It’s pretty funny to read the comments from the 2017 article. Something’s change….most things have stayed the same…..

The short sightedness of closing and then needing to open schools is disruptive to the kids and expensive for the district.

MVWSD has about 15% fewer students than a decade ago and 15% more elementary schools (6 neighborhood + 2 choice vs. 5 + 2), and they don't stop beating the drum about needing more schools (two mentioned just in this article).

They pretty much goofed when they redrew boundaries last time, but not by much. Monta Loma is a little small, but not way so. Vargas isn't currently large at all. It's going to be 5 years before Vargas grows through new housing, and it may not be that much for the first few years. So trying to make a decision now about attendance boundaries for Vargas is kind of dumb. Without some new housing, Vargas would be getting smaller over the next 5 years. The key question is just how much smaller will be castro, Monta Loma and Theuerkaf, and of course Landels.

Comments were much livelier in 2017 before moderation was introduced, that’s for sure.

One significant factor that came up during the housing element process is the contrast between Imai and Castro, particularly regarding the unequal distribution of wealth and opportunity. Preserving boundaries that perpetuate this inequality, with wealthier areas located south of El Camino zoned for Imai and lower-income areas zoned for Castro, would not be a favorable approach.

Instead, it would be essential to align the redrawn boundaries with the principle of equal opportunity, considering the committed housing element. By ensuring that opportunities are distributed more equitably across different neighborhoods, the city can work towards a fairer and more inclusive educational system.

So, while it's important to address the specific challenges related to school enrollment, it's equally crucial to prioritize a broader approach that tackles the underlying issue of unequal opportunity distribution within the city.

The housing element has nothing to do with the school attendance boundaries. The rampant development is addressing issues with Castro though. The enrollment there is down 20% in the past 3 years, reaching 248 this year. That's only 3 more than at Monta Loma. First grade at Castro is only 35 kids where it was 50 in 2019-2020 so that's looking more like a 30% drop. At Monta Loma the school was larger to start with but it had a 29% drop since 2019-2020. However, first grade only dropped 23%. Castro is more in decline than Monta Loma and it could get worse as older buildings are torn down and their residents are displaced. If they stay in the district, they'll move to a different attendance area organically. Equity solved.

One thing that the district could afford to do would be to close Castro entirely and spread those kids out to various different schools. Some could be assigned to Huff/Imai, some to Monta Loma, etc. It's not many kids to absorb elsewhere and enrollments are declining at all the schools. By the time they need to reopen Castro due to enrollment growht, the same attendance area is going to have a lot more higher income residents.....

Or they could take this as an opportunity and add special programs to help the kids at Castro. With 248 in one school with a high rate of benefiting from added programs, this is a golden opportunity. There was a charter school proposal that would work for Castro. Longer school days with an included after school program/child care every day. Less summer vacation. Tutors and added attention. It's not really very expensive when you are focusing on just 248 students out of a district with 4522. Much harder to do to address the disadvantaged kids at all the schools.

- This persistent and pernicious Hispanic Segregation is Owned by this community.-
The lone Latino on the last redistricting Board - was also the lone vote against Castro segregation boundaries [gerrymandered redlining perpetuated]. White Trustee Blakely 'talked' about this disparity, in fact, the very Board meeting before she assumed office / she asked during public comment time, 'why the odd Bubb boundary South of Castro?' (i.e. Gemello).

How did Trustee Blakely actually Vote?

Talk is very very cheap (as is posting :). Or 'making a PR video' explaining why this type of neighborhood school segregation is 'one of the biggest school problems' (another White Trustee).

Economic real estate interests (see 2017 public comments) will always favor "redlining". Expect such members of the public - to always be organized, turn out, and speak up (for their economic interests - or isolating their children from poor families).

"White Fragility" - sure is a "woke book" and it sure explains most of the political action (IMO) of the White majorities on this Board - and all Mountain View school district boards since the establishment of "Escuela School" on "School Street" in the late 1800's.
-This persistent and pernicious Hispanic Segregation is Owned by this community.-

As far as setting the stage for discrimination goes, I would say that Gemello isn't that big of a factor in what results as enrollees in Castro. What I would question is the idea of squeezing a 2nd district wide school on such a small site as Castro.
Castro is clearly an inferior site for both of the 2 schools there. If Bubb had been used as the site for 2 schools sharing one site, it would make more sense for several reasons (1) increased population ends up being likely south of El Camino Real but currently only 2 schools sited there, and both district wide schools sited on the Bay Side of El Camino (2) Bubb is a larger site with an adjacent separate good size city park next to it, so none of the actual Bubb site goes to all-day Park uses and then (3) it really has no beneficial effects on Castro to have higher socio economic level kids next to them at Mistral. Give Castro its own dedicated site before reaching across ECR to add attendance areas to that school. Not having done that adds fuel to the idea that Gemello folks going there is bad. It's bad because it's an inferior site, which means those attending the site are being discriminated against and not from how the attendance areas are drawn.

