1. Archie Mazmanian comments.
2. Response.
1. Archie Mazmanian comments.
Your recent post at your Blog brought to mind memories in the mid 1930s of my family's visits to relatives on Dudley Street, in North Cambridge.
I was probably around 5-6 years of age and an older cousin took me on a trip to a nearby ice house where there was a creek. We played in the creek and I caught some polliwogs, which my cousin explained would become frogs/toads as they grew and changed. This was exciting to a curious child.
The area has of course changed quite a bit. I understand the herring may still run in Alewife. I recall the chemical factory as well.
I had been under the impression that care and consideration were given to the extensive development in the area. Ice houses are no longer that important but the creek surely was/is not just for a curious child.
2. Response.
Archie, you have accurately communicated what the fake protective group communicated.
The letter in the Cambridge Chronicle from the fake group praising the destruction said everything.
These entities with connections to the City Manager / City Council keep concerned people down and enable frequently very destructive behavior.
The impending destruction of Alewife for very minimal flood storage with that massive parking lot directly across Cambridge Park Drive and on the verge of being lost itself is one of the most environmentally heinous achievements of an extremely bad city government.
As the courts said looking at the City Manager’s destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint: “Reprehensible.” “Ample evidence [of] outrageous actions” and $3.5 million penal damages.
A really bad city government stays in power doing these terrible things because of the fact that fake groups are running around spouting lies that that government is worthy of respect.
As usual, it is impossible to say with precision that the fake groups are passing on the lies with knowledge of the falsity. All that can honestly be said, as is so common with the fake groups, is: “You cannot possibly be that stupid."
And the logging and clear cutting of that virgin, excellent forest with massive and needless destruction of animal life is slated to start in October.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Destroy Alewife to Save North Cambridge? Nonsense!
There is a very real disconnect from reality among the Cambridge pols, and it is amazing just how consistent that disconnect comes out in response to the most destructive actions by the City of Cambridge.
A person who has been a 15 or more year member of the Fake Protective Group on Alewife very indignantly proclaimed a few days ago that the destruction imminent at Alewife is necessary to keep North Cambridge from being the flood storage for Alewife.
Absolute nonsense, as usual.
Truly bizarre destruction out of Cambridge. Truly bizarre explanation, as usual.
The core Alewife reservation is being destroyed, supposedly, for flood storage to protect against a TWO year storm. A TWO year storm is the worst storm, on average coming every two years. Alewife has seen TWO FIFTY years storms in the past 20 years.
A few days ago, Marilyn Wellons provided a link to photos of one of those 50 year storms in 1997?, http://www.openeyesvideo.com/Floodpix.html.
The Cambridge pols, as usual, do not want to know reality.
Reality is those flood photos.
Reality is the Satellite view from http://maps.google.com showing 100 Cambridge Park Drive, Cambridge, MA.
In that satellite view, above Cambridge Park Drive is the virgin Alewife reservation with its excellent native trees and its massive animal population. When I last saw the Google Maps view, it was dated. It did not show this massive destruction which has been already accomplished, but which is PRELIMINARY, far smaller than the intended destruction.
Directly below Cambridge Park Drive is a massive parking lot, readily usable for a very large multiple of the silly flood storage being created by the destruction of the core Alewife reservation. That parking lot runs all the way over to Alewife Brook Parkway. That massive parking lot occupies a very large percentage of the area between Cambridge Park Drive and the Commuter Rail to the south of the parking lot.
But the owner of a very large part of that parking lot wants to build, and, once the suckers learn just how much they have been shafted, the destroyers will be oh, so sorry. “Why did you not keep us from doing this terrible thing?” is their usual position. And this will not be the first time a con game has achieved exactly the opposite of what has been claimed.
Just another con game.
If the Cambridge City Council even slightly resembled the environmental saints they constantly tell us they are, there is no question that that parking lot would be taken for flood storage with the buildings being constructed on air rights above the flood storage. And the flood storage would be a very large multiple of the silly flood storage for which the core Alewife reservation is being destroyed.
If the Cambridge City Council even slightly resembled the environmental saints they constantly claim to be, the destruction of the irreplaceable core Alewife reservation will not commence in October 2011 and be done for a month with logging, clear cutting and massive killing of animals.
The destruction would be ended immediately and that massive parking lot would be used for flood storage.
But the Cambridge City Council is lying in its constant claims of environmental sainthood.
Reality is the opinion of independent third parties looking at Cambridge.
Reality is Monteiro v. City of Cambridge. Jury: $3.5 million penal damages. Superior court judge: “reprehensible.” Appeals court: “ample evidence [of] outrageous conduct.” $8.3 million paid to the plaintiff with total cost reported to exceed $10 million.
For the key superior court opinion, see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html. For the comments of the appeals court panel, see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.
That was on a civil rights case which concerned a woman’s life being destroyed by the Cambridge City Manager because she had the nerve to file a civil rights complaint. The Cambridge City Council also claims to be civil rights saints. The failure to implement the court decisions and fire the Cambridge City Manager shows reality once again.
The Cambridge City Council is living a lot of lies.
But fake groups help them out by running protection for them.
A person who has been a 15 or more year member of the Fake Protective Group on Alewife very indignantly proclaimed a few days ago that the destruction imminent at Alewife is necessary to keep North Cambridge from being the flood storage for Alewife.
Absolute nonsense, as usual.
Truly bizarre destruction out of Cambridge. Truly bizarre explanation, as usual.
The core Alewife reservation is being destroyed, supposedly, for flood storage to protect against a TWO year storm. A TWO year storm is the worst storm, on average coming every two years. Alewife has seen TWO FIFTY years storms in the past 20 years.
A few days ago, Marilyn Wellons provided a link to photos of one of those 50 year storms in 1997?, http://www.openeyesvideo.com/Floodpix.html.
The Cambridge pols, as usual, do not want to know reality.
Reality is those flood photos.
Reality is the Satellite view from http://maps.google.com showing 100 Cambridge Park Drive, Cambridge, MA.
In that satellite view, above Cambridge Park Drive is the virgin Alewife reservation with its excellent native trees and its massive animal population. When I last saw the Google Maps view, it was dated. It did not show this massive destruction which has been already accomplished, but which is PRELIMINARY, far smaller than the intended destruction.
Directly below Cambridge Park Drive is a massive parking lot, readily usable for a very large multiple of the silly flood storage being created by the destruction of the core Alewife reservation. That parking lot runs all the way over to Alewife Brook Parkway. That massive parking lot occupies a very large percentage of the area between Cambridge Park Drive and the Commuter Rail to the south of the parking lot.
But the owner of a very large part of that parking lot wants to build, and, once the suckers learn just how much they have been shafted, the destroyers will be oh, so sorry. “Why did you not keep us from doing this terrible thing?” is their usual position. And this will not be the first time a con game has achieved exactly the opposite of what has been claimed.
Just another con game.
If the Cambridge City Council even slightly resembled the environmental saints they constantly tell us they are, there is no question that that parking lot would be taken for flood storage with the buildings being constructed on air rights above the flood storage. And the flood storage would be a very large multiple of the silly flood storage for which the core Alewife reservation is being destroyed.
If the Cambridge City Council even slightly resembled the environmental saints they constantly claim to be, the destruction of the irreplaceable core Alewife reservation will not commence in October 2011 and be done for a month with logging, clear cutting and massive killing of animals.
The destruction would be ended immediately and that massive parking lot would be used for flood storage.
But the Cambridge City Council is lying in its constant claims of environmental sainthood.
Reality is the opinion of independent third parties looking at Cambridge.
Reality is Monteiro v. City of Cambridge. Jury: $3.5 million penal damages. Superior court judge: “reprehensible.” Appeals court: “ample evidence [of] outrageous conduct.” $8.3 million paid to the plaintiff with total cost reported to exceed $10 million.
For the key superior court opinion, see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html. For the comments of the appeals court panel, see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.
That was on a civil rights case which concerned a woman’s life being destroyed by the Cambridge City Manager because she had the nerve to file a civil rights complaint. The Cambridge City Council also claims to be civil rights saints. The failure to implement the court decisions and fire the Cambridge City Manager shows reality once again.
The Cambridge City Council is living a lot of lies.
But fake groups help them out by running protection for them.
South Station Expansion Project, information link
When dealing with the situation in Cambridge, MA, USA, accurate information is always a lot more valuable than the stuff being passed around in Cambridge.
The Cambridge pols are fighting for commuter rail trains on the Grand Junction railroad line running under the BU Bridge through the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese, and passing through the eastern part of Cambridge with at grade crossings at a number of busy Cambridge Streets.
Worcester / Framingham commuter service currently goes to South Station. An excellent connection to the proposed Urban Ring Orange Line service has been assisted by the legislature’s subsidy to the rebuilding of Yawkey Station near Kenmore Station on the Green Line and near Fenway Park. Yawkey Station is on the line currently serving Framingham / Worcester.
The Cambridge Pols are putting out nonsense that moving “a few” (and then all) commuter trips from Framingham / Worcester to the Grand Junction is needed to expand service. They want that service to go to North Station via the Grand Junction.
The pols, as usual, just cannot understand that the expansion of South Station for the South Coast Rail Project will create ample room for expansion of Worcester / Framingham service without their silly and very destructive Grand Junction route.
Marilyn Wellons has been kind enough to provide the URL for the state documents on the South Station Expansion Project.
http://web.massdot.net/southstationexpansion/Documents.html
Thank you, Marilyn.
The Cambridge pols are fighting for commuter rail trains on the Grand Junction railroad line running under the BU Bridge through the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese, and passing through the eastern part of Cambridge with at grade crossings at a number of busy Cambridge Streets.
Worcester / Framingham commuter service currently goes to South Station. An excellent connection to the proposed Urban Ring Orange Line service has been assisted by the legislature’s subsidy to the rebuilding of Yawkey Station near Kenmore Station on the Green Line and near Fenway Park. Yawkey Station is on the line currently serving Framingham / Worcester.
The Cambridge Pols are putting out nonsense that moving “a few” (and then all) commuter trips from Framingham / Worcester to the Grand Junction is needed to expand service. They want that service to go to North Station via the Grand Junction.
The pols, as usual, just cannot understand that the expansion of South Station for the South Coast Rail Project will create ample room for expansion of Worcester / Framingham service without their silly and very destructive Grand Junction route.
Marilyn Wellons has been kind enough to provide the URL for the state documents on the South Station Expansion Project.
http://web.massdot.net/southstationexpansion/Documents.html
Thank you, Marilyn.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Estate Planning and the Charles River White Geese
A very major defect in Massachusetts law has existed concerning binding transfers for the benefit of animals.
The state legislature and the governor have recently added Chapter 203, section 3C to the General Laws.
Under this wording, trust conveyances can be made for the care of animals alive during the donor’s lifetime. The money cannot be retained beyond the death of the last surviving animal alive during the donor’s lifetime (legally important words). I have recently had a report by a caregiver of White Chinas living into their 30's.
Almost all of the Charles River White Geese have the appearance of White China Geese or of Emden Geese or of their progeny.
The trust can be created during the donor’s lifetime or by will at the time of death.
The state legislature and the governor have recently added Chapter 203, section 3C to the General Laws.
Under this wording, trust conveyances can be made for the care of animals alive during the donor’s lifetime. The money cannot be retained beyond the death of the last surviving animal alive during the donor’s lifetime (legally important words). I have recently had a report by a caregiver of White Chinas living into their 30's.
Almost all of the Charles River White Geese have the appearance of White China Geese or of Emden Geese or of their progeny.
The trust can be created during the donor’s lifetime or by will at the time of death.
What you can do, the short of it
Yesterday, I posted a very extensive analysis of what you can do on the Charles River and at Alewife.
If you can only do one thing, contact the governor. I will be linking yesterday’s post at the top of this Blog modified to that extent.
Governor Deval Patrick is at the heart of this situation on the state side. His managers do not merit attention. His own contact information is:
Email form: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us
888-870-7770 / 617-725-4005.
The detailed information is at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-you-can-do.html.
If you can only do one thing, contact the governor. I will be linking yesterday’s post at the top of this Blog modified to that extent.
Governor Deval Patrick is at the heart of this situation on the state side. His managers do not merit attention. His own contact information is:
Email form: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us
888-870-7770 / 617-725-4005.
The detailed information is at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-you-can-do.html.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
What you can do.
INTRO.
1. General.
A. An integrated attack on the environment.
B. Charles River, Abridged.
C. Destruction of the core Alewife reservation is imminent.
D. The Cambridge City Manager condemned by the courts for destroying a black, Cape Verdean, woman’s life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights action.
2. Basic Action.
3. Contact the big guys.
4. Specific contact information.
5. Estate Planning and the Charles River White Geese.
6. Summary.
INTRO.
If you can only do one thing, contact the governor.
Governor Deval Patrick is at the heart of this situation on the state side. His managers do not merit attention. His own contact information is:
Email form: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us
888-870-7770 / 617-725-4005.
1. General.
A. An integrated attack on the environment.
The basic purpose of this blog is to protect the Charles River, its animals, its vegetation, its waters and its air from truly destructive state and local governments, and the fake groups that they work through.
It would be foolhardy to think that this problem is limited to the Charles River. The Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation and the City of Cambridge are destroying both the Charles River and virgin wild areas in the western part of Cambridge.
B. Charles River, Abridged.
Massive destruction has been done at Magazine Beach on the Charles River in Cambridge, just west of the BU Bridge. Heartless starvation is being imposed on the Charles River White Geese as part of a public policy of killing off all animals on the Charles River Basin with hypocritical lies whitewashing things. Poisons are being dumped on the banks of the Charles River to keep alive introduced sickly grasses which replace seven acres of healthy grass that survived without poisons for the better part of a Century. Magazine Beach has been walled off from the Charles River with a bizarre wall of introduced bushes. This bizarre wall is the only vegetation bordering the Charles River Basis which is NOT destroyed twice a year. The manager brags that it starves the Charles River White Geese.
Pretty much all ground vegetation was destroyed between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse to the east except for vegetation near planned construction work on the BU Bridge. This is the area to which the Charles River White Geese have been confined since the destruction at Magazine Beach. Their habitat for most of the time since 1981 has been a mile long stretch centered on the BU Bridge. The destruction of ground vegetation has been done since a fake protective group started destroying the environment for the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Massive and very much worse tree destruction is planned. Hundreds of trees are targeted, along with wildlife habitat, between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge in one of many projects. Federal money has been sought using flat out lies. Governor Patrick seems to have prevented the Federal moneys for the time being but money could very likely be in the state budget.
