Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have 2 young kids (1.5 & 4.5). Because of jobs, we have to move but the only options is either San Diego or Austin. We currently live in Ft Collins, Colorado. Is pretty small compared to SD or Austin. So moving to 'big city' can be a bit nerve wrecking.
I can only state what my research said so far. Never live in these 2 places before so i could be wrong. In term of home price & good schools, I think Austin is more affordable & heard all good things about their schools in Westlake, Leander & Lake Travis ISD. But San Diego, can't beat the weather. So we set aside 700K budget for SD (hope is good enough budget for homes in Poway, PQ, Carmel Mountain area) & Austin, we think we can do it with ~450K budget for Lakeway/Steiner Ranch area. We are not rushing into getting a house though. This thread is more about asking the quality of SD school vs Austin school.
Long story short, before we decide on location, I just want to know how good (quality of teaching, depth of learning, competitiveness, available gifted program etc) SD school compared to equivalent schools in other states or places like Austin for that matter? I did a greatschool & school digger rating checks, each states are using different standardize tests, is really hard to do apple to apple comparison.
Also Charter school is my first choice for our kids if we get to stay but I don't think both Austin & SD are big at charter schools. Right? Why is that?
Sorry if I seems confused & undecided. The truth is I am. Trying to find the best place to raise our kids is possibly the biggest deal out weight the stress coming from moving to a new job & new location.
Can't comment on the Austin schools but the suburban areas in SD with 700k homes usually have good schools. The downside is that with the state essentially bankrupt there is tremendous pressure on public schools to increase class sizes, shorten the school year, and cut services like PE, libraries, band etc. The wealthier districts make up the difference out of the parents pockets, essentially meaning that you will pay 1-5k/yr in addition to your tax bill to ensure your school is adequately staffed and your kids have access to the expected programs.
Can't comment on the Austin schools but the suburban areas in SD with 700k homes usually have good schools. The downside is that with the state essentially bankrupt there is tremendous pressure on public schools to increase class sizes, shorten the school year, and cut services like PE, libraries, band etc. The wealthier districts make up the difference out of the parents pockets, essentially meaning that you will pay 1-5k/yr in addition to your tax bill to ensure your school is adequately staffed and your kids have access to the expected programs.
Exactly. I've been VERY impressed with the Poway Unified School district. It's EXCELLENT. Even just in pre-K it's very noticeable the parent involvement. And the student to teacher ratio is also really great. This is the 2nd year of our daughter in Pre-K and at both schools she has been to it's been really great. The teachers are incredible as well as the teacher's assistants.
And the parent involvement is great with both schools she has attended having "Room parents" that are very involved. The parents are all connected via websites where all the kids and their parents phones/emails are all listed and communication with the teacher is great (almost daily with emails) informing parents what is going on that week.
And when they need supplies, they simply send out a list to parents and typically by the next week all the things are purchased.
And even larger ticket items the parents help purchase. For example, the teacher of our daughter's class sent an email out to the parents saying that it would be nice for the kids to have a few ipads in the class for some educational programs. The school couldn't afford them. A week or two later and they have several ipads in their class funded by parent donations. (I doubt you'd see that kind of thing in the San Diego Unified School District).
I don't have ANY idea how the school districts are in Austin. DEFINITELY real estate is cheaper there but you will probably pay more property taxes in Austin on a $450,000 house vs. a $700,000 house in San Diego so keep that in mind. Property taxes are wicked expensive in Texas. They don't have State income tax there so they find other ways to beat up taxpayers so keep that in mind.
In San Diego for the most part your property tax bill is 1% of the purchase price. If you live in a newer development area, you will also get hit with Mello Roos taxes which add on more (we pay over $5,000 extra a year in Mello Roos taxes). However, in many cities in Texas, property taxes can approach almost 3% a year in property taxes!
Plus you will spend a small fortune on utility bills in the summer. Austin had something like 40+ days of 100 degree weather last summer. Even a decade ago, I had $600+ electricity bills in Dallas cooling my house. Granted it was a big house but still I imagine now with more expensive electricity it would cost over $1,000 a month during the summer to cool a big house like that.
Because of jobs, we have to move but the only options is either San Diego or Austin. We currently live in Ft Collins, Colorado. Is pretty small compared to SD or Austin. So moving to 'big city' can be a bit nerve wrecking.