The implicit premise is that Bubb neighbors deserve a better large school site and Park than do those living in the Catro School area.

Another thing you'd need to look at when assessing the Castro attendance area is the students Castro loses to Mistral. Perhaps those are some of the best students and perhaps their presence at Castro would improve education for those currently left at Castro. This is weird when you have 2 schools with a substandard school site (compared to Bubb, Huff/Imai or Landels for sure). Just redrawing the attendance area doesn't address the situation adequately. There's a problem with the inferiority of the school site there.

The housing element, with its requirement to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing, actually addresses the issue of economic and racial segregation in the current school boundaries. It recognizes the need to promote fair housing opportunities and tackle disparities in access to education. So, the housing element does have a direct connection to the school attendance boundaries.

Additionally, I noticed that you referred to Imai by its old name. It's important to use the updated name, as the change was made for good reason. Could you please clarify why you insist on referring to it by the old name?

Regarding your statement about Castro, while addressing the issues with Castro is important, it's crucial to consider the broader implications of boundary changes. Displacement of residents and the impact on the overall community must be carefully evaluated. Organic movement within the district doesn't necessarily guarantee equity, as it may overlook the systemic issues that contribute to the unequal distribution of opportunity.

Therefore, it remains essential to approach the redrawn boundaries with a comprehensive perspective, taking into account the principles of fairness, inclusivity, and the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing requirement outlined in the housing element.

Castro:Mistral The deed is done - more density (in permanent buildings) at the historic Escuela School site. At one time this site had a Dual Immersion Language Program, a Parent Participation Program and a Neighborhood school program! Overcrowded for a single-story building environment.

In the future - more density will eventually be needed (multi-story) in all new schools. Take a look at any 20th century single story residential area around MV. Second stories 'popping up all over'! Mid 20th century schools will also eventually need multi-story updates.

[BTW - Trustee Bill Lambert does own a home less than 15 minutes walking distance from the nearest MVWSD neighborhood elementary. 3 min. via Google mapping. A "15 minute city" is reasonable for many residents - if Planned For.]

The housing element essentially assumes the same school boundaries as today in that this classifying of economic opportunity in a location for new housing includes the premise that some schools are better than others. If you go changing the attendance boundaries significantly you can then undo the alleged advantages of a particular location for new housing.

I think that there is an inherent conflict in this idea of a neighborhood school if you are going to claim an obligation to homogenize the school populations across all schools. If you take this to the most direct action than closing the Castro school would have the most immediate effect. The disadvantaged kids could be split up and spread out amongst all other schools wher ethey would patake of the benefits of attending those schools. Or alternatively they would be diluted as to their affect on test scores and so forth.

This is ironic that there was an excellent charter school proposal which would have added special features to the school program which could not help but benefit the kids attending the school. It also sought to draw in kids from other backgrounds as well. To me, that would have a pretty good affect at equalizing things for the Castro neighborhood with the inferior shared site there. Put a charter school next to Mistral and let it lure in higher economic status kids as well as some of the local kids. It makes sense to give such a program a chance. MVWSD messed up in terms of equity by rejecting that porposal out of hand. They could always have closed it after a few years if it did not work, but we were left with more of the same situation that has gone on for 10 years now.

Meanwhile the inevitable gentrification will remove low income kids from Castro if it remains a neighborhood school, but over a period of 10-20 years.

While the housing element may consider the existing school boundaries, it also acknowledges the need to address economic and racial disparities within those boundaries. The goal is not to perpetuate the idea that some schools are inherently better than others, but rather to promote fair housing opportunities and ensure equitable access to quality education for all students.

Changing attendance boundaries significantly doesn't necessarily undo the advantages of a particular location for new housing. It allows for a reevaluation of the distribution of resources and opportunities, aiming to create more balanced and inclusive school communities.

Regarding the concept of neighborhood schools and homogenizing school populations, it is indeed a complex issue. While there may be inherent conflicts, the objective is to strike a balance between maintaining neighborhood connections and addressing inequities. Closing a school like Castro could have immediate effects, but it's important to carefully consider the impact on the students and the community involved.

Regarding the charter school proposal, it's understandable that you see it as a potential solution to equalizing opportunities for the Castro neighborhood. However, decisions regarding charter schools involve various considerations, including resource allocation and the overall educational framework. Evaluating and implementing such proposals require thorough analysis and assessment of their potential long-term impact on equity and student outcomes.