The DCR brags, translating the fine print, of intent to kill off all resident animals in the Charles River Basin.
C. Destruction of the core Alewife reservation is imminent.
The Alewife reservation is an essentially virgin and massive woods just west of the subway Red Line’s terminus, Alewife station.
This vile behavior is playing out at Alewife with the imminent destruction of the core Alewife Reservation, with logging and clear cutting scheduled to commence in October 2011 and proceed for one month. The big difference at Alewife is that the local fake group, after years of telling people concerned about Alewife to look at everything except the most important pending destruction planned by their friends, has gone public admitting 15 years of con games to be flat out lies by praising the environmental destruction in the Cambridge Chronicle on September 16, 2011, and in a publication on line.
The massive destruction at Alewife is claimed to be for flood storage to protect against two year floods, directly across the street from a massive parking lot which readily could be used for a very large multiple of the flood storage possible through their silly and very very destructive project.
The extreme irresponsibility of the Alewife situation may be seen on Google Maps. Go to maps.google.com, select satellite view, and go to 100 Cambridge Park Drive, Cambridge, MA. Directly above the street is an excellent, virgin wood lands with thousands of excellent animals. The view I see is dated. There is now a scar in the middle of this virgin woods for “preliminary” work that is outrageous on its own, but the destruction is scheduled to be a multiple. Below Cambridge Park Drive and between it and the commuter rail and Alewife Brook Parkway to the east (left) is a MASSIVE parking lot. That massive parking lot can hold a very large multiple of the two year storm flood protection that the virgin woods are being destroyed for.
D. The Cambridge City Manager condemned by the courts for destroying a black, Cape Verdean, woman’s life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights action.
One key person, the Cambridge City Manager, has been called “reprehensible” by the superior court (http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html) with the appeals court agreeing, finding “ample evidence [of] outrageous conduct.” (http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html) The Cambridge City Manager has, civilly, been found guilty of destroying the life of Malvina Monteir, a black, Cape Verdean department head, by firing her in retaliation for her filing a civil right complaint. Cambridge has paid her $8.3 million in response to the court decisions, including $3.5 million penal damage awarded by the jury.
These combined decisions give the self declared environmental and civil rights saints on the Cambridge City Council power to fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office without his golden parachute and, possibly, without pension.
It is not too late.
2. Basic Action.
First of all, please friend the Charles River White Geese on facebook.
Secondly, this blog has a link by which you can make a contribution to Friends of the White Geese through Paypal which accepts all major credit cards. Money is crucial to publicize the escalating outrage.
By snail mail, please send contributions to:
Friends of the White Geese
Post Office Box 391412
Cambridge, MA 02139.
Our Financial Director is Ellen Schloss, 978-362-8786, beaksandnoses@verizon.net.
Fliers are minimal. Print advertisements are ideal. Mass mailings are a dream which might come true with your help.
These contributions are NOT tax deductible.
Workers, telephoning / writing and money are key.
We need leafleters, especially at the BU Bridge, but also at key meetings. Please contact Bob at 617-491-7181 or at boblat@yahoo.com.
3. Contact the big guys.
The really destructive people on the first ten miles of Charles River and in the most important part of Alewife are the governments, especially the state and Cambridge.
They have a very major weakness. They run around pretty much nonstop proclaiming they are environmental saints, and they have massive organizations repeating these silly claims.
The Cambridge City Government is particularly sensitive because they certainly look like they are in contact with pretty much everybody.
At the state level, the bureaucrats are beneath consideration. The responsible person is the governor. And the worst of the destruction is on state property.
The governor is very likely the one person most likely to behave responsibly. He has already prevented use of Obama moneys for destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive.
The City of Cambridge is very much a part of the destruction. Moneys come from the Cambridge City Council. The Cambridge City Council routinely tells everybody how to save the world.
The Cambridge City Council brags of environmental initiatives. They vote the bad stuff fast, occasionally by suspending rules to keep things as secret as possible. They then brag about “initiatives” which are next too meaningless. The Cambridge City Council is fully within its powers and its duties to end these outrages.
Communication is crucial, individual and, if possible, on a large scale.
4. Specific contact information.
Contact Information for people to contact:
A long shot, if these people are still trying to stick in Obama moneys is President Barack Obama. Millions of Obama stimulus dollars were requested for destruction of hundreds of healthy trees between the BU Boathouse and the Longfellow Bridge, PLUS being used for destruction of even more goose food across from the Hyatt Regency Hotel. That money could be once again requested. It is normal to find out about dirty tricks after the fact.
President Obama’s email contact form is: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/. His telephone number is: 202-456-6213.
Much more important right now is Governor Deval Patrick.
Governor Deval Patrick is at the heart of this situation on the state side. His managers at the Department of Conservation and Recreation do not merit attention. They are way beneath consideration and are repeated liars.
Governor Patrick’s contact information is:
Email form: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us
888-870-7770 / 617-725-4005.
It is pointless to contact the Cambridge City Manager. It may be useful to contact the Cambridge Conservation Commission although its members are the Manager's appointees. (One former appointee in a different city agency won that $8.3M legal payment against the City Manager for his retaliation against her when he found her civil rights complaint displeasing. As I mentioned above, Cambridge lost the case and the Cambridge City Council has it in its power to fire the City Manager because of the court decisions.)
The Cambridge Conservation Commission may be reached by e-mail:
Director Jennifer Wright, jwright@CambridgeMA.GOV; telephone: 617-349-4680.
The Cambridge City Council and other city officials and their supporters dismiss concerns about these environmental outrages to the extent they comment at all. 2011 is, however, an election year and voters need to know where the candidates stand.
Incumbent City Councillors are:
Mayor David P. Maher
mailto:dmaher@cambridgema.gov
617-547-7219 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Vice Mayor Henrietta Davis
mailto:hdavis@cambridgema.gov
617-547-0877 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Leland Cheung,
mailto:LCheung@cambridgema.gov
617-491-2692 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Marjorie C. Decker
mailto:mdecker@cambridgema.gov
617-349-4280 (W)
Craig A. Kelley
mailto:ckelley@cambridgema.gov
617-354-8353 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Kenneth E. Reeves
mailto:kreeves@cambridgema.gov
617-661-1635 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Samuel Seidel
mailto:sseidel@cambridgema.gov
617-547-1067 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
E. Denise Simmons
mailto:dsimmons@cambridgema.gov
617-491-7435 (H), 617-349-4321 (W)
Timothy J. Toomey, Jr.
Also State Representative
mailto:TimToomey@aol.com
617-576-6483 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Cambridge School Committee incumbent:
Marc McGovern
617-945-1866 (H)
State Representatives:
Martha M. Walz
Rep.MartyWalz@Hou.State.MA.US
617-722-2460
Alice K. Wolf
Rep.AliceWolf@Hou.State.MA.US
617-722-2460
State Senators:
Sal N. DiDomenico
Sal.DiDomenico@state.ma.us
617-722-1650
Anthony Petruccelli
mailto:Anthony.Petruccelli@state.ma.us
617-722-1634
Rationale behind this list may be found at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2008/10/visibility-367-october-15-2008-nice.html in section 3, Distinction among the bad guys.
It is our opinion that, in order to end the attacks on the Charles River, and possibly Alewife as well, the Cambridge City Manager must be fired.
The Cambridge City Council has a very strong court opinion calling the City Manager “reprehensible” for civil rights violations. We have posted that opinion at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html, and have a YouTube analysis at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeGQtlFSg7k. This analysis is dated because it was made before the Appeals Court decision.
The Appeals Court decision affirming the Superior Court was handled in such a manner that the Court communicated disgust at Cambridge for the appeal be refusing to file a formal opinion. It is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.
The City of Cambridge has paid $8.3 million so far because of the court decisions, which, we understand will increase to over $10 million including everything.
5. Estate Planning and the Charles River White Geese.
A very major defect in Massachusetts law has existed concerning binding transfers for the benefit of animals.
The state legislature and the governor have recently added Chapter 203, section 3C to the General Laws.
Under this wording, trust conveyances can be made for the care of animals alive during the donor’s lifetime. The money cannot be retained beyond the death of the last surviving animal alive during the donor’s lifetime (legally important words). I have recently had a report by a caregiver of White Chinas living into their 30's.
Almost all of the Charles River White Geese have the appearance of White China Geese or of Emden Geese or of their progeny.
The trust can be created during the donor’s lifetime or by will at the time of death.
For the specific language of the change, please see: http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2010/Chapter430.
6. Summary.
Thank you in advance for whatever you can do.
This report was initially posted October 10, 2008
This report was updated on September 26, 2011.
1. General.
A. An integrated attack on the environment.
B. Charles River, Abridged.
C. Destruction of the core Alewife reservation is imminent.
D. The Cambridge City Manager condemned by the courts for destroying a black, Cape Verdean, woman’s life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights action.
2. Basic Action.
3. Contact the big guys.
4. Specific contact information.
5. Estate Planning and the Charles River White Geese.
6. Summary.
INTRO.
If you can only do one thing, contact the governor.
Governor Deval Patrick is at the heart of this situation on the state side. His managers do not merit attention. His own contact information is:
Email form: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us
888-870-7770 / 617-725-4005.
1. General.
A. An integrated attack on the environment.
The basic purpose of this blog is to protect the Charles River, its animals, its vegetation, its waters and its air from truly destructive state and local governments, and the fake groups that they work through.
It would be foolhardy to think that this problem is limited to the Charles River. The Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation and the City of Cambridge are destroying both the Charles River and virgin wild areas in the western part of Cambridge.
B. Charles River, Abridged.
Massive destruction has been done at Magazine Beach on the Charles River in Cambridge, just west of the BU Bridge. Heartless starvation is being imposed on the Charles River White Geese as part of a public policy of killing off all animals on the Charles River Basin with hypocritical lies whitewashing things. Poisons are being dumped on the banks of the Charles River to keep alive introduced sickly grasses which replace seven acres of healthy grass that survived without poisons for the better part of a Century. Magazine Beach has been walled off from the Charles River with a bizarre wall of introduced bushes. This bizarre wall is the only vegetation bordering the Charles River Basis which is NOT destroyed twice a year. The manager brags that it starves the Charles River White Geese.
Pretty much all ground vegetation was destroyed between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse to the east except for vegetation near planned construction work on the BU Bridge. This is the area to which the Charles River White Geese have been confined since the destruction at Magazine Beach. Their habitat for most of the time since 1981 has been a mile long stretch centered on the BU Bridge. The destruction of ground vegetation has been done since a fake protective group started destroying the environment for the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Massive and very much worse tree destruction is planned. Hundreds of trees are targeted, along with wildlife habitat, between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge in one of many projects. Federal money has been sought using flat out lies. Governor Patrick seems to have prevented the Federal moneys for the time being but money could very likely be in the state budget.
The DCR brags, translating the fine print, of intent to kill off all resident animals in the Charles River Basin.
C. Destruction of the core Alewife reservation is imminent.
The Alewife reservation is an essentially virgin and massive woods just west of the subway Red Line’s terminus, Alewife station.
This vile behavior is playing out at Alewife with the imminent destruction of the core Alewife Reservation, with logging and clear cutting scheduled to commence in October 2011 and proceed for one month. The big difference at Alewife is that the local fake group, after years of telling people concerned about Alewife to look at everything except the most important pending destruction planned by their friends, has gone public admitting 15 years of con games to be flat out lies by praising the environmental destruction in the Cambridge Chronicle on September 16, 2011, and in a publication on line.
The massive destruction at Alewife is claimed to be for flood storage to protect against two year floods, directly across the street from a massive parking lot which readily could be used for a very large multiple of the flood storage possible through their silly and very very destructive project.
The extreme irresponsibility of the Alewife situation may be seen on Google Maps. Go to maps.google.com, select satellite view, and go to 100 Cambridge Park Drive, Cambridge, MA. Directly above the street is an excellent, virgin wood lands with thousands of excellent animals. The view I see is dated. There is now a scar in the middle of this virgin woods for “preliminary” work that is outrageous on its own, but the destruction is scheduled to be a multiple. Below Cambridge Park Drive and between it and the commuter rail and Alewife Brook Parkway to the east (left) is a MASSIVE parking lot. That massive parking lot can hold a very large multiple of the two year storm flood protection that the virgin woods are being destroyed for.
D. The Cambridge City Manager condemned by the courts for destroying a black, Cape Verdean, woman’s life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights action.
One key person, the Cambridge City Manager, has been called “reprehensible” by the superior court (http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html) with the appeals court agreeing, finding “ample evidence [of] outrageous conduct.” (http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html) The Cambridge City Manager has, civilly, been found guilty of destroying the life of Malvina Monteir, a black, Cape Verdean department head, by firing her in retaliation for her filing a civil right complaint. Cambridge has paid her $8.3 million in response to the court decisions, including $3.5 million penal damage awarded by the jury.
These combined decisions give the self declared environmental and civil rights saints on the Cambridge City Council power to fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office without his golden parachute and, possibly, without pension.
It is not too late.
2. Basic Action.
First of all, please friend the Charles River White Geese on facebook.
Secondly, this blog has a link by which you can make a contribution to Friends of the White Geese through Paypal which accepts all major credit cards. Money is crucial to publicize the escalating outrage.
By snail mail, please send contributions to:
Friends of the White Geese
Post Office Box 391412
Cambridge, MA 02139.
Our Financial Director is Ellen Schloss, 978-362-8786, beaksandnoses@verizon.net.
Fliers are minimal. Print advertisements are ideal. Mass mailings are a dream which might come true with your help.
These contributions are NOT tax deductible.
Workers, telephoning / writing and money are key.
We need leafleters, especially at the BU Bridge, but also at key meetings. Please contact Bob at 617-491-7181 or at boblat@yahoo.com.
3. Contact the big guys.
The really destructive people on the first ten miles of Charles River and in the most important part of Alewife are the governments, especially the state and Cambridge.
They have a very major weakness. They run around pretty much nonstop proclaiming they are environmental saints, and they have massive organizations repeating these silly claims.
The Cambridge City Government is particularly sensitive because they certainly look like they are in contact with pretty much everybody.
At the state level, the bureaucrats are beneath consideration. The responsible person is the governor. And the worst of the destruction is on state property.
