Fate of annex rests with MV City Council
The photo at right depicts Mountain View’s Cuesta Park Annex in 1959, photographed by the late Gerry Gerontinos.
It looked this beautiful in 1968 when my father drove his 1957 Chevy up onto the annex dirt, and my mother, father, brother and I picked fruit off the trees and put them into our popcorn bags on our way home from the Monte Vista Drive-In Theater (which used to be at Grant Road and El Camino Real).
At Tuesday’s Mountain View City Council meeting, councilmembers will decide whether they agree with the Santa Clara Valley Water District’s decision to remove the historical annex orchard remnant from its Permanente Creek flood protection plan so that present and future generations can enjoy its rural beauty.
Let the city council know what you think.
Robert Schick Los Altos Hills
Resident questions tennis court restrictions
Note: This is an open letter to the Los Altos Recreation Department.
A sign has been posted at the Monteclaire public tennis courts, promoting fee-for-service tennis lessons by a specific professional.
It also announces that use of one of the two courts is restricted to these lessons for several hours per day. It states in capitals:
“ONLY THE ABOVE CITY INSTRUCTOR(S) ARE PERMITTED TO TEACH LESSONS AT MONTECLAIRE PARK. PLEASE REPORT ANY ILLEGAL LESSONS TO THE RECREATION DEPARTMENT.”
Why would Los Altos promote a monopoly on teaching? And what is the justification for declaring any other teaching “ILLEGAL”? Such heavy-handedness seems intended to intimidate players from choosing their own instructors.
What happens to those who want to share their love and knowledge of tennis with their children, grandchildren and friends?
Lessons, by anyone, shouldn’t take priority over the use of the courts by residents who simply want to play.
Unreasonable restrictions and threats foster resentment, and any policy that benefits a few at the expense of the many must be reconsidered.