Gentrification, as you mentioned, can indeed result in the displacement of low-income students from certain neighborhoods over time. That's why it's crucial to address these issues proactively and seek solutions that promote both housing equity and educational equity.

Addressing the complex issues surrounding school boundaries, equity, and access to quality education requires careful evaluation, considering the long-term impact on all students and communities.

The Castro kids are not without opportunities. They have every resource at their disposal that all the others school have, probably even more, in the form of dedicated English language specialists. Spreading them to other schools doesn’t “create” opportunities. The they already have access to the highest paid teachers in the county.

@Salsa / U R in error. Castro school site does not even have the highest paid teachers in the MVWSD.
FACT CHECK: 2021-22 SARC (School Accountability Report Cards)
$91,597 / $96,407. Castro / Imai (elementaries)

2018-19 data Ed-Data: The Why
Castro: 5 yr "Average Teaching Experience", MVWSD ave 8 yr, County ave 10 yr
Imai: 8 yr "Average Teaching Experience" ...

The Political-Power Why (IMO)
Imai: Socioeconomically disadvantaged 5.6% about 1 in 18
Castro: Socioeconomically disadvantaged 85.9% about 7 in 8

There is a very good / independent / California education policy site used by and recommended by the State PTA. Educational Inequality (less/more resources) are also closely tied to average parent family income! Stevenson and Imai have the highest average family incomes / more 'independent' resources, including massive numbers of college educated parents that have time to volunteer!

ed100.org 8.11 Volunteers/ Hidden Treasure "The "wealth" of a school depends deeply on the skills, energy and time that moms, dads, students, and community members can bring to bear"
Web Link

IMO 'closing Castro School' and scattering this community is dystopian. It is easy to think of simple-but-sort-of-dumb solutions. [I have myself!] Castro overcrowded ? (2012) - Oh, open a Spanish Dual Language Immersion choice school out in Wagon Wheel (instead of a general neighborhood elementary)! MVWSD Administration!

sure ! those carless poor Hispanic families get to walk 2.5 miles to school? Or bus them all? twice a day

Dual Immersion (now Mistral) was initially designed to be WALKABLE by poor-Hispanic families living in the Castro (Esquela) school neighborhood.

The common thread for Castro isn't too many or too few administrators, or school facilities. Like the majority of segregated schools across the US: to find out why a single population is underperforming, follow your nose to the structural barriers in the COMMUNITY that prevent the families who live a particular zone from getting what they need so that their children can thrive at school.

The factors that are disproportionately affecting Castro today (and have disproportionately affected the schools South of El Camino since the schools North of El Camino were built) are tied to the local history of neighborhood housing policy. The City of Mountain View's Human Relations Commission and Historical Association held an informative roundtable event last summer which is especially relevant here. It was even covered by the MVV: Web Link

And here are the links to the materials and presentation: Web Link

Web Link

A summary: similarly to other historic cities in CA and the US which were established in the Jim Crow era (before 1968), 1) Mountain View's original city planners deliberately concentrated socioeconomically-disadvantaged (usually non-white and often termed "transient") families into high-density housing zones and 2) the City (as an agent of local political will) under-invested as a matter of policy in these neighborhoods and restricted access to better housing on the basis of race and income.

The City's presentation emphasizes the history of discrimination against people of Asian descent but barely mentions the demographic which continues to be disproportionately affected by historic and modern systemic and overt racism: the very large, very multi-cultural, rapidly-changing local Latino population.

If you get really interested in the students who are currently zoned for Castro (and who make up 40% of Mistral's student body), you might be tempted to make a few assumptions.

You might assume, having read that 80% of the households whose children attend Castro make less than $52,000, that the housing these families live in (mostly West of Escuela and North of Central Expy) charges significantly lower rents than other units. That reasonable assumption is bizarrely incorrect -- these units are generally within a few % points of market rates, which is why many low-income families share apartments.

Then might conclude that if the complexes charge market rates, then the housing must be of similar quality to the housing in the market rate apartments that are not in the neighborhood zoned for Castro. You'd be wrong again. Market-rate rents in these units have not been used to improve the quality of the housing for these families. Nor have they been used to upgrade many of the buildings' infrastructures with hardware to the support children trying to, say, attend class from home during a pandemic. Nor has the city or private telecom companies invested in cellular infrastructure so that mobile hotspots are effective.

It takes political will from the entire community at the City, County, State, and (gods forbid) Federal levels (not just yelling incoherently at local school boards about having too many administrators) to change policies that create and sustain neighborhood segregation, lead to shareholder profits earned from deliberate concentration of poverty, and local marginalization of the voices of the families in those neighborhoods. This is what we might learn if we get really interested in "schools like Castro."

