Mountain View–Whisman trustees voted unanimously to make roughly $29 million available while the district explores options to purchase the land beneath a recently opened staff-housing development and to continue analysis of rent, occupancy and governance options.

At a presentation on the staff-housing project, consultant Peter Ingram and district staff summarized operational progress, occupancy and next steps toward a stabilization plan. The board heard that property management has moved on site, construction activities continue around the property and staff are preparing detailed pro forma financial analysis to inform decisions about rent levels and whether to exercise a purchase option.

Ingram described visits to other district-owned housing projects and recommended the board consider forming a separate governance entity to operate the building if the district retained ownership. He cited Jefferson Union High School District's 501(c)(3) housing corporation as an operational model that the board might study.

A slide staff shared listed a current snapshot of residents tied to district employment: of 34 employees indicated as residing (or soon to reside) in the building, that snapshot showed 6 counselors/behavioral technicians, 5 instructional aides, 11 teachers and 3 clerical/custodial staff. Staff said they would provide more detailed occupancy and unit-type breakdowns on request.

Members of the public raised concerns about how the district displays and aggregates occupancy information. One commenter said an earlier slide's presentation of teachers versus other staff was misleading when categories were regrouped; another asked for a clear breakdown of how many units are occupied by district employees versus other entities and for how many median-income units remain available.

Dr. Westover (district presenter on finance) and Interim Superintendent Bair answered questions about next steps: staff will complete pro forma analyses, review rent-rate options, and bring study sessions to the board. Westover said ownership would remain with the district under the 501(c)(3) oversight model used by other districts; that model would delegate operational decisions to a nonprofit board while the district retained the underlying asset.

After the update the board considered a staff recommendation to pause some Measure T projects and earmark available capital and other funds while deciding whether to buy the land. Trustee Lambert moved to approve the recommendation; Trustee Henry seconded. The motion to make approximately $29 million available for a possible purchase passed unanimously.

Motion: approve staff recommendation to set aside funds for a potential purchase of the land under staff housing. Mover: Trustee Lambert. Second: Trustee Henry. Vote: unanimous (Board recorded voice vote as "all in favor, aye").

Trustees also directed staff to hold two study sessions to permit deeper review of the pro forma analyses and to return with recommendations on longer-term governance options, including steps to form a nonprofit oversight entity if the board decides to pursue that route.

Public commenters asked for clearer itemized accounting of legal and administrative costs tied to the staff-housing project; trustees and staff agreed to follow up with additional financial reporting and occupancy details at upcoming study sessions.