got to be kidding, thinking that just because someone lives next to mass transit they will be using all the time.

You want high density, move to NYC, or back to detroit.

Sorry, @, YIMBY is a Bay Area native, unlike you. Just because you're too set in your ways, doesn't mean you get to dictate what others do.

@@yimby

Nah, I'll stay here and keep voting for high-density growth initiatives and politicians that support them. If you want low-density I encourage you to move to a more rural area.

Hopefully there are enough of us who want to keep the flair and suburban feel that we moved here for and can stop the over-building and over-use of our local natural resources. YIMBY is free to push his agenda but there are many of us, most not nearly as vocal but still powerful in our voting, who very strongly disagree with his proposals.

Just because you want to live here does not make it a right. There are MANY reasons to discourage high-density and as a culture and society we need to seriously talk about the long term effects of overbuilding in our cities and states. Particularly given the challenges that California faces with resources.

I say build it out,it's gonna happen anyway. The money talks and will drive the real estate development to push higher and denser and less affordible.

You can't stop it now with an endless flow of money coming in from China and a tech thirsty economy driven by global desires. You wanted success, this is what it looks like with people filling our cities from overseas. Overcrowding, expensive and loss of quality of life.

If you want to survive it.. Make your fortune and get out!
That's what I did.

I've got to say, The Donald, this is the first time I've agreed with you. The best course of action is for mvresident2003 to get out.

What a joke, if you read the story it says:

Taking a unique approach to providing affordable housing, LinkedIn is pledging $10 MILLION IN SEED MONEY THAT WOULD BE LOANED OUT for new residential developments in Mountain View. This pool of money is described as a new tool to help affordable housing projects that struggle to acquire property in a competitive real estate market.

They are not do anyone any favors, this was just another means to get some kind of control over the City of Mountain View. Watch, if this is used, they will threaten the City with demanding payment for the loan in one payment. This is just another corporate scam.

Randy. Do you really think it's a good idea and the best thing for California to continue over-crowding, over-building and over-taxing our resources? Once could argue that the recent fires up North are a result of this expansion gone wild. What is so wrong with encouraging growth elsewhere, places with more natural resources and less chances of wildfires, drought, etc?

And could we possibly have a civil discourse without the snide, snarky comments? I'm happy to discuss/debate this with anyone, it's healthy to have these discussions but I'm not in it if it can't be civil.