The governor is very likely the one person most likely to behave responsibly. He has already prevented use of Obama moneys for destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive.
The City of Cambridge is very much a part of the destruction. Moneys come from the Cambridge City Council. The Cambridge City Council routinely tells everybody how to save the world.
The Cambridge City Council brags of environmental initiatives. They vote the bad stuff fast, occasionally by suspending rules to keep things as secret as possible. They then brag about “initiatives” which are next too meaningless. The Cambridge City Council is fully within its powers and its duties to end these outrages.
Communication is crucial, individual and, if possible, on a large scale.
4. Specific contact information.
Contact Information for people to contact:
A long shot, if these people are still trying to stick in Obama moneys is President Barack Obama. Millions of Obama stimulus dollars were requested for destruction of hundreds of healthy trees between the BU Boathouse and the Longfellow Bridge, PLUS being used for destruction of even more goose food across from the Hyatt Regency Hotel. That money could be once again requested. It is normal to find out about dirty tricks after the fact.
President Obama’s email contact form is: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/. His telephone number is: 202-456-6213.
Much more important right now is Governor Deval Patrick.
Governor Deval Patrick is at the heart of this situation on the state side. His managers at the Department of Conservation and Recreation do not merit attention. They are way beneath consideration and are repeated liars.
Governor Patrick’s contact information is:
Email form: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us
888-870-7770 / 617-725-4005.
It is pointless to contact the Cambridge City Manager. It may be useful to contact the Cambridge Conservation Commission although its members are the Manager's appointees. (One former appointee in a different city agency won that $8.3M legal payment against the City Manager for his retaliation against her when he found her civil rights complaint displeasing. As I mentioned above, Cambridge lost the case and the Cambridge City Council has it in its power to fire the City Manager because of the court decisions.)
The Cambridge Conservation Commission may be reached by e-mail:
Director Jennifer Wright, jwright@CambridgeMA.GOV; telephone: 617-349-4680.
The Cambridge City Council and other city officials and their supporters dismiss concerns about these environmental outrages to the extent they comment at all. 2011 is, however, an election year and voters need to know where the candidates stand.
Incumbent City Councillors are:
Mayor David P. Maher
mailto:dmaher@cambridgema.gov
617-547-7219 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Vice Mayor Henrietta Davis
mailto:hdavis@cambridgema.gov
617-547-0877 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Leland Cheung,
mailto:LCheung@cambridgema.gov
617-491-2692 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Marjorie C. Decker
mailto:mdecker@cambridgema.gov
617-349-4280 (W)
Craig A. Kelley
mailto:ckelley@cambridgema.gov
617-354-8353 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Kenneth E. Reeves
mailto:kreeves@cambridgema.gov
617-661-1635 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Samuel Seidel
mailto:sseidel@cambridgema.gov
617-547-1067 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
E. Denise Simmons
mailto:dsimmons@cambridgema.gov
617-491-7435 (H), 617-349-4321 (W)
Timothy J. Toomey, Jr.
Also State Representative
mailto:TimToomey@aol.com
617-576-6483 (H), 617-349-4280 (W)
Cambridge School Committee incumbent:
Marc McGovern
617-945-1866 (H)
State Representatives:
Martha M. Walz
Rep.MartyWalz@Hou.State.MA.US
617-722-2460
Alice K. Wolf
Rep.AliceWolf@Hou.State.MA.US
617-722-2460
State Senators:
Sal N. DiDomenico
Sal.DiDomenico@state.ma.us
617-722-1650
Anthony Petruccelli
mailto:Anthony.Petruccelli@state.ma.us
617-722-1634
Rationale behind this list may be found at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2008/10/visibility-367-october-15-2008-nice.html in section 3, Distinction among the bad guys.
It is our opinion that, in order to end the attacks on the Charles River, and possibly Alewife as well, the Cambridge City Manager must be fired.
The Cambridge City Council has a very strong court opinion calling the City Manager “reprehensible” for civil rights violations. We have posted that opinion at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html, and have a YouTube analysis at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeGQtlFSg7k. This analysis is dated because it was made before the Appeals Court decision.
The Appeals Court decision affirming the Superior Court was handled in such a manner that the Court communicated disgust at Cambridge for the appeal be refusing to file a formal opinion. It is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.
The City of Cambridge has paid $8.3 million so far because of the court decisions, which, we understand will increase to over $10 million including everything.
5. Estate Planning and the Charles River White Geese.
A very major defect in Massachusetts law has existed concerning binding transfers for the benefit of animals.
The state legislature and the governor have recently added Chapter 203, section 3C to the General Laws.
Under this wording, trust conveyances can be made for the care of animals alive during the donor’s lifetime. The money cannot be retained beyond the death of the last surviving animal alive during the donor’s lifetime (legally important words). I have recently had a report by a caregiver of White Chinas living into their 30's.
Almost all of the Charles River White Geese have the appearance of White China Geese or of Emden Geese or of their progeny.
The trust can be created during the donor’s lifetime or by will at the time of death.
For the specific language of the change, please see: http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2010/Chapter430.
6. Summary.
Thank you in advance for whatever you can do.
This report was initially posted October 10, 2008
This report was updated on September 26, 2011.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
New City Manager for Cambridge, MA, USA? Henrietta Davis and Leland Cheung
1. General.
2. Henrietta Davis.
3. Leland Cheung.
4. Prior Reports.
1. General.
The situation in Cambridge, MA, USA is outrageous.
Environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by government on the Charles River is bizarre and getting worse.
The city and its friends in the state are preparing to destroy the last virgin forest, the core Alewife reservation, for flood storage that is patently silly. They are protecting against a two year flood in an area that has seen two 50 year floods in the last 20 years. Directly across the street from their destruction is a massive parking lot that can handle a multiple of the flooding. It is impossible to call the explanation serious.
Informed analyses by non-insiders have a tendency to communicate shock.
Judge, jury and appeals court panel have evaluated Cambridge’s treatment of a black, Cape Verdean department head with extreme displeasure. They have found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed her life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The jury spoke with $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages. The judge reaffirmed the jury in an opinion which quoted the Cambridge City Manager’s testimony extensively. She called him “reprehensible.” The appeals court panel reacted to Cambridge’s appeal with disgust, refusing to honor the appeal with a full fledged opinion. They commented that there was “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.
The cost of the case paid by Cambridge to the plaintiff is $8.3 million. Estimates are frequently presented that total cost will approach or exceed $10 million.
The Cambridge Chronicle’s editorial, posted on August 18, 2011, at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1852620823/Editorial-A-multimillion-dollar-gamble#axzz1VBaL41vk, seems to go both ways on whether the City Manager should leave.
My personal opinion is that the binding judicial decision seems to indicate that the Cambridge City Manager should be fired without his golden parachute and probably without pension. The latter would be an extension of existing law, but the case is ideal to extend the law. I think the courts have reached an excellent opinion.
The election season is here.
The Cambridge Chronicle is asking candidates: “Do you think it is time for a new City Manger?”
I am reporting on the answers with links to the complete comments.
2. Henrietta Davis.
Henrietta Davis was quoted in the September 22, 2011 edition on page 14. Her comments are posted at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x789274658/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Henrietta-Davis#axzz1YsTg5eOs.
Ms. Davis makes no comment on Monteiro, on the $8 to $10 million cost, or on the judicial findings and orders. She does extensively praise him, ignoring the extremely bad parts of his record.
A brief summary of her answer is: “. . . I do not feel we must have a new city manager now."
3. Leland Cheung.
Leland Cheung was quoted in the September 22, 2011 edition on page 14. His comments are posted at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x789274695/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Leland-Cheung#axzz1YsTg5eOs.
Cheung speaks favorably of the Cambridge City Manager. His answer to the question is positive. "Regardless, I do believe the time is coming for a fresh perspective in City Hall."
His response indicates lack of awareness of the Monteiro decision.
4. Prior Reports.
Tom Stohlman and Sam Seidel: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
Tim Toomey and Minka vanBeuzekom: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa_10.html.
Charlie Marquardt and James Williamson: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa_18.html.
2. Henrietta Davis.
3. Leland Cheung.
4. Prior Reports.
1. General.
The situation in Cambridge, MA, USA is outrageous.
Environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by government on the Charles River is bizarre and getting worse.
The city and its friends in the state are preparing to destroy the last virgin forest, the core Alewife reservation, for flood storage that is patently silly. They are protecting against a two year flood in an area that has seen two 50 year floods in the last 20 years. Directly across the street from their destruction is a massive parking lot that can handle a multiple of the flooding. It is impossible to call the explanation serious.
Informed analyses by non-insiders have a tendency to communicate shock.
Judge, jury and appeals court panel have evaluated Cambridge’s treatment of a black, Cape Verdean department head with extreme displeasure. They have found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed her life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The jury spoke with $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages. The judge reaffirmed the jury in an opinion which quoted the Cambridge City Manager’s testimony extensively. She called him “reprehensible.” The appeals court panel reacted to Cambridge’s appeal with disgust, refusing to honor the appeal with a full fledged opinion. They commented that there was “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.
The cost of the case paid by Cambridge to the plaintiff is $8.3 million. Estimates are frequently presented that total cost will approach or exceed $10 million.
The Cambridge Chronicle’s editorial, posted on August 18, 2011, at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1852620823/Editorial-A-multimillion-dollar-gamble#axzz1VBaL41vk, seems to go both ways on whether the City Manager should leave.
My personal opinion is that the binding judicial decision seems to indicate that the Cambridge City Manager should be fired without his golden parachute and probably without pension. The latter would be an extension of existing law, but the case is ideal to extend the law. I think the courts have reached an excellent opinion.
The election season is here.
The Cambridge Chronicle is asking candidates: “Do you think it is time for a new City Manger?”
I am reporting on the answers with links to the complete comments.
2. Henrietta Davis.
Henrietta Davis was quoted in the September 22, 2011 edition on page 14. Her comments are posted at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x789274658/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Henrietta-Davis#axzz1YsTg5eOs.
Ms. Davis makes no comment on Monteiro, on the $8 to $10 million cost, or on the judicial findings and orders. She does extensively praise him, ignoring the extremely bad parts of his record.
A brief summary of her answer is: “. . . I do not feel we must have a new city manager now."
3. Leland Cheung.
Leland Cheung was quoted in the September 22, 2011 edition on page 14. His comments are posted at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x789274695/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Leland-Cheung#axzz1YsTg5eOs.
Cheung speaks favorably of the Cambridge City Manager. His answer to the question is positive. "Regardless, I do believe the time is coming for a fresh perspective in City Hall."
His response indicates lack of awareness of the Monteiro decision.
4. Prior Reports.
Tom Stohlman and Sam Seidel: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
Tim Toomey and Minka vanBeuzekom: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa_10.html.
Charlie Marquardt and James Williamson: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa_18.html.
Friday, September 23, 2011
Photos of the 1997 (?) Flood at Alewife, 50 year flood, 2 year flood protections now to destroy the core reservation
On the facebook Charles River White Geese Page, we have had a good discussion on the pending, bizarre destruction of the core Alewife reservation for flood storage protection against two year floods with a massive parking lot directly across the street which could readily a very large multiple of the flood storage.
Logging and clear cutting is scheduled to start in October 2011 and take a month. A large number of Cambridge City Councilors are running for reelection claiming to be environmental saints.
Marilyn Wellons has been kind enough to respond as follows:
Marilyn Wellons 4:55pm Sep 23:
Here's a link to photos of the 1997? flood, before the Cook petition rezoned the Arthur D. Little parking lot to open space:
http://www.openeyesvideo.com/Floodpix.html.
That was one of the two 50-year floods within the last 15 years.
Alewife Flood Photos
www.openeyesvideo.com
Parking Lot of Arthur D. Little (no longer in business) along the eastbound side of route 2, just
Logging and clear cutting is scheduled to start in October 2011 and take a month. A large number of Cambridge City Councilors are running for reelection claiming to be environmental saints.
Marilyn Wellons has been kind enough to respond as follows:
Marilyn Wellons 4:55pm Sep 23:
Here's a link to photos of the 1997? flood, before the Cook petition rezoned the Arthur D. Little parking lot to open space:
http://www.openeyesvideo.com/Floodpix.html.
That was one of the two 50-year floods within the last 15 years.
Alewife Flood Photos
www.openeyesvideo.com
Parking Lot of Arthur D. Little (no longer in business) along the eastbound side of route 2, just
Cambridge Chronicle letters on imminent Alewife destruction disappoints, bad guys say look at the small stuff
1. Cambridge Chronicle.
2. Fake Tree Protection.
3. My letter, unedited, marked to show what was printed.
4. Marilyn Wellons letter.
1.. Cambridge Chronicle.
I recently reported on the posting on line by the Cambridge Chronicle of their edit of my clean up of the letter I previously posted here concerning the pending destruction of the core Alewife reservation. The unedited clean up letter is printed below.
Marilyn Wellons letter was also posted on line. It is printed below as well.
Regrettably, my shortened letter was printed in the September 22, 2011, edition of the Cambridge Chronicle. Marilyn’s was not. The impact on the substantive issues is that I objected about the outrageous destruction of the core Alewife reservation, and the fact was included that it was being done for silly purposes, protection against a two year flood. What was not said was that directly across the street is a massive parking lot which could hold a large multiple of the storage being provided by the clear cutting / logging of the core Alewife reservation.
Instead of Marilyn’s substantive letter, a letter was printed preceding mine which claimed very broad knowledge and experience of the writer and said that people concerned about trees in Cambridge should base their vote in the upcoming election on the handling of four street trees.
The letter was from a friend of the Alewife "protective" group and its timing is highly suspect.
2. Fake Tree Protection.
The writer talking about the four street trees created a supposedly universal organization which claimed concern for all trees in the City of Cambridge. The writer of the substitute letter has helped the Alewife “protective” group along with Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation in their imminent plans to destroy the core Alewife reservation and she is helping Cambridge and the DCR destroy Memorial Drive.
She has created the usual Cambridge Pol group which sounds so great. As is altogether too common with these groups, reality and achievements tend to be exactly the opposite of the lovely claims. Many fake groups are interrelated and loudly and falsely praise each other.
The basic pitch of her tree “protective” group has been a claim of defending all trees, but the unstated fine print is: “How dare you object to the destruction of the core Alewife reservation! How dare you object to the destruction of Memorial Drive! How dare you expect this organization to meaningfully protect trees that our friends want to destroy and which constitute a massively greater multiple of the street trees our friends will consider not destroying!”
