Why do we always have to "DO" something with everything. Just leave it the way it is. Natural.

The musuem approval is contingent on the Historical Association raising millions of dollars from private donors. I don't think they'll be able to do that and the museum will never happen.

of course, it is unethusiastic in that neighborhood. Because these elite and successful, add 'filthy rich' people don't want anything done to thier neighborhoods. They don't want people of other classes (economically weaker) in their neighborhoods except of course to deliver newspapers, mow their lawns, clean their houses,etc..

But they woudl jump on their cadillac escalades,Landcruisers,Lexus SUVs,Hummers to drive their children to my neighborhood playground for useless soccer games and baseball games.

Money corrupts people's attitude. Once they have the money, they think laws,rules,equality don't apply to them because they can. This is not democracy. This is meritocracy obtained with money.

The annex must be the last piece of unmolested dirt in Mountain View. Leave it alone! Why is the city always searching for opportunities to blow money? City staff must get to keep a percentage of everything they spend.

I am continually surprised by people who don't want the Annex to change because it is natural. It is the natural result of a commercial orchard neglected for many decades. It is not a natural example of the pre-1850 landscape in that area. The proposed flood basin and other landscape changes will result in a natural landscape that, while different, should be every bit as good looking as the Annex today and should be just as good a wildlife habitat.

The history museum is a different matter. While I do not object to siting it in the Annex, I do not believe that is the only place for it. The Adobe building (first built in the 1930's), the replica train station and the Jehning Lock Museum downtown, while too small for a history museum would be valuable out-buildings if the museum was built nearby. Indeed, the 100 block of Castro Street contains a number of very old, more or less recently restored buildings that would also make valuable adjuncts to the history museum. Perhaps one of them could even be its home. The most recently restored building is for rent. (Hint, hint.)

Doug Pearson, I'd love to have anyone on council member make as much sense as you.

We don't need another history museum. There is already Rengstoff House and the Los Altos museum. Besides to represent the history of this town, the space should be converted to an orchard of the original fruits grown here. I believe that's what Sunnyvale did in their Heritage Park. There has got to be a better use of that land than a history museum.

The history museum should be in Moffett Field in a shared building or annex with the Smithsonian West Air and Space Museum.

Cuesta Park should have a community garden/orchard.

I love to walk my dog at Cuesta Annex. I am in favor of leaving it alone, just as it is. Maybe it is not anymore like it used to be in 1850, but it has a wild and ungroomed feel that is really wonderful in the middle of our urban area. And I often see birds of prey and even other big strange birds in the park. A special ecosystem has seemingly developed there. To make it into a "park" will diminish all that wildness and beauty.

Perhaps the history museum should be put in an historical Mountain View building. It's agreat excuse to buy a run-down property and make it better for the city. It might be expensive, but I definately don't want to see something new built which will house historical items, it seems silly.

I think that the History museum idea is a bit silly, especially since the proponents have offered no evidence that they have the ability to raise the needed funds.

But something different caught my eye in this article:

"Aaron Jabbari called for a show of hands among among the 20 Cuesta Park neighborhood residents in attendance. "How many of you would like the museum in your neighborhood?" he asked. No one raised their hand in response. "I would have to vote against it," he said in response."

Despite the fact that I agree with his stance, this 'show-of-hands' mentality reinforces my belief that Mr Jabbari lacks the proper maturity, experience and leadership to do the job.

Another one:

Waylonis's comment that one-foot deep flood waters are "nothing" demonstrates a lack of understanding of the issue. The flood basin project isnt about preventing a flood that has a 1% chance of occurance in any given year. Its about taking a number of homes out of the federal flood district, eliminating their need for pricey flood insurance.

I dont disagree with Mr Waylonis neccessarily, but am troubled that he doesnt appear to understand the issue

This is classic stuff from the rich folks on the MV/LA border..not in our back yards please.
I say build it and feel some of the MV council pain.
This council will build on land the size of a postage stamp to gain tax dollars for MV...
I mean come take a look at the hideous development they call Pulte homes on Ferguson Drive...that sums up this and previous MV councils!
I wish I could afford to live in Palo Alto!

You could consider a history museum near the Computer History Museum - Pear Avenue area could become a cultural area - between Microsoft and Google. If you like old houses then Shoreline might be an option - but be aware of rising sea levels.

First of all, the people that live in the community are not rich spoiled whatever else you can call them. Most are working class people that bought their homes in the late 60's to mid 70's. They've raised families and made the community a safe place to live. I grew up in the area and my folks still live there. They are hardly spoiled or rich. They have a right to their opinion as you do.

Hey, simple and cheaper solution.... Why not "add on" to the Rengsdorf House.. Plenty of room

'Bout time someone ran for Council that isn't there to Spend and Tax us all.

Consider it.... please.

If not at R.House, there is plenty of room in and around Shoreling Park.