Sorry if I seems confused & undecided. The truth is I am. Trying to find the best place to raise our kids is possibly the biggest deal out weight the stress coming from moving to a new job & new location.
Thanks for your help.
My general thoughts are, go to Austin. You are going to save a metric ton of money living there versus Southern California, and San Diego in particular. Right now Southern Cali is all kinds of bad for young families, due to one of the highest income taxes in the nation, one of the highest sales taxes in the nation, among the highest gas prices in the nation, electricity costs a fortune, and on and on.
You can read lots of reports about migration out of California. You know who's leaving? Young families, because their dollars go much further in other states. Sad fact, but true fact. Civic Report 71 | The Great California Exodus: A Closer Look
Bottom line, California is a fiscal train wreck. You need to research everything concerning a future in California, including local property taxes, Mello Roos assessments, any HOA assessments, etc. etc. Property out here can be a viper's den. For example, if you do decide to buy in Poway, you need to research the tax issue very carefully, because look at what you may be buying. Good luck trying to sell your Poway house in the future if this bond deal blows up and taxpayers are on the hook for a billion or so:
Quote:
Where Borrowing $105 Million Will Cost $1 Billion: Poway Schools
The bottom line: For borrowing $105 million in 2011, taxpayers will end up paying investors more than $981 million by 2051, or almost 10 times what the district borrowed. That’s wildly more expensive than a typical school bond, in which a district pays back two or maybe three times what it borrowed.
As well as being expensive, capital appreciation bonds work by tapping future growth in property values to pay today’s debts, a concept considered by many in the school bond business to be both risky and inequitable. In 1994, the state of Michigan banned school districts from issuing bonds like this, deeming them too toxic to taxpayers.
Nevertheless, California’s ever-strapped districts have increasingly looked to capital appreciation bonds to raise money for improvements without increasing taxes on current residents. Across the state, districts have borrowed billions this way, using exotic financing to shift the burden for paying for today’s school construction to future generations of Californians.
Poway Unified, a district more accustomed to praise for its fiscal austerity, has found itself at the center of the debate over these bonds. For a year now, it’s come under fire from taxpayer groups and concerned elected officials around the state, for whom Poway’s bond has reached legendary status.
"This is way worse than loan sharking," said Michael Turnipseed, executive director of the Kern County Taxpayers Association in central California, which has lobbied the state Legislature to tighten laws on school district borrowing. "And Poway is the poster child. What they have done is absolutely insane."
. . .
In short: In order to keep its promises to current residents, the district entered into a deal that places a billion-dollar burden on future residents. Last year's deal, in the words of County Treasurer and Tax Collector Dan McAllister, "is a perfect example of how something that’s done today can adversely affect the next generation and the generation after that.
Last year, the district put together its deal to borrow $105 million, without paying anything towards the debt for 20 years. In two decades’ time, taxpayers will start paying about $50 million a year towards the loan. They’ll make those payments for the next 20 years or so. It’s a bit like a massive version of one of those exotic loans that got homeowners into so much trouble. With one key difference: For the next 20 years, Poway Unified isn’t even paying the interest.
On The Hook
Apart from its overall cost, there’s another reason why Poway’s massive capital appreciation bond should matter to taxpayers. In 20 years, the school district will be on the hook for its first payment towards last year’s loan. That payment will be a little more than $30 million, $24 million of which is interest. The following year, the payment will balloon to almost $47 million. And, for the next 18 years after that, until 2051, district taxpayers will have to pay about $50 million every year towards the debt — essentially paying off their initial loan every two years for the next two decades.
The district and its advisors assumed that Poway Unified would have enough coming in from the existing taxes by 2033 to pay those bills. But that's far from certain. Right now, the district receives about $11 million a year from homeowners towards paying off its bonds. So, to be able to afford its debt payments 20 years from now, the total assessed value of property within the taxed area would have to quadruple.
That’s possible. In the last 10 years, the total value of property in the school district almost doubled. But if the last decade has shown municipal governments anything, it’s that relying on consistent growth in tax revenues is a risky business.
If the district’s projections don’t come true, homeowners will see their taxes spike to make up the difference. And there’s no chance of the district refinancing the deal. The loan contains a provision strictly barring the district from refinancing its debt. The district told taxpayers back in 2008 that it probably wouldn’t have to raise taxes to meet its payments. But it’s fully within its legal rights to do so.