The technical term for the fake groups is “company union.” I would not dream of trying to figure out if any individual person in any of these fake groups is a knave or a fool. The problem is too general and too severe in the City of Cambridge, MA. However, a very reasonable and downright normal reaction to the individual behavior of too many of these people is: “You cannot possibly be that stupid.”
The Alewife “protective” group told people to defend against everything except what counts and was winnable. They told people to chase their tails, just do not do anything that has a high probability of winning something of meaningful value. They kept well meaning people “out of trouble” and worked to allow their friends to destroy the most important, the most winnable and valuable part of the Alewife reservation.
The Alewife “protective” group fought for the destruction of the core Alewife reservation through a very vile con game which is highly normal in Cambridge. And this woman’s fake tree protective group, along with this letter, falls into the same category.
In a related matter, the falsely named Cambridgeport “neighborhood association” had a meeting against tree destruction on Wednesday. Without going it, I can guarantee that they did not mention the planned destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive by their friends. Their key members have routinely supported the Alewife “protective” group in its fight for the destruction of massive number of excellent trees on the Alewife reservation, and they have celebrated the environmental outrage at Magazine Beach after censoring mention of the destruction in a supposed public meeting on Magazine Beach. The key people in that “neighborhood association” support the fake tree protective group in its support of the destruction of massive numbers of major trees that their friends want to destroy.
As I said, part of the strength of the Cambridge fake groups is their mutual support and praise.
3. My letter, unedited, marked to show what was printed.
I have been concerned about the Alewife reservation since I lived in North Cambridge thirty years ago. I have been very deeply concerned about Cambridge and the DCR’s plans to destroy the core Alewife reservation for about 20 years. I have frequently printed letters in the Chronicle warning about the threat to the core Alewife in response to letters telling people concerned about Alewife to look at everything else.
In 2000, I wrote Sheila Cook’s successful downzoning to restrict the large parking lot between Alewife station and Route 2 to open space.
My big problem at Alewife has been a group which was created after its leader had discussions with the City Manager’s people. That group has been running around telling people concerned about Alewife to look at everything but the core reservation. They been fighting next to impossible battles, fighting to regulate private uses of less important areas.
They have told people to look at everything but the core reservation, owned by a City Council which loudly proclaims its environmental sainthood. The group has close friends who are also friendly with the Cambridge City Manager. Those friends include people who have been major problems on too many of my successful and frequently major downzonings.
The Alewife “protective” group treated Sheila Cook very badly when she downzoned that parking lot to open space.
The leader of the Alewife “protective” group just went public in these pages. She has spent years condemning all sorts of private development at Alewife, loudly proclaiming her concern for the reservation.
In these pages, the leader of this Alewife “protective” group praised the destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
The core Alewife reservation is far more valuable than peripheral areas the Alewife “protective” group has been “protecting” against much more difficult odds than exist in the core Alewife reservation.
The core Alewife reservation is massive irreplaceable aged NATIVE trees with an irreplaceable animal population. The logging and clear cutting has already started. The main destruction will take a month and will commence in October.
Birds have been dislocated from here and from Fresh Pond to the windows of office buildings. Chipmunks, possums, rabbits, raccoons, deer and untold other excellent animals will casually be killed by massive machines totally and needlessly destroying their homes, unless they can run away from the relentless machines..
Why? For flood storage to protect against a TWO YEAR FLOOD in an area which has seen TWO FIFTY YEAR FLOODS in the past twenty years.
[End of Chronicle publication. I have not compared for edits.]
Directly across Cambridge Park Drive, visible from the core Alewife reservation, is a massive parking lot which could be readily be used for flood storage if Cambridge had a city council resembling the claims of environmental sainthood spouted by the Cambridge City Council.
This barren parking lot is massive and is readily takeable by eminent domain. If the Cambridge City Council were the environmental saints that their constant claims proclaim.
The flood storage that could be placed under that massive parking lot is a very large multiple of the silly TWO YEAR FLOOD protection provided by the massive and reprehensible destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
It is not too late, the leader of the Alewife “protective” group has publicly admitted her group is a con game by her praise for destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
Gone is her praise for the irreplaceable, virgin woods.
Gone is her praise for the irreplaceable and excellent animals.
Present is outright contempt for the excellent environment being destroyed.
Essentially, she is now saying “Do not look at what the City Council is destroying. Look at the beautiful pork project WE are providing.”
“Reprehensible.” “Ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.” The superior court and appeals court were talking about Cambridge’s contempt for civil rights. These words apply to Cambridge’s contempt for our environment as well.
The key to the imminent destruction of Alewife is the self proclaimed environment saints on the Cambridge City Council.
The self proclaimed environmental saints on the Cambridge City Council have very carefully not wanted to know what is going on. But they have been kept abreast of plans.
It is not too late, but the serious logging starts in October. The City Council should be told to behave like the environmental saints they claim to be.
This irresponsible and totally needless destruction should be stopped with the damage that has already been done.
That massive parking lot can hold much more needed flood storage than the pittance that can be gotten by destroying the core Alewife reservation. That massive parking lot should be used for the needed flood storage with the owner developing planned buildings on air rights.
4. Marilyn Wellons letter.
At the September 7, 2011 meeting about Alewife flood storage in DCR parkland, Cambridge said the system it will build can handle 2-year floods. As readers may know, there have been at least two 50-year floods there since 1996. Cambridge's solution will be grossly inadequate, the loss of parkland gratuitous.
Community Preservation Act legislation allows for purchase of watershed lands. Cambridge has spent more than a million dollars of Community Preservation Act funds to buy watershed outside of the city, in Lincoln. I propose that instead of destroying Alewife, the city spend CPA funds to buy watershed in Cambridge, at Alewife, to deal with the torrents of water that will continue to flood there in future storms.
It should be possible for the city and the current property owner of a parking lot on Cambridgepark Drive to agree on flood storage under any future building there. The developer would retain air rights for such a building or buildings. The city would pay the developer for the easement and marginal increase in the costs of a foundation built over the flood storage.
The owner of the parking lot has been attuned to environmental issues and has previously installed a rain garden at Alewife property to deal with runoff from its buildings.
The city could reasonably pursue this option as an alternative to its imminent crime against the environment at Alewife.
2. Fake Tree Protection.
3. My letter, unedited, marked to show what was printed.
4. Marilyn Wellons letter.
1.. Cambridge Chronicle.
I recently reported on the posting on line by the Cambridge Chronicle of their edit of my clean up of the letter I previously posted here concerning the pending destruction of the core Alewife reservation. The unedited clean up letter is printed below.
Marilyn Wellons letter was also posted on line. It is printed below as well.
Regrettably, my shortened letter was printed in the September 22, 2011, edition of the Cambridge Chronicle. Marilyn’s was not. The impact on the substantive issues is that I objected about the outrageous destruction of the core Alewife reservation, and the fact was included that it was being done for silly purposes, protection against a two year flood. What was not said was that directly across the street is a massive parking lot which could hold a large multiple of the storage being provided by the clear cutting / logging of the core Alewife reservation.
Instead of Marilyn’s substantive letter, a letter was printed preceding mine which claimed very broad knowledge and experience of the writer and said that people concerned about trees in Cambridge should base their vote in the upcoming election on the handling of four street trees.
The letter was from a friend of the Alewife "protective" group and its timing is highly suspect.
2. Fake Tree Protection.
The writer talking about the four street trees created a supposedly universal organization which claimed concern for all trees in the City of Cambridge. The writer of the substitute letter has helped the Alewife “protective” group along with Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation in their imminent plans to destroy the core Alewife reservation and she is helping Cambridge and the DCR destroy Memorial Drive.
She has created the usual Cambridge Pol group which sounds so great. As is altogether too common with these groups, reality and achievements tend to be exactly the opposite of the lovely claims. Many fake groups are interrelated and loudly and falsely praise each other.
The basic pitch of her tree “protective” group has been a claim of defending all trees, but the unstated fine print is: “How dare you object to the destruction of the core Alewife reservation! How dare you object to the destruction of Memorial Drive! How dare you expect this organization to meaningfully protect trees that our friends want to destroy and which constitute a massively greater multiple of the street trees our friends will consider not destroying!”
The technical term for the fake groups is “company union.” I would not dream of trying to figure out if any individual person in any of these fake groups is a knave or a fool. The problem is too general and too severe in the City of Cambridge, MA. However, a very reasonable and downright normal reaction to the individual behavior of too many of these people is: “You cannot possibly be that stupid.”
The Alewife “protective” group told people to defend against everything except what counts and was winnable. They told people to chase their tails, just do not do anything that has a high probability of winning something of meaningful value. They kept well meaning people “out of trouble” and worked to allow their friends to destroy the most important, the most winnable and valuable part of the Alewife reservation.
The Alewife “protective” group fought for the destruction of the core Alewife reservation through a very vile con game which is highly normal in Cambridge. And this woman’s fake tree protective group, along with this letter, falls into the same category.
In a related matter, the falsely named Cambridgeport “neighborhood association” had a meeting against tree destruction on Wednesday. Without going it, I can guarantee that they did not mention the planned destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive by their friends. Their key members have routinely supported the Alewife “protective” group in its fight for the destruction of massive number of excellent trees on the Alewife reservation, and they have celebrated the environmental outrage at Magazine Beach after censoring mention of the destruction in a supposed public meeting on Magazine Beach. The key people in that “neighborhood association” support the fake tree protective group in its support of the destruction of massive numbers of major trees that their friends want to destroy.
As I said, part of the strength of the Cambridge fake groups is their mutual support and praise.
3. My letter, unedited, marked to show what was printed.
I have been concerned about the Alewife reservation since I lived in North Cambridge thirty years ago. I have been very deeply concerned about Cambridge and the DCR’s plans to destroy the core Alewife reservation for about 20 years. I have frequently printed letters in the Chronicle warning about the threat to the core Alewife in response to letters telling people concerned about Alewife to look at everything else.
In 2000, I wrote Sheila Cook’s successful downzoning to restrict the large parking lot between Alewife station and Route 2 to open space.
My big problem at Alewife has been a group which was created after its leader had discussions with the City Manager’s people. That group has been running around telling people concerned about Alewife to look at everything but the core reservation. They been fighting next to impossible battles, fighting to regulate private uses of less important areas.
They have told people to look at everything but the core reservation, owned by a City Council which loudly proclaims its environmental sainthood. The group has close friends who are also friendly with the Cambridge City Manager. Those friends include people who have been major problems on too many of my successful and frequently major downzonings.
The Alewife “protective” group treated Sheila Cook very badly when she downzoned that parking lot to open space.
The leader of the Alewife “protective” group just went public in these pages. She has spent years condemning all sorts of private development at Alewife, loudly proclaiming her concern for the reservation.
In these pages, the leader of this Alewife “protective” group praised the destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
The core Alewife reservation is far more valuable than peripheral areas the Alewife “protective” group has been “protecting” against much more difficult odds than exist in the core Alewife reservation.
The core Alewife reservation is massive irreplaceable aged NATIVE trees with an irreplaceable animal population. The logging and clear cutting has already started. The main destruction will take a month and will commence in October.
Birds have been dislocated from here and from Fresh Pond to the windows of office buildings. Chipmunks, possums, rabbits, raccoons, deer and untold other excellent animals will casually be killed by massive machines totally and needlessly destroying their homes, unless they can run away from the relentless machines..
Why? For flood storage to protect against a TWO YEAR FLOOD in an area which has seen TWO FIFTY YEAR FLOODS in the past twenty years.
[End of Chronicle publication. I have not compared for edits.]
Directly across Cambridge Park Drive, visible from the core Alewife reservation, is a massive parking lot which could be readily be used for flood storage if Cambridge had a city council resembling the claims of environmental sainthood spouted by the Cambridge City Council.
This barren parking lot is massive and is readily takeable by eminent domain. If the Cambridge City Council were the environmental saints that their constant claims proclaim.
The flood storage that could be placed under that massive parking lot is a very large multiple of the silly TWO YEAR FLOOD protection provided by the massive and reprehensible destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
It is not too late, the leader of the Alewife “protective” group has publicly admitted her group is a con game by her praise for destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
Gone is her praise for the irreplaceable, virgin woods.
Gone is her praise for the irreplaceable and excellent animals.
Present is outright contempt for the excellent environment being destroyed.
Essentially, she is now saying “Do not look at what the City Council is destroying. Look at the beautiful pork project WE are providing.”
“Reprehensible.” “Ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.” The superior court and appeals court were talking about Cambridge’s contempt for civil rights. These words apply to Cambridge’s contempt for our environment as well.
The key to the imminent destruction of Alewife is the self proclaimed environment saints on the Cambridge City Council.
The self proclaimed environmental saints on the Cambridge City Council have very carefully not wanted to know what is going on. But they have been kept abreast of plans.
It is not too late, but the serious logging starts in October. The City Council should be told to behave like the environmental saints they claim to be.
This irresponsible and totally needless destruction should be stopped with the damage that has already been done.
That massive parking lot can hold much more needed flood storage than the pittance that can be gotten by destroying the core Alewife reservation. That massive parking lot should be used for the needed flood storage with the owner developing planned buildings on air rights.
4. Marilyn Wellons letter.
At the September 7, 2011 meeting about Alewife flood storage in DCR parkland, Cambridge said the system it will build can handle 2-year floods. As readers may know, there have been at least two 50-year floods there since 1996. Cambridge's solution will be grossly inadequate, the loss of parkland gratuitous.
Community Preservation Act legislation allows for purchase of watershed lands. Cambridge has spent more than a million dollars of Community Preservation Act funds to buy watershed outside of the city, in Lincoln. I propose that instead of destroying Alewife, the city spend CPA funds to buy watershed in Cambridge, at Alewife, to deal with the torrents of water that will continue to flood there in future storms.
It should be possible for the city and the current property owner of a parking lot on Cambridgepark Drive to agree on flood storage under any future building there. The developer would retain air rights for such a building or buildings. The city would pay the developer for the easement and marginal increase in the costs of a foundation built over the flood storage.
The owner of the parking lot has been attuned to environmental issues and has previously installed a rain garden at Alewife property to deal with runoff from its buildings.
The city could reasonably pursue this option as an alternative to its imminent crime against the environment at Alewife.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Alewife destruction letters posted by Cambridge Chronicle
A few days ago, I posted the first submitted draft of a letter to the Cambridge Chronicle on the impending destruction of the irreplaceable core Alewife reservation by Cambridge, MA, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation and their fake groups.
