Several things in this accurate description show the fuzzy logic used by the district in this process. First, the district has provided portable classrooms to give BCS about 65,000 sq ft of space, which is below district standards for their current size. Adding 7 classes certainly means need for 7 new classrooms, but it should be more than that. It's not so easy to squeeze 200 extra kids into the same limited outdoor space, for example. Use of the specialized school rooms for art music science etc needs to increase too for 200 extra kids. 7 classrooms is a bare minimum and when I look at the BCS proposal I read it as saying that they can make do with less space if they are all together, but if they are split 2 ways they need more space to duplicate some space at each site, offices, workrooms, lunch areas, all sorts of things.

BCS has only met the demand for enrollment and not gone beyond. The district knew this was coming "Consulting" is not an issue. Did the district consult with BCS about the design of this new school in Mountain VIew? Everything I see about that show it to be very bizarrely planned, with many differences from the normal LASD school. Doesn't that require some consultation too? And 2022 is optimistic on opening it. The city council may well require that it be used for a neighborhood school, meaning no BCS there. Any consultations about that? What did LASD plan to do to improve BCS facilities for next year? Have they put forth any plans to BCS as of yet, even for less growth than actually happened?

The problem seems to be denial of the situation by LASD, not unpredictability of what happened. it was going to happen.

Five years ago BCS and LASD entered into a settlement agreement in which BCS accepted a growth cap and less-then- equitable facilities in exchange for the promise of a permanent solution by the end of the five years. LASD has had FIVE years to collaborate with BCS and the Los Altos community to find a solution - how can they be “surprised” that BCS has returned to the legal Prop 39 process when there is no permanent solution in sight? LASD trustees are elected to manage our shared public resources, including public school facilities and revenue. It is concerning to hear their rhetoric of “us” vs “them” when all of these students are public school students. It is time for our community to insist on good faith collaboration and a permanent solution so all of our public school students have equal access to facilities and our community members are not pitted against one another because of which public school they choose for their child.

Solutions LASD could have implemented during the five year peace agreement to fulfill their promise of finding a permanent solution:
1.Move 6th graders to Egan and Blach, as all neighboring districts have done.
2.Choose a campus to locate or co-locate BCS, which currently enrolls 20% of in-district public school students
3.Draw new attendance boundaries for the shrinking elementary schools. Only apply to incoming students, so no current students are displaced
4.Seek an enrollment cap from BCS in exchange for providing these equitable facilities.
5.Consider creating some meaningful “choice” programs in the district to alleviate the significant demand for alternative education models.

Eliminate all public schools and issue vouchers to needy families that can be used at government approved schools. Rich families often pay for private schools - all rich families should pay for their own children's education. Residents without children should not be paying for them. This WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY needs to stop. It won't, of course.

Fascinating.

Has anyone else noticed that NONE of the comments here are from people who actually LIVE here?

Nothing like having non-locals telling a community what it should or should not do with its children and its money. We are intelligent enough to solve this problem without having pseudo-intellectual input.

Very amusing to have psr from Palo Alto claiming to live in The Crossings critique people's locales.

He doesn't know Mountain View or Los Altos very well.

Yes, that is amusing ‘1 person’, Pattie S Rotondo doesn’t realize that Monroe Park is not the Crossings or that most LASD constituents don’t have any other option than ‘Another Community’ in the drop-down list. To her credit, though, I think she actually lives in the Mountain View portion of Monroe Park. But that is definitely not the Crossings according to the Nextdoor neighborhood outlines.

@PSR : The MV Voice does not offer "Los Altos" as a neighborhood option, only "other community". Please do not assume comments are from "non-locals". I live in Los Altos, I am an LASD constituent and I care deeply how the LASD trustees manage (or mismanage) our community assets.