McAllister, whose office is tasked with making sure local school districts pay their bond debts, said his office could be compelled to raise property tax rates to ensure the district can make its payments on the bond.
Of course, many of the residents who voted on Proposition C will be long gone by then. They’ll be dead, or living somewhere else. But whoever’s left living in the taxed area will have to pick up the tab for the money the district borrowed last year, and for the $877 million in interest the district will have accumulated by then.
Excellent Post. This is the daily news here in Poway. How it tumbles out could affect the area here. It's a cluster now with investigations etc. On the better side Poway is a reasonable climate about 10 days/year near 100 degrees but milder than Texas not blistering. Families are friendly and linked in to the community. The dark side of the schools as children grow up is drugs (maybe that's anywhere) but the combination of income and free time is a bad recipe for high school age (realize your kids are younger)....
Being from Alaska I recommend you visit both places for a week. Stay at a Marriott Residence Inn. Call first and chat with local people in both cities. Eyes on the ground is the best way to know what fits for you and your family. Important decisions like this should not be by remote...
The dark side of the schools as children grow up is drugs (maybe that's anywhere) but the combination of income and free time is a bad recipe for high school age (realize your kids are younger)....
I see this mentioned a lot in north county school discussions here, I have a toddler and a baby so this will affect us eventually. Having recently purchased in the La Costa area and intending for my kids to go through high school there, I'm curious what this means? Maybe it is my low income, small town Midwestern roots and I don't understand, but do parents just give the kids a bunch of money in the higher income areas that they can then use on drugs without the parents knowing? Despite being likely classified as a "higher income" family (though definitely not rich by coastal North County terms), I certainly didn't plan on just giving my kids that kind of spending money.
I have been seeing some very nice cars parked all along the high school, so perhaps that is a warning sign. It seems strange to me that parents would just give kids money like that, high income or not. Is that the prevailing culture among high school age students in the higher income areas, to just have money and time to burn on drugs? I hate to make my kids social outcasts, but I think they'll be driving beater cars and not having pockets full of free money.
Maybe it is my low income, small town Midwestern roots and I don't understand, but do parents just give the kids a bunch of money in the higher income areas that they can then use on drugs without the parents knowing? Despite being likely classified as a "higher income" family (though definitely not rich by coastal North County terms), I certainly didn't plan on just giving my kids that kind of spending money.
Basically yes. The kids have their own disposable incomes, most are fairly unsupervised (both mom and dad work long hours). It is a typical upper-middle class suburban problem.
I think it's not a good idea to generalize too much on kids and the higher incomes. I've met plenty of families that are really great with their kids. In fact, I'll go one step further and say the vast majority of families in this area are responsible with their kids, do a fairly good job of parenting, and involved at school. However, in any fairly affluent area you're always going to have a certain % of parents that give their kids whatever they want.
And not just in San Diego. The same can be said for any area in the country. I formally lived in Dallas and go to an area like Highland Park or University Park and I can assure you it blows San Diego out of the water for what kinds of cars you will see in the public high school parking lot.
Like Sassberto mentioned, here in North County a high number of households have both parents working to pay the bills so the potential for bad things to happen if they aren't properly parenting probably is higher. But based on what I've seen I wouldn't say it's a huge problem only here. The same thing is going to happen in any big town.
There are going to be certain advantages of Austin and certain of San Diego. Absolutely cost of living is going to be higher in San Diego but if you can comfortably afford it, it's a NO BRAINER that there is a much higher quality of life in the SD area vs. in Texas. (and I speak from experience living in Texas for 9 years).
Yes, Texas has no state income tax which can save you a small fortune if you're making tons of money. That's one thing I really loved about Texas. However, they find other ways to hit you including the crazy high property taxes.
I think parents who do not endorse drug use and supervise their kids activities AND know who their kids are hanging out with "should be" ok. Most kids I see having trouble have parents who are ok with them smoking pot and turn a deaf ear to the dangers of that and other risky behaviors.
One has to stick close to teenagers without becoming intrusive. Not an easy task.
I think climate would be a big deal. How can kids go outside and play in the summer when it's in the high 90's and low 100's for a few months? Won't they end up playing tons of video games inside? I love being able to have windows open almost every day in the summer and not feel like a prisoner in my air conditioned house.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