Last comment: People who didn’t grow up in CA or the USA might not realize that each elementary school’s site plan for student achievement is developed by a state-mandated committee comprised of that school's parents, teachers, and administrators. Web Link

Community members who want to inform themselves with granular data about the specific realities and challenges at each school site can do a Google search for [school name] + “site plan for student achievement.” Here is a link to Castro’s: Web Link

Castro’s school site plan describes, in detail, the customized support and also the unique barriers disproportionately experienced by the families who live in the neighborhoods zoned for Castro. None of the specific barriers mentioned (on pages 8-9) are attributable to a deficiency in the school site’s layout, facilities, or number of students. For example: "A significant barrier to school climate is the amount of counseling and support needed by our children and families. Children are often experiencing a significant amount of stress or trauma due to housing instability, home conditions, number of people sharing living spaces, political or social unrest, and dysfunctional family dynamics that include drug, alcohol, domestic violence, and sexual abuse. This stress impacts their ability to learn and focus positively on peer relations as well as relations with adults."

There are more details, but it's important to remember that these are not excuses for poor learning; they just provide the context that this school works with. Why can't we direct our energy away from habitually blaming the district and school employees (compassionate working-class knowledge-workers who *also* can't afford to live here) for the predictable outcomes of greed, ignorance, systemic racism.

I'd say - @MVWSD Parent - you are so right about the theoretical "framework"
[Dan Waters: CalMatters this week's Opinion
"California's (MVWSD's) education achievement gap defies billions (millions per year) in school spending]. (local comments added about our LCAP).
"... LCFF - as implemented, not as envisioned- has not been a roaring success."

But Castro, with an enormous need (SED numbers) is not getting "primarily proportional" extra money (LCFF/LCAP Enhancement Grant). Hence their need for drastically getting councilors to help end drastically large Chronic Absenteeism. This has been a problem for many years! Not just the Pandemic years.

"A significant barrier to school climate is the amount of counseling and support needed by our children and families. Children are often ...

I read this as Not Enough counseling AT THIS PARTICULAR Title 1 school at this PARTICULAR TIME. A plea by parents and staff. The MVWSD Administration has improved a little the LCAP funded positions where the High Needs students are [but Administrative positions are above county average percent and STUDENT SERVICES positions are still reported as Below County Average [troll Ed-Data.org]. district/Staff/. inverse ratios

In Los Altos SD (elementary) the administrator/students services positions are almost equal. AND, both the ratios are much closer to the county average. [BTY "Benchmarking" is a very valid way to compare educational organizations doing the same basic job and that eventually send their students to the same high school educational system. IMO]

The "extra" programs now found at Castro are minimal compared to the need. The attitude that they are sufficient demonstrates the problem. Self interests of parents of kids that aren't from such disadvantaged families are the problem. I do feel like redrawing attendance boundaries is a way to help hide the problems rather than to address them.

The idea that the neighborhood lived in by a disadvantaged child can improve the outcome for that child is a flaw of the housing advocates calling for locating more subsidized apartments in high income areas. The real issue is different parental means. The subsidies for low income kids to attend Beyond the Bell at Castro should be available for EVERY kid enrolled there. It should be a much bigger after school program than is found at the schools with YMCA programs.
And look at how Mistral only has the YMCA program even though a large part of its sstudents are disadvantaged too. The after school program is just babysitting for the other schools but it's a way to give opportunities to the disadvantaged kids.

@LongResident, we basically agree on several things. BYTB funding for Mistral SED and ELL is Completely a Board Policy decision! $$$,$$$/yr for yet another administrator? :). I Do continue to BLAME THE District Administrators and policy makers for our nation-wide-shame of academic Achievement GAP in MVWSD. (White - Hispanic). This was well reported by The Voice, after the New York Times picked it up (2009-12 data). But has been underreported by the Voice since!

MVWSD increase in Academic Achievement GAP (W-H) by 10% over last 5 years compared to MVLA High School District (W-H). To me, MVWSD Parent, there seems to be a very local reason for this 'odd' disparity. None or extremely small absolute GAP decrease over that same time period just within MVWSD.
"Intent" over a decade does not best "measured results". (can't use trump :)

MVWSD Parent / hope U have read the 'woke' White Fragility chapter 11 on "White Woman's Tears". Who are U? Do U have a name? Are U a politico? Ellen W. and C. Chiang have always "owned" their public commentary. U? MVWSD (White) Parent or MVWSD (Asian) Parent?

I always have loved the 'back story' on the internationally famous MLK "Letter from Birmingham Jail" / it frames my civic-political response to missives that are like "A Call for Unity". MVWSD Parent, the side of the (white) clergymen and yours, just don't resonate in me - not like King's call for Not Waiting Patently and creating Constructive Tension.

MVWSD - I sure hope I'm creating tension!
(Wikipedia on MLK Letter)
Web Link