I rewrote the letter to moderate the tone and resubmitted.
Today, 9/21/11, the Chronicle has posted a shortened version of the letter.
Omitted is the fact that the destruction of the core Alewife reservation is totally unnecessary because there is a massive parking lot across the way which could readily hold much more than the flood storage that the core reservation is being destroyed for.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1804875708/Letter-Concerned-about-Alewife#axzz1YafFVL9L
It is being printed along with a letter from Marilyn Wellons making the omitted point.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1408092943/Letter-Solution-to-flooding-inadequate#axzz1YafFVL9L
Nice combination. It will be interesting to see the hard copy. Thank you Chronicle.
I rewrote the letter to moderate the tone and resubmitted.
Today, 9/21/11, the Chronicle has posted a shortened version of the letter.
Omitted is the fact that the destruction of the core Alewife reservation is totally unnecessary because there is a massive parking lot across the way which could readily hold much more than the flood storage that the core reservation is being destroyed for.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1804875708/Letter-Concerned-about-Alewife#axzz1YafFVL9L
It is being printed along with a letter from Marilyn Wellons making the omitted point.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1408092943/Letter-Solution-to-flooding-inadequate#axzz1YafFVL9L
Nice combination. It will be interesting to see the hard copy. Thank you Chronicle.
Monday, September 19, 2011
A Summary on Alewife and the "protectors" in the middle of destruction
1. General Background.
2. The City Manager’s Alewife “Protective” Group.
3. Their one “victory.”
4. Have they succeeded in destroying the core Alewife reservation?
5. The real record in Cambridge, with confirmation by judge, jury and appeals court.
6. Summary. Photos.
1. General Background.
The core Alewife reservation is an irreplaceable virgin woodlands within view of the Alewife (western) terminus of Boston’s Red Line subway and of the eastern terminus of Route 2, the northern of two superhighway systems connecting east and west in Massachusetts. It is teeming with wildlife.
Cambridge and its state accomplice, the Department of Conservation and Recreation, are highly destructive of the environment. Projects are too often so bizarre it is difficult to say they have any value except as pork.
Cambridge has been governed by two related city managers since 1974.
Cambridge’s worst dirty tricks have frequently been assisted by “citizen’s groups” which have undisclosed connections to the Cambridge City Manager.
I have 35 years experience fighting for the environment in Cambridge. I have major victories using zoning as a tool. I have forced votes out of the Cambridge City Council and won a majority of votes. The victories usually have been at the expense of the City Manager and of groups friendly to the Cambridge City Manager which do not clearly disclose the connection or of unnamed entities composed of the same people. Such groups have caused major harm to goals which are shared by a very significant part of the Cambridge electorate.
Working with various groups, my zoning changes have included downzoning of about 85% of Massachusetts Avenue between Harvard and Central Squares, and the restriction of a key parking lot between Alewife Station and Route 2 to open space. The further I have kept away from the City Manager groups, the greater has been my success.
2. The City Manager’s Alewife “Protective” Group.
A group claiming to be defending Alewife has spent perhaps 20 years running around claiming to be defending Alewife. Reality is that the group was telling people to defend everything except for the part owned by its friends. This group was created after discussions with the Cambridge City Manager’s people.
The actions of this group kept potential activists “out of trouble” by keeping them from focusing on the most valuable part of the Alewife reservation. The group told people to yell at private property owners in nearly impossible battles. They sounded great. They told people to keep away from proposed destruction of the most important part of the reservation, fight readily winnable because the Cambridge City Council claims to be a bunch of environmental saints.
3. Their one “victory.”
They seem to claim one victory during their existence. That victory looks like their taking credit for Sheila Cook's and my achievement.
In 2000 an effort led by Sheila Cook, using a zoning change written by me, restricted the use of the large parking lot between Alewife station and Route 2 to open space. About 5 years later, the owner obeyed the zoning. The supposed “protective” group treated Sheila Cook very badly for her downzoning and have since claimed sole credit for the implemention of and the obvious results of her downzoning. They do not mention the downzoning.
4. Have they succeeded in destroying the core Alewife reservation?
After 20 years loudly claiming to be defending Alewife but in reality defending everything in Alewife except for the portion owned by its friends, the group just went public supporting destruction of the major part of that core portion of the Alewife reservation owned by its friends. Destruction has already been accomplished on a distressingly large but “preliminary” area. Full scale destruction is expected to be actually accomplished in a month of clear cutting and logging commencing in October 2011.
The destruction is just as bizarre as too many prior examples of destruction in Cambridge. This excellent virgin native woods teeming with valuable wildlife is being destroyed for “flood storage.” The “flood storage” will protect against two year floods in an area which has seen two fifty year floods in the past 20 years.
Directly across the street from the target virgin woods is a massive parking lot, readily usable for flood storage and capable of holding a very large multiple of the two year storm drainage being created by Cambridge, the DCR, and their fake group.
5. The real record in Cambridge, with confirmation by judge, jury and appeals court.
The Cambridge City Council, pretty much non stop, proclaims its sainthood on the environment. The typical Cambridge voter wants a responsible city government. The Cambridge City Council’s claims of sainthood are flat out lies. They translate as: “I’m saving the world. How dare you object to my destruction of Cambridge." The Cambridge City Council is very vulnerable to communication of reality.
Projects by the two on the Charles River are comparably bizarre, displaying contempt for the environment and for the animal population. The governor may have stepped in to prevent use of Obama moneys for a massive tree destruction project. The DCR described all the trees as diseased. The DCR’s filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission proved the DCR’s claims to be flat out lies. Flat out lies have been very much too common.
Within the past week, Cambridge has paid an $8.3 million judgment in the case of Monteiro v. Cambridge. In this case, jury, judge and appeals court found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of a black female Cape Verdean department head in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint. The jury said $3.5 million penal damages. The superior court judge summarized his testimony and behavior in the word “reprehensible.” The appeals court panel should its disgust by refusing to issue a formal opinion. They said “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.” But the Cambridge pols blithely run around praising the city manager and totally seem to be unaware of the informed opinions of judge, jury and appeals court on the Cambridge City Manager.
And those words/actions by judge, jury and appeals court sound strikingly like appropriate reactions to Cambridge’s environmental behavior.
6. Summary. Photos.
I have recently published on this blog a copy of a proposed op ed I have given to the Cambridge Chronicle responding to the fake protective group’s support of destruction of the core Alewife reservation after years of claims by them that they were defending Alewife. Since then, I have submitted a modified version which is more subtle. The words “lie” and “fake” were deleted, and “con game” was only used after I proved the con game a con game.
Here are two prior postings on this matter, providing key photographs:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/destruction-of-alewife-pre-cambridge.html. This is my report from July 28, 2011, providing photo of the “preliminary” destruction and a photo of the part of the massive parking lot across Cambridge Park Drive where the flood storage should be placed.
Please compare Google Maps, satellite view, for 100 Cambridge Park Drive in Cambridge, MA. This shows Alewife before this first stage logging and shows the full extent of that massive parking lot. It extends far beyond the area seen in the photograph, winding between large buildings, the commuter rail and Alewife Brook Parkway.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/large-alewife-parking-lot-returned-to.html. This goes into more detail about the parking lot saved by Sheila Cook and me, with photographs.
Alewife is savable. All that is necessary is for a Cambridge City Council which claims to be saints on environment issues to vaguely resemble their claims.
2. The City Manager’s Alewife “Protective” Group.
3. Their one “victory.”
4. Have they succeeded in destroying the core Alewife reservation?
5. The real record in Cambridge, with confirmation by judge, jury and appeals court.
6. Summary. Photos.
1. General Background.
The core Alewife reservation is an irreplaceable virgin woodlands within view of the Alewife (western) terminus of Boston’s Red Line subway and of the eastern terminus of Route 2, the northern of two superhighway systems connecting east and west in Massachusetts. It is teeming with wildlife.
Cambridge and its state accomplice, the Department of Conservation and Recreation, are highly destructive of the environment. Projects are too often so bizarre it is difficult to say they have any value except as pork.
Cambridge has been governed by two related city managers since 1974.
Cambridge’s worst dirty tricks have frequently been assisted by “citizen’s groups” which have undisclosed connections to the Cambridge City Manager.
I have 35 years experience fighting for the environment in Cambridge. I have major victories using zoning as a tool. I have forced votes out of the Cambridge City Council and won a majority of votes. The victories usually have been at the expense of the City Manager and of groups friendly to the Cambridge City Manager which do not clearly disclose the connection or of unnamed entities composed of the same people. Such groups have caused major harm to goals which are shared by a very significant part of the Cambridge electorate.
Working with various groups, my zoning changes have included downzoning of about 85% of Massachusetts Avenue between Harvard and Central Squares, and the restriction of a key parking lot between Alewife Station and Route 2 to open space. The further I have kept away from the City Manager groups, the greater has been my success.
2. The City Manager’s Alewife “Protective” Group.
A group claiming to be defending Alewife has spent perhaps 20 years running around claiming to be defending Alewife. Reality is that the group was telling people to defend everything except for the part owned by its friends. This group was created after discussions with the Cambridge City Manager’s people.
The actions of this group kept potential activists “out of trouble” by keeping them from focusing on the most valuable part of the Alewife reservation. The group told people to yell at private property owners in nearly impossible battles. They sounded great. They told people to keep away from proposed destruction of the most important part of the reservation, fight readily winnable because the Cambridge City Council claims to be a bunch of environmental saints.
3. Their one “victory.”
They seem to claim one victory during their existence. That victory looks like their taking credit for Sheila Cook's and my achievement.
In 2000 an effort led by Sheila Cook, using a zoning change written by me, restricted the use of the large parking lot between Alewife station and Route 2 to open space. About 5 years later, the owner obeyed the zoning. The supposed “protective” group treated Sheila Cook very badly for her downzoning and have since claimed sole credit for the implemention of and the obvious results of her downzoning. They do not mention the downzoning.
4. Have they succeeded in destroying the core Alewife reservation?
After 20 years loudly claiming to be defending Alewife but in reality defending everything in Alewife except for the portion owned by its friends, the group just went public supporting destruction of the major part of that core portion of the Alewife reservation owned by its friends. Destruction has already been accomplished on a distressingly large but “preliminary” area. Full scale destruction is expected to be actually accomplished in a month of clear cutting and logging commencing in October 2011.
The destruction is just as bizarre as too many prior examples of destruction in Cambridge. This excellent virgin native woods teeming with valuable wildlife is being destroyed for “flood storage.” The “flood storage” will protect against two year floods in an area which has seen two fifty year floods in the past 20 years.
Directly across the street from the target virgin woods is a massive parking lot, readily usable for flood storage and capable of holding a very large multiple of the two year storm drainage being created by Cambridge, the DCR, and their fake group.
5. The real record in Cambridge, with confirmation by judge, jury and appeals court.
The Cambridge City Council, pretty much non stop, proclaims its sainthood on the environment. The typical Cambridge voter wants a responsible city government. The Cambridge City Council’s claims of sainthood are flat out lies. They translate as: “I’m saving the world. How dare you object to my destruction of Cambridge." The Cambridge City Council is very vulnerable to communication of reality.
Projects by the two on the Charles River are comparably bizarre, displaying contempt for the environment and for the animal population. The governor may have stepped in to prevent use of Obama moneys for a massive tree destruction project. The DCR described all the trees as diseased. The DCR’s filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission proved the DCR’s claims to be flat out lies. Flat out lies have been very much too common.
Within the past week, Cambridge has paid an $8.3 million judgment in the case of Monteiro v. Cambridge. In this case, jury, judge and appeals court found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of a black female Cape Verdean department head in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint. The jury said $3.5 million penal damages. The superior court judge summarized his testimony and behavior in the word “reprehensible.” The appeals court panel should its disgust by refusing to issue a formal opinion. They said “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.” But the Cambridge pols blithely run around praising the city manager and totally seem to be unaware of the informed opinions of judge, jury and appeals court on the Cambridge City Manager.
And those words/actions by judge, jury and appeals court sound strikingly like appropriate reactions to Cambridge’s environmental behavior.
6. Summary. Photos.
I have recently published on this blog a copy of a proposed op ed I have given to the Cambridge Chronicle responding to the fake protective group’s support of destruction of the core Alewife reservation after years of claims by them that they were defending Alewife. Since then, I have submitted a modified version which is more subtle. The words “lie” and “fake” were deleted, and “con game” was only used after I proved the con game a con game.
Here are two prior postings on this matter, providing key photographs:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/destruction-of-alewife-pre-cambridge.html. This is my report from July 28, 2011, providing photo of the “preliminary” destruction and a photo of the part of the massive parking lot across Cambridge Park Drive where the flood storage should be placed.
Please compare Google Maps, satellite view, for 100 Cambridge Park Drive in Cambridge, MA. This shows Alewife before this first stage logging and shows the full extent of that massive parking lot. It extends far beyond the area seen in the photograph, winding between large buildings, the commuter rail and Alewife Brook Parkway.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/large-alewife-parking-lot-returned-to.html. This goes into more detail about the parking lot saved by Sheila Cook and me, with photographs.
Alewife is savable. All that is necessary is for a Cambridge City Council which claims to be saints on environment issues to vaguely resemble their claims.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
New City Manager for Cambridge, MA, USA? Charlie Marquardt and James Williamson
1. General.
2. Charlie Marquardt.
3. James Williamson.
4. Longer quote from Williamson.
5. Prior Reports.
1. General.
The situation in Cambridge, MA, USA is outrageous.
Environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by government on the Charles River is bizarre and getting worse.
The city and its friends in the state are preparing to destroy the last virgin forest, the core Alewife reservation, for flood storage that is patently silly. They are protecting against a two year flood in an area that has seen two 50 year floods in the last 20 years. Directly across the street from their destruction is a massive parking lot that can handle a multiple of the flooding. It is impossible to call the explanation serious.
Informed analyses by non-insiders have a tendency to communicate shock.
Judge, jury and appeals court panel have evaluated Cambridge’s treatment of a black, Cape Verdean department head with extreme displeasure. They have found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed her life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The jury spoke with $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages.
The judge reaffirmed the jury in an opinion which quoted the Cambridge City Manager’s testimony extensively. She called him “reprehensible.”
The appeals court panel reacted to Cambridge’s appeal with disgust, refusing to honor the appeal with a full fledged opinion. They commented that there was “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.
The cost of the case paid by Cambridge to the plaintiff is $8.3 million. Estimates are frequently presented that total cost will approach or exceed $10 million.
The Cambridge Chronicle’s editorial, posted on August 18, 2011, at : http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1852620823/Editorial-A-multimillion-dollar-gamble#axzz1VBaL41vk, seems to go both ways on whether the City Manager should leave.
My personal opinion is that the binding judicial decision seems to indicate that the Cambridge City Manager should be fired without his golden parachute and probably without pension. The latter would be an extension of existing law, but the case is ideal to extend the law. I think the courts have reached an excellent opinion.
The election season is here.
The Cambridge Chronicle is asking candidates: “Do you think it is time for a new City Manger?”
I am reporting on the answers with links to the complete comments.
2. Charlie Marquardt.
Charlie Marquardt was quoted in the September 15, 2011 edition on page 12. His comments are posted at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x519377765/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Charlie-Marquardt#axzz1YJ3bCD5d.
Mr. Marquardt makes no comment on Monteiro, on the $8 to $10 million cost, or on the judicial findings and orders.
A brief summary of his answer is: “Yes. Mr. Healy has served Cambridge well over his tenure, but it is time to begin the process of transitioning to a new City Manager. "
3. James Williamson.
Williamson was quoted in the September 15, 2011 edition on page 12. I would be very pleased to be corrected, but I have hunted and hunted. I do not see his comments on line. I am therefore quoting the relevant portion of his comments below.
He includes financial references to Monteiro and mentions that it was a “‘retaliation’ verdict.”
His answer to the question is positive. "It would be prudent for the Council to begin a search for a suitable replacement NOW."
4. Longer quote from Williamson.
Yes. Of course. But it's time for a new City Council, as well. (Aren't they responsible for the City Manager??) Robert Healy gets paid - pays himself? - $336,000 a year. His 'depadee', Richard Rossi, gets $270,000. Tim Geither, the Secretary of the US Treasury, gets $172,000 a year. Anything wrong with this picture. Anything wrong with this picture?
Healy squandered $10 million fighting a "retaliation" verdict by two juries. Money well spent??
"Bob" Healy has been in power for 35 years, longer than Mubarak?
It would be prudent for the Council to begin a search for a suitable replacement NOW. But we can't wait and blame everything on the manager.
[Series of issues not relevant to this blog, shut off by Chronicle at their 140 word limit]
5. Prior Reports.
Tom Stohlman and Sam Seidel: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
Tim Toomey and Minka vanBeuzekom: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa_10.html.
2. Charlie Marquardt.
3. James Williamson.
4. Longer quote from Williamson.
5. Prior Reports.
1. General.
The situation in Cambridge, MA, USA is outrageous.
Environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by government on the Charles River is bizarre and getting worse.
The city and its friends in the state are preparing to destroy the last virgin forest, the core Alewife reservation, for flood storage that is patently silly. They are protecting against a two year flood in an area that has seen two 50 year floods in the last 20 years. Directly across the street from their destruction is a massive parking lot that can handle a multiple of the flooding. It is impossible to call the explanation serious.
Informed analyses by non-insiders have a tendency to communicate shock.
Judge, jury and appeals court panel have evaluated Cambridge’s treatment of a black, Cape Verdean department head with extreme displeasure. They have found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed her life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The jury spoke with $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages.
The judge reaffirmed the jury in an opinion which quoted the Cambridge City Manager’s testimony extensively. She called him “reprehensible.”
The appeals court panel reacted to Cambridge’s appeal with disgust, refusing to honor the appeal with a full fledged opinion. They commented that there was “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.
The cost of the case paid by Cambridge to the plaintiff is $8.3 million. Estimates are frequently presented that total cost will approach or exceed $10 million.
The Cambridge Chronicle’s editorial, posted on August 18, 2011, at : http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1852620823/Editorial-A-multimillion-dollar-gamble#axzz1VBaL41vk, seems to go both ways on whether the City Manager should leave.
My personal opinion is that the binding judicial decision seems to indicate that the Cambridge City Manager should be fired without his golden parachute and probably without pension. The latter would be an extension of existing law, but the case is ideal to extend the law. I think the courts have reached an excellent opinion.
The election season is here.
The Cambridge Chronicle is asking candidates: “Do you think it is time for a new City Manger?”
I am reporting on the answers with links to the complete comments.
2. Charlie Marquardt.
Charlie Marquardt was quoted in the September 15, 2011 edition on page 12. His comments are posted at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x519377765/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Charlie-Marquardt#axzz1YJ3bCD5d.
Mr. Marquardt makes no comment on Monteiro, on the $8 to $10 million cost, or on the judicial findings and orders.
A brief summary of his answer is: “Yes. Mr. Healy has served Cambridge well over his tenure, but it is time to begin the process of transitioning to a new City Manager. "
3. James Williamson.
Williamson was quoted in the September 15, 2011 edition on page 12. I would be very pleased to be corrected, but I have hunted and hunted. I do not see his comments on line. I am therefore quoting the relevant portion of his comments below.
He includes financial references to Monteiro and mentions that it was a “‘retaliation’ verdict.”
His answer to the question is positive. "It would be prudent for the Council to begin a search for a suitable replacement NOW."
4. Longer quote from Williamson.
Yes. Of course. But it's time for a new City Council, as well. (Aren't they responsible for the City Manager??) Robert Healy gets paid - pays himself? - $336,000 a year. His 'depadee', Richard Rossi, gets $270,000. Tim Geither, the Secretary of the US Treasury, gets $172,000 a year. Anything wrong with this picture. Anything wrong with this picture?
Healy squandered $10 million fighting a "retaliation" verdict by two juries. Money well spent??
"Bob" Healy has been in power for 35 years, longer than Mubarak?
It would be prudent for the Council to begin a search for a suitable replacement NOW. But we can't wait and blame everything on the manager.
[Series of issues not relevant to this blog, shut off by Chronicle at their 140 word limit]
5. Prior Reports.
Tom Stohlman and Sam Seidel: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
Tim Toomey and Minka vanBeuzekom: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa_10.html.
Friday, September 16, 2011
A response on the destruction of the core Alewife reservation to an admission of a con game by the leader of the con game
The following has been submitted to the Cambridge Chronicle a few minutes prior to its publication in this Blog. Yesterday, September 15, 2011, the leader of the fake protective group claiming to be defending Alewife published a letter praising the destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
The following is offered as an op ed piece in defense of the core Alewife reservation, and this introductory language is part of the op ed piece.
You are reminded that the con game that the fake environmental group has been conducting has used multiple op ed pieces in its non stop diversions aimed at keeping people away from the standing up to totally unnecessary and irresponsible destruction of the core Alewife reservation by its friends until it is “too late.”
The core Alewife reservation is far more valuable than peripheral areas the fake protective group has been “protecting” against much more difficult odds than exist in the core Alewife reservation.
The core Alewife reservation is massive irreplaceable aged NATIVE trees with an irreplaceable animal population. The logging and clear cutting has already started. The main destruction will take a month and will commence in October.
Birds have been dislocated from here and from Fresh Pond to the windows of office buildings. Chipmunks, possums, rabbits, raccoons, deer and untold other excellent animals will casually be killed by massive machines totally and needlessly destroying their homes, unless they can run away from the relentless machines..
Why? For flood storage to protect against a TWO YEAR FLOOD in an area which has seen TWO FIFTY YEAR FLOODS in the past twenty years.
Directly across Cambridge Park Drive, visible from the core Alewife reservation, is a massive parking lot which could be readily be used for flood storage if Cambridge had a city council resembling the lies of environmental sainthood spouted by the Cambridge City Council.
This barren parking lot is massive and is readily takeable by eminent domain. If the Cambridge City Council were the environmental saints that their constant lies proclaim.
The flood storage that could be placed under that massive parking lot is a very large multiple of the silly TWO YEAR FLOOD protection provided by the massive and reprehensible destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
There are big differences between the destruction of the core Alewife reservation and the destruction of less valuable locations that the fake protective group has been yelling about. The key difference is in the ownership.
The less valuable locations the fake protective group has been running around in circles about is privately owned. Alewife is owned by a bunch of liars who are elected by the public, a bunch of liars who lie that they are environmental saints.
The fake protective group tells us it is ok for its friends to destroy, destroy, destroy the core Alewife reservation, but the fake protective group tells us it is inexcusable for private owners to destroy far less valuable land.
If Cambridge had a city government that resembles the lies of this environmentally irresponsible city government, that massive parking lot would be taken in a moment. Flood storage would be placed under it and development of the air rights would be coordinated with the current owners who will go forward anyway.
The most important difference is that the fake protective group has been lying itself.
The fake protective group has been telling people not to look at the important stuff, not to look at the excellent virgin forest about to be destroyed by a lying city council which claims to be environment saints. The fake protective group has been telling well intentioned people to look at everything else, to look at the long shots, look at the private property owners. Do not look at the lying city council involved in yet another totally inexcusable and wasteful piece of pork.
And the leader of the fake protective group has just admitted the con.
Gone is the praise for the irreplaceable, virgin woods.
Gone is the praise for the irreplaceable and excellent animals.
Present is outright contempt for the excellent environment being destroyed.
Do not look at what a lying city council is destroying.
Look at the beautiful pork project WE are providing.
“Reprehensible.” “Ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.” The superior and appeals court were talking about Cambridge’s contempt for civil rights. These words apply to Cambridge’s contempt for our environment as well.
Shame, shame, shame, but the fake environmental saints on the Cambridge City Council have none.
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
The following is offered as an op ed piece in defense of the core Alewife reservation, and this introductory language is part of the op ed piece.
You are reminded that the con game that the fake environmental group has been conducting has used multiple op ed pieces in its non stop diversions aimed at keeping people away from the standing up to totally unnecessary and irresponsible destruction of the core Alewife reservation by its friends until it is “too late.”
The core Alewife reservation is far more valuable than peripheral areas the fake protective group has been “protecting” against much more difficult odds than exist in the core Alewife reservation.
The core Alewife reservation is massive irreplaceable aged NATIVE trees with an irreplaceable animal population. The logging and clear cutting has already started. The main destruction will take a month and will commence in October.
Birds have been dislocated from here and from Fresh Pond to the windows of office buildings. Chipmunks, possums, rabbits, raccoons, deer and untold other excellent animals will casually be killed by massive machines totally and needlessly destroying their homes, unless they can run away from the relentless machines..
Why? For flood storage to protect against a TWO YEAR FLOOD in an area which has seen TWO FIFTY YEAR FLOODS in the past twenty years.
Directly across Cambridge Park Drive, visible from the core Alewife reservation, is a massive parking lot which could be readily be used for flood storage if Cambridge had a city council resembling the lies of environmental sainthood spouted by the Cambridge City Council.
This barren parking lot is massive and is readily takeable by eminent domain. If the Cambridge City Council were the environmental saints that their constant lies proclaim.
The flood storage that could be placed under that massive parking lot is a very large multiple of the silly TWO YEAR FLOOD protection provided by the massive and reprehensible destruction of the core Alewife reservation.
There are big differences between the destruction of the core Alewife reservation and the destruction of less valuable locations that the fake protective group has been yelling about. The key difference is in the ownership.
The less valuable locations the fake protective group has been running around in circles about is privately owned. Alewife is owned by a bunch of liars who are elected by the public, a bunch of liars who lie that they are environmental saints.
The fake protective group tells us it is ok for its friends to destroy, destroy, destroy the core Alewife reservation, but the fake protective group tells us it is inexcusable for private owners to destroy far less valuable land.
If Cambridge had a city government that resembles the lies of this environmentally irresponsible city government, that massive parking lot would be taken in a moment. Flood storage would be placed under it and development of the air rights would be coordinated with the current owners who will go forward anyway.
The most important difference is that the fake protective group has been lying itself.
The fake protective group has been telling people not to look at the important stuff, not to look at the excellent virgin forest about to be destroyed by a lying city council which claims to be environment saints. The fake protective group has been telling well intentioned people to look at everything else, to look at the long shots, look at the private property owners. Do not look at the lying city council involved in yet another totally inexcusable and wasteful piece of pork.
And the leader of the fake protective group has just admitted the con.
Gone is the praise for the irreplaceable, virgin woods.
Gone is the praise for the irreplaceable and excellent animals.
Present is outright contempt for the excellent environment being destroyed.
Do not look at what a lying city council is destroying.
Look at the beautiful pork project WE are providing.
“Reprehensible.” “Ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.” The superior and appeals court were talking about Cambridge’s contempt for civil rights. These words apply to Cambridge’s contempt for our environment as well.
Shame, shame, shame, but the fake environmental saints on the Cambridge City Council have none.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Destruction coming on the Charles River
The vilest thing about Cambridge, the Department of Conservation and Recreation and their fake groups is their constant lying that they are environmental saints.
I have reported on the imminent and downright silly October 2011 destruction of the core Alewife reservation by these people loudly declaring their environmental sainthood.
The situation is comparable on the Charles River. The proposed destruction makes no more sense. Here are photos of the 105 tree grove at the Memorial Drive split scheduled for decimation. The photos were taken on September 4, 2011. The Memorial Drive split is about a block east of the Hyatt Regency Hotel and perhaps half a mile east of the BU Bridge.
The DCR sought Obama money to decimate this grove and also DESTROY MANY LARGER, also healthy trees.
The lie they used was that they were destroying diseased trees and they put out the same lie responding to a Boston Globe reporter as well.
Marilyn Wellons gave the governor a copy of their application to the Cambridge Conservation Commission which proved the target trees healthy. There were diseased trees on Memorial Drive. They were destroyed five years ago. The governor apparently prevented the Obama money.
It is highly likely now that there is money in the state budget for the Memorial Drive destruction.
But Cambridge, the DCR and their fake groups do not want to know reality. They just want to destroy and lie that they are environmental saints.
Will these be destroyed before Alewife?
I have reported on the imminent and downright silly October 2011 destruction of the core Alewife reservation by these people loudly declaring their environmental sainthood.
The situation is comparable on the Charles River. The proposed destruction makes no more sense. Here are photos of the 105 tree grove at the Memorial Drive split scheduled for decimation. The photos were taken on September 4, 2011. The Memorial Drive split is about a block east of the Hyatt Regency Hotel and perhaps half a mile east of the BU Bridge.
The DCR sought Obama money to decimate this grove and also DESTROY MANY LARGER, also healthy trees.
The lie they used was that they were destroying diseased trees and they put out the same lie responding to a Boston Globe reporter as well.
Marilyn Wellons gave the governor a copy of their application to the Cambridge Conservation Commission which proved the target trees healthy. There were diseased trees on Memorial Drive. They were destroyed five years ago. The governor apparently prevented the Obama money.
It is highly likely now that there is money in the state budget for the Memorial Drive destruction.
But Cambridge, the DCR and their fake groups do not want to know reality. They just want to destroy and lie that they are environmental saints.
Will these be destroyed before Alewife?
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
A different view on MassDOT — State Hearing on Transportation Delays
1. General.
2. MassDOT complaints.
1. General.
Tuesday evening, September 14, 2011, I attended the state environmental office’s hearing on delays of a number of projects.
Most visible were the Green Line extension to Tufts University in Medford / Somerville and plans to scrap planning for a connection between the Blue Line subway at Government Center / Bowdoin Station to Charles Station at the southern end of the Longfellow Bridge.
Handicapped activists raised long comments against MassDOT’s handling of hearings on the Green Line extension. They supported the delay at least in part based on their claims of misbehavior. A number of people, most associated with Somerville, objected to the delay. It appears that the line will now not be completed prior to 2018, rather than 2015 or so.
MassDOT explained the change as giving in to the inevitable.
I was one of the few commenting on the apparent latest death of the Blue Line — Red Line connector. This short tunnel would get people off the Green Line between Government Center and Park Street stations in Boston and eliminate one transfer in making changes between the two lines. This would clearly be a great improvement for people who need to go related routes. It be an improvement in reducing congestion in the core subway.
The stated reason for this was lack of apparent future funding to go forward.
Green Line supporters blamed funding problems on highway costs (the Big Dig) being improperly allocated to the MBTA.
When I was done, both sides on the Green Line dispute thanked me for my comments defending the Blue Line — Red Line connector.
2. MassDOT complaints.
At the end of the meeting, I explained to both MassDOT and to the objectors that I had been tempted to speak in defense of MassDOT based on my experiences on the Charles River. I did not do so because the comment would be solely attacks on Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation and would not really have relevance to MassDOT.
Nevertheless, MassDOT has been a breath of fresh air in the really rotten situation in Cambridge.
The outrageously destructive behavior of Cambridge and the DCR has been beneath contempt. Their goals are “reprehensible” and demonstrate “outrageous misbehavior”, to quote the Superior and Appeals Courts on Monteiro. Their tactics are comparable. The most recent secret public meeting on the impending destruction of the Alewife reservation is just one sample.
The fake group which has fought for the destruction of the core reservation for 15 to 20 years was created after consultation with the Cambridge Development Department. I was at her initial organizing meeting. She clearly admitted it.
The fake neighborhood association fighting for the destruction of the Charles River admits to being created at the request of the Cambridge City Manager.
The first of these fake groups, in the central city was likewise created working with the City Manager’s people and has done a lot of harm.
A multitude of organizations run around praising / fighting for destructive behavior by the city and clearly work closely with the city.
They work together and praise each other, frequently stating goals exactly the opposite of reality. Formal proposals commonly have fine print belying lovely claims.
False statements out of the DCR and its predecessor have been legion.
The lies out of the City of Cambridge are usually more sophisticated than from the DCR, but when it counts flat out lying is not surprising. An excellent example is the lie that the only option on the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal is Cambridge’s silly and destructive streetcar route. I proposed the Kenmore Crossing seven years befer it was adopted as a formal option by the state. I can provide the state’s maps of the two option. It is still on the table and has been funded by $10 million from the state for Yawkey Station in a location only working with the Kenmore Crossing. Yet Cambridge’s friends keep on putting out the lie.
It should not be necessary to disprove flat out lies. In Cambridge and in dealing with the DCR, it is commonly necessary.
The folks in these destructive groups clearly work together and have a number of other so called community entities which spout the nonsense coming out of Cambridge / the DCR. These people are clearly friends with each other, and these entities work for each other’s goals. They commonly give themselves lovely (and frequently flat out false) names.
They have done a lot of harm and are fighting for even more harm with commonly bizarre projects.
MassDOT has conducted responsibly located meetings and a lot of them. MassDOT has meaningfully stood up to people fighting for destruction.
I have well earned contempt for Cambridge and the DCR.
I have respect for MassDOT.
2. MassDOT complaints.
1. General.
Tuesday evening, September 14, 2011, I attended the state environmental office’s hearing on delays of a number of projects.
Most visible were the Green Line extension to Tufts University in Medford / Somerville and plans to scrap planning for a connection between the Blue Line subway at Government Center / Bowdoin Station to Charles Station at the southern end of the Longfellow Bridge.
Handicapped activists raised long comments against MassDOT’s handling of hearings on the Green Line extension. They supported the delay at least in part based on their claims of misbehavior. A number of people, most associated with Somerville, objected to the delay. It appears that the line will now not be completed prior to 2018, rather than 2015 or so.
MassDOT explained the change as giving in to the inevitable.
I was one of the few commenting on the apparent latest death of the Blue Line — Red Line connector. This short tunnel would get people off the Green Line between Government Center and Park Street stations in Boston and eliminate one transfer in making changes between the two lines. This would clearly be a great improvement for people who need to go related routes. It be an improvement in reducing congestion in the core subway.
The stated reason for this was lack of apparent future funding to go forward.
Green Line supporters blamed funding problems on highway costs (the Big Dig) being improperly allocated to the MBTA.
When I was done, both sides on the Green Line dispute thanked me for my comments defending the Blue Line — Red Line connector.
2. MassDOT complaints.
At the end of the meeting, I explained to both MassDOT and to the objectors that I had been tempted to speak in defense of MassDOT based on my experiences on the Charles River. I did not do so because the comment would be solely attacks on Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation and would not really have relevance to MassDOT.
Nevertheless, MassDOT has been a breath of fresh air in the really rotten situation in Cambridge.
The outrageously destructive behavior of Cambridge and the DCR has been beneath contempt. Their goals are “reprehensible” and demonstrate “outrageous misbehavior”, to quote the Superior and Appeals Courts on Monteiro. Their tactics are comparable. The most recent secret public meeting on the impending destruction of the Alewife reservation is just one sample.
The fake group which has fought for the destruction of the core reservation for 15 to 20 years was created after consultation with the Cambridge Development Department. I was at her initial organizing meeting. She clearly admitted it.
The fake neighborhood association fighting for the destruction of the Charles River admits to being created at the request of the Cambridge City Manager.
The first of these fake groups, in the central city was likewise created working with the City Manager’s people and has done a lot of harm.
A multitude of organizations run around praising / fighting for destructive behavior by the city and clearly work closely with the city.
They work together and praise each other, frequently stating goals exactly the opposite of reality. Formal proposals commonly have fine print belying lovely claims.
False statements out of the DCR and its predecessor have been legion.
The lies out of the City of Cambridge are usually more sophisticated than from the DCR, but when it counts flat out lying is not surprising. An excellent example is the lie that the only option on the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal is Cambridge’s silly and destructive streetcar route. I proposed the Kenmore Crossing seven years befer it was adopted as a formal option by the state. I can provide the state’s maps of the two option. It is still on the table and has been funded by $10 million from the state for Yawkey Station in a location only working with the Kenmore Crossing. Yet Cambridge’s friends keep on putting out the lie.
It should not be necessary to disprove flat out lies. In Cambridge and in dealing with the DCR, it is commonly necessary.
The folks in these destructive groups clearly work together and have a number of other so called community entities which spout the nonsense coming out of Cambridge / the DCR. These people are clearly friends with each other, and these entities work for each other’s goals. They commonly give themselves lovely (and frequently flat out false) names.
They have done a lot of harm and are fighting for even more harm with commonly bizarre projects.
MassDOT has conducted responsibly located meetings and a lot of them. MassDOT has meaningfully stood up to people fighting for destruction.
I have well earned contempt for Cambridge and the DCR.
I have respect for MassDOT.
Cambridge Day: City of Cambridge Pays $8.3 million to Monteiro
Cambridge Day reports that, by transmittal latter dated Friday, Cambridge satisfied its legal obligations to Malvina Monteiro. Payment was probably made by wire transfer.
As I reported yesterday, the final pretrial hearing on the last two plaintiffs in this originally 5 plaintiff case have been delayed yet another month, to October 11, at 2 pm in Middlesex Superior Court, room / session F.
Monteiro’s victory was based on retaliation. My apparently knowledgeable source on Monday described a continuing pattern of behavior. Whether the retaliation victory will translate into large payments to the last two plaintiffs rather than trial is yet to be seen. My understanding is that the first two plaintiffs got good payments.
http://www.cambridgeday.com/2011/09/13/monteiro-lawyer-have-8-3-million-from-city/
As I reported yesterday, the final pretrial hearing on the last two plaintiffs in this originally 5 plaintiff case have been delayed yet another month, to October 11, at 2 pm in Middlesex Superior Court, room / session F.
Monteiro’s victory was based on retaliation. My apparently knowledgeable source on Monday described a continuing pattern of behavior. Whether the retaliation victory will translate into large payments to the last two plaintiffs rather than trial is yet to be seen. My understanding is that the first two plaintiffs got good payments.
http://www.cambridgeday.com/2011/09/13/monteiro-lawyer-have-8-3-million-from-city/
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Cambridge Day: Tree Lover Gave an Explosive Start to City Council meeting
Cambridge Day reports Judy Johnson indulging in a strong attack on Denise Simmons for destruction of trees at the beginning of the September 12, 2011 Cambridge City Council meeting.
Johnson is a repeated accomplice of the woman who has been fighting for destruction of the core Alewife reservation while loudly claiming to be defending Alewife.
Johnson need to go no farther than a mirror to see where tree destruction problems exist.
http://www.cambridgeday.com/2011/09/12/public-comment-starts-council-meeting-with-bang-crash-boom/
Johnson is a repeated accomplice of the woman who has been fighting for destruction of the core Alewife reservation while loudly claiming to be defending Alewife.
Johnson need to go no farther than a mirror to see where tree destruction problems exist.
http://www.cambridgeday.com/2011/09/12/public-comment-starts-council-meeting-with-bang-crash-boom/
Final Monteiro plaintiffs — Key Hearing Postponed Again
The final pretrial hearing for the final two of the five Monteiro plaintiffs has been postponed again.
This time it has been rescheduled from tomorrow, September 14 to October 11, 2011, 2 pm in session (courtroom) F at the Middlesex Superior Court.
My source, confirmed from the docket, never wants to be credited.
He says he has been following the cases pretty much from the beginning and that a clear pattern of harassment among between the five plaintiffs.
This time it has been rescheduled from tomorrow, September 14 to October 11, 2011, 2 pm in session (courtroom) F at the Middlesex Superior Court.
My source, confirmed from the docket, never wants to be credited.
He says he has been following the cases pretty much from the beginning and that a clear pattern of harassment among between the five plaintiffs.
Saturday, September 10, 2011
New City Manager for Cambridge, MA, USA? Minka vonBeuzecom and Tim Toomey
1. General.
2. Minka vonBeuzecom.
3. Tim Toomey
4. Prior Reports.
1. General.
The situation in Cambridge, MA, USA is outrageous.
Environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by government on the Charles River is bizarre and getting worse.
The city and its friends in the state are preparing to destroy the last virgin forest, the core Alewife reservation, for flood storage that is patently silly. They are protecting against a two year flood in an area that has seen two 50 year floods in the last 20 years. Directly across the street from their destruction is a massive parking lot that can handle a multiple of the flooding. It is impossible to call the explanation serious.
Informed analyses by non-insiders have a tendency to communicate shock.
Judge, jury and appeals court panel have evaluated Cambridge’s treatment of a black, Cape Verdean department head with extreme displeasure. They have found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed her life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The jury spoke with $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages.
The judge reaffirmed the jury in an opinion which quoted the Cambridge City Manager’s testimony extensively. She called him “reprehensible.”
The appeals court panel reacted to Cambridge’s appeal with disgust, refusing to honor the appeal with a full fledged opinion. They commented that there was “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.
The cost of the case to Cambridge now seems to be approaching $8 million and estimates are frequently presented that total cost will approach $10 million.
The Cambridge Chronicle’s editorial, posted on August 18, 2011, at : http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1852620823/Editorial-A-multimillion-dollar-gamble#axzz1VBaL41vk, seems to go both ways on whether the City Manager should leave.
My personal opinion is that the binding judicial decision seems to indicate that the Cambridge City Manager should be fired without his golden parachute and probably without pension. The latter would be an extension of existing law, but the case is ideal to extend the law. I think the courts have reached an excellent opinion.
The election season is here.
The Cambridge Chronicle is asking candidates: “Do you think it is time for a new City Manger?”
I will be reporting on the answers with links to the complete comments.
2. Minka vonBeuzecom.
Minka vonBeuzecom was quoted in the September 8, 2011 edition on page 19. Her comments are posted at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1069115254/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Minka-vanBeuzekom#axzz1XYbbI8Wr.
Mr. vonBeuzecom makes no comment on Monteiro, on the $8 to $10 million cost, or on the judicial findings and orders.
A brief summary of her answer is: “The Council is obligated to objectively evaluate [Healy's] performance, his cost to the city and whether extending his contract for three additional years is warranted. I do not believe the Council has fulfilled their obligation nor have they communicated their objective evaluations."
3. Tim Toomey.
Toomey was quoted in the September 8, 2011 edition on page 19. His comments are posted at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1638750470/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Tim-Toomey#axzz1XNscf1TP.
Toomey is an incumbent. He was apparently uninterested when another member of the Council attempted to get the Council to obtain independent opinion on whether an appeal should be conducted in Monteiro. Toomey is part of the very bad Cambridge City Council environmental package. He has a terrible environmental record where it is meaningful.
His answer to the question is negative. "If the City Manager were to ask for another contract, I would certainly welcome having him . . ."
His comments rather clearly communicate that the Monteiro decision does not exist.
4. Prior Reports.
Tom Stohlman and Sam Seidel: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
2. Minka vonBeuzecom.
3. Tim Toomey
4. Prior Reports.
1. General.
The situation in Cambridge, MA, USA is outrageous.
Environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by government on the Charles River is bizarre and getting worse.
The city and its friends in the state are preparing to destroy the last virgin forest, the core Alewife reservation, for flood storage that is patently silly. They are protecting against a two year flood in an area that has seen two 50 year floods in the last 20 years. Directly across the street from their destruction is a massive parking lot that can handle a multiple of the flooding. It is impossible to call the explanation serious.
Informed analyses by non-insiders have a tendency to communicate shock.
Judge, jury and appeals court panel have evaluated Cambridge’s treatment of a black, Cape Verdean department head with extreme displeasure. They have found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed her life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The jury spoke with $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages.
The judge reaffirmed the jury in an opinion which quoted the Cambridge City Manager’s testimony extensively. She called him “reprehensible.”
The appeals court panel reacted to Cambridge’s appeal with disgust, refusing to honor the appeal with a full fledged opinion. They commented that there was “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.
The cost of the case to Cambridge now seems to be approaching $8 million and estimates are frequently presented that total cost will approach $10 million.
The Cambridge Chronicle’s editorial, posted on August 18, 2011, at : http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1852620823/Editorial-A-multimillion-dollar-gamble#axzz1VBaL41vk, seems to go both ways on whether the City Manager should leave.
My personal opinion is that the binding judicial decision seems to indicate that the Cambridge City Manager should be fired without his golden parachute and probably without pension. The latter would be an extension of existing law, but the case is ideal to extend the law. I think the courts have reached an excellent opinion.
The election season is here.
The Cambridge Chronicle is asking candidates: “Do you think it is time for a new City Manger?”
I will be reporting on the answers with links to the complete comments.
2. Minka vonBeuzecom.
Minka vonBeuzecom was quoted in the September 8, 2011 edition on page 19. Her comments are posted at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1069115254/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Minka-vanBeuzekom#axzz1XYbbI8Wr.
Mr. vonBeuzecom makes no comment on Monteiro, on the $8 to $10 million cost, or on the judicial findings and orders.
A brief summary of her answer is: “The Council is obligated to objectively evaluate [Healy's] performance, his cost to the city and whether extending his contract for three additional years is warranted. I do not believe the Council has fulfilled their obligation nor have they communicated their objective evaluations."
3. Tim Toomey.
Toomey was quoted in the September 8, 2011 edition on page 19. His comments are posted at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1638750470/Cambridge-Election-2011-Meet-the-Candidates-Tim-Toomey#axzz1XNscf1TP.
Toomey is an incumbent. He was apparently uninterested when another member of the Council attempted to get the Council to obtain independent opinion on whether an appeal should be conducted in Monteiro. Toomey is part of the very bad Cambridge City Council environmental package. He has a terrible environmental record where it is meaningful.
His answer to the question is negative. "If the City Manager were to ask for another contract, I would certainly welcome having him . . ."
His comments rather clearly communicate that the Monteiro decision does not exist.
4. Prior Reports.
Tom Stohlman and Sam Seidel: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/new-city-manager-for-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
Friday, September 09, 2011
Alewife destruction meeting good primer on Cambridge con games
1. Introduction.
2. The person with the greatest individual guilt.
3. The folks from Arlington.
4. Marilyn Wellons.
5. Other individual.
6. Summary.
1. Introduction.
The secret public meeting on the imminent destruction of the Alewife reservation was an excellent primer on how the Cambridge Pol games work.
There were a few non suits in the room.
Off the top of my head, I count six speakers.
2. The person with the greatest individual guilt.
One of the six spoke in glowing terms of the project. She was the only non suit in the room who glowed about the project.
But this woman has run around for 15 or 20 years loudly yelling her non stop opposition to destruction of the Alewife reservation.
Fine print: She has consistently fought against peripheral destruction by private parties.
This was destruction of the core reservation, destruction, downright silly and irresponsible, by her friends.
The common reaction to so much behavior by core Cambridge Pols has to be: “You cannot possibly be that stupid.”
This person, in my opinion, in the one person most responsible for the imminent destruction of the excellent core Alewife reservation, its massive native trees and its uncountable numbers of animals with almost certain killing of most of the animals.
She is guilty because she got concerned people to fight against far less important destruction, fights which were real long shot. She is guilty because she kept concerned people from attacking the real rotters: an irresponsible but highly self righteous city council which has a significant proportion lying that they are pro environment.
She distracted people and protected the real bad people from their own behavior.
Pretty non stop lies on environmental sainthood make these nine destructive city councilors highly vulnerable. The con game that has gone on at Alewife told people non stop to look at everybody except for the real rotters, the hypocrites on the Cambridge City Council running around lying that they are environmental saints.
3. The folks from Arlington.
One woman I have known for nearly 30 years, since I lived about a mile from the Alewife reservation.
She gave an excellent speech.
When I asked her to put it in writing to be reproduced on these pages, she, as usual, refused to do so. It is not her sort of thing.
She is perfectly happy to have a great sounding con artist (amply proven by her comments at the meeting) run around loudly “protecting” everything except what counts most, “protecting” everything except the fight which was most winnable. The con artist keeps sounding so good, but somehow just cannot behave properly on the important stuff.
The woman from Arlington is an excellent example of the common people victimized by the Cambridge Pols. She has done a great job communicating the extreme irresponsibility of Cambridge and the state bureaucrats in small meetings, but she will not take the next step.
The Cambridge Pols sound so good and deliver so bad, but the “little guy” defers to the ones who can be bothered, and the ones who can be bothered altogether too often are on the wrong side.
A second woman who spoke excellently commented when I spoke to her: What could she do? They had lost the lawsuit.
This is another con game. Keep the victims busy. Keep them chasing their tails. Let them spend years suing over something peripheral and get other people involved.
As long as the Cambridge Pols keep well meaning people away from the real game which is that rotten city council, the Cambridge Pols have done their job.
4. Marilyn Wellons.
Excellent job of speaking, excellent. I have encouraged her to put her comments into words. She has full access to both the Blog and the facebook page.
5. Other individual.
This person was the source of the information that the “flood plain” being created would only protect against two year storms. This fact was admitted by the suits.
I would love to credit him for that comment.
The trouble is that over the years, he has made many excellent comments, but he has, to a very high degree if not more, very consistently been part of the Cambridge Pols machine and their very destructive behavior.
In Cambridge, you cannot tell the difference between the knaves and the fools. It is possible, however, to be aware of their records.
6. Summary.
A really rotten city government kept in power by a really destructive organization which protects them from their record.
It is impossible to distinguish between the knaves and the fools, and really irrelevant.
It is really impossible to distinguish between lies, lack of knowledge, and stupidity, and really irrelevant.
The rotten city government gets away with these terrible things because people object but are overwhelmed by destructive tactics of a massive, lying, destructive machine.
This is Cambridge, MA, USA.
2. The person with the greatest individual guilt.
3. The folks from Arlington.
4. Marilyn Wellons.
5. Other individual.
6. Summary.
1. Introduction.
The secret public meeting on the imminent destruction of the Alewife reservation was an excellent primer on how the Cambridge Pol games work.
There were a few non suits in the room.
Off the top of my head, I count six speakers.
2. The person with the greatest individual guilt.
One of the six spoke in glowing terms of the project. She was the only non suit in the room who glowed about the project.
But this woman has run around for 15 or 20 years loudly yelling her non stop opposition to destruction of the Alewife reservation.
Fine print: She has consistently fought against peripheral destruction by private parties.
This was destruction of the core reservation, destruction, downright silly and irresponsible, by her friends.
The common reaction to so much behavior by core Cambridge Pols has to be: “You cannot possibly be that stupid.”
This person, in my opinion, in the one person most responsible for the imminent destruction of the excellent core Alewife reservation, its massive native trees and its uncountable numbers of animals with almost certain killing of most of the animals.
She is guilty because she got concerned people to fight against far less important destruction, fights which were real long shot. She is guilty because she kept concerned people from attacking the real rotters: an irresponsible but highly self righteous city council which has a significant proportion lying that they are pro environment.
She distracted people and protected the real bad people from their own behavior.
Pretty non stop lies on environmental sainthood make these nine destructive city councilors highly vulnerable. The con game that has gone on at Alewife told people non stop to look at everybody except for the real rotters, the hypocrites on the Cambridge City Council running around lying that they are environmental saints.
3. The folks from Arlington.
One woman I have known for nearly 30 years, since I lived about a mile from the Alewife reservation.
She gave an excellent speech.
When I asked her to put it in writing to be reproduced on these pages, she, as usual, refused to do so. It is not her sort of thing.
She is perfectly happy to have a great sounding con artist (amply proven by her comments at the meeting) run around loudly “protecting” everything except what counts most, “protecting” everything except the fight which was most winnable. The con artist keeps sounding so good, but somehow just cannot behave properly on the important stuff.
The woman from Arlington is an excellent example of the common people victimized by the Cambridge Pols. She has done a great job communicating the extreme irresponsibility of Cambridge and the state bureaucrats in small meetings, but she will not take the next step.
The Cambridge Pols sound so good and deliver so bad, but the “little guy” defers to the ones who can be bothered, and the ones who can be bothered altogether too often are on the wrong side.
A second woman who spoke excellently commented when I spoke to her: What could she do? They had lost the lawsuit.
This is another con game. Keep the victims busy. Keep them chasing their tails. Let them spend years suing over something peripheral and get other people involved.
As long as the Cambridge Pols keep well meaning people away from the real game which is that rotten city council, the Cambridge Pols have done their job.
4. Marilyn Wellons.
Excellent job of speaking, excellent. I have encouraged her to put her comments into words. She has full access to both the Blog and the facebook page.
5. Other individual.
This person was the source of the information that the “flood plain” being created would only protect against two year storms. This fact was admitted by the suits.
I would love to credit him for that comment.
The trouble is that over the years, he has made many excellent comments, but he has, to a very high degree if not more, very consistently been part of the Cambridge Pols machine and their very destructive behavior.
In Cambridge, you cannot tell the difference between the knaves and the fools. It is possible, however, to be aware of their records.
6. Summary.
A really rotten city government kept in power by a really destructive organization which protects them from their record.
It is impossible to distinguish between the knaves and the fools, and really irrelevant.
It is really impossible to distinguish between lies, lack of knowledge, and stupidity, and really irrelevant.
The rotten city government gets away with these terrible things because people object but are overwhelmed by destructive tactics of a massive, lying, destructive machine.
This is Cambridge, MA, USA.
Thursday, September 08, 2011
Cambridge Chronicle: Cambridge Mayor refuses to provide access to Monteiro records, other Monteiro updates
The Cambridge Chronicle has posted on line its report on its attempts to see the records of the city council’s closed door deliberations on the case of Malvina Monteiro v. City of Cambridge.
The mayor has refused access.
The URL of the story is: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/features/x1069113308/Cambridge-Mayor-blocks-Monteiro-records#axzz1XNscf1TP.
In other related action, Monteiro’s attorneys have filed papers with the Appeals Court to obtain payment by Cambridge for Cambridge’s appeal of the Monteiro decision in Superior Court.
This coming Wednesday, September 14, 2011, at 2 pm, the Middlesex Superior Court will conduct a final pretrial hearing on the last two plaintiffs in the Monteiro case.
The mayor has refused access.
The URL of the story is: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/features/x1069113308/Cambridge-Mayor-blocks-Monteiro-records#axzz1XNscf1TP.
In other related action, Monteiro’s attorneys have filed papers with the Appeals Court to obtain payment by Cambridge for Cambridge’s appeal of the Monteiro decision in Superior Court.
This coming Wednesday, September 14, 2011, at 2 pm, the Middlesex Superior Court will conduct a final pretrial hearing on the last two plaintiffs in the Monteiro case.
FLASH REPORT: Cambridge, DCR to destroy Alewife reservation “in October” for flood protection against a TWO YEAR storm
Last night, September 7, 2011, Cambridge and Massachusetts’ Department of Conservation and Recreation announced they would take one month to clear cut the core Alewife reservation, destroying all the massive trees there and all the wildlife while loudly proclaiming their concern for the environment and wildlife.
Logging was announced to start in October 2011 with construction to be completed in 2013, but, while they loudly proclaimed their concern for wildlife, wildlife which they do not kill outright would be kept from “returning” until their lovely new park gets a chance to regrow.
The fancy new park being created will protect against the worst storm likely to occur every two years, called a two year storm. The destroyers did a lot of self congratulation on the expensive new system to protect against two year storms.
The area has seen two fifty year storms in the last twenty years.
Directly across the street, Cambridge Park Drive, is a massive parking lot which could readily hold much greater flooding than the two year storms they are so destructively protecting against.
Marilyn Wellons made an excellent presentation, supporting use of the parking lot for the flood storage, and pointing out the silliness (excessively positive word) of the DCR/Cambridge destruction. She stated there are excess Community Preservation Act moneys available could be used on a responsible version of the project. My comments at the meeting are included in this posting.
But, in the Cambridge tradition, Cambridge and the state has had the usual fake organization running protection for the destruction. The creator of this fake organization has been running around for fifteen years loudly proclaiming her love for Alewife and telling everybody to protect against everything except for the destruction of the core Alewife reservation by her friends.
She spent considerable time telling people how beautiful the dead replacement facility will be.
The presentation was done to a room which had far more suits in it than people concerned about the environment.
In the DCR tradition so clearly shown at the BU Bridge, the meeting was conducted in a blatantly inconvenient location for the people most directly affected, an auditorium on the far side of one or two large bodies of water, two miles from the destruction. There is a frequently used auditorium in the middle of the victims and convenient to almost all the other HUMAN victims, .9 miles down the street from the destruction site.
To make things worse, the acoustics were terrible. But the DCR and Cambridge checked the proper boxes.
The event made me lonely for reality as demonstrated in Monteiro v. Cambridge. There, truly responsible institutions looked at Cambridge and intoned: “outrageous misbehavior,” “reprehensible,” and $3.5 million penal damages.
Nothing different at Alewife.
They even made pious noises declaring their sainthood.
Logging was announced to start in October 2011 with construction to be completed in 2013, but, while they loudly proclaimed their concern for wildlife, wildlife which they do not kill outright would be kept from “returning” until their lovely new park gets a chance to regrow.
The fancy new park being created will protect against the worst storm likely to occur every two years, called a two year storm. The destroyers did a lot of self congratulation on the expensive new system to protect against two year storms.
The area has seen two fifty year storms in the last twenty years.
Directly across the street, Cambridge Park Drive, is a massive parking lot which could readily hold much greater flooding than the two year storms they are so destructively protecting against.
Marilyn Wellons made an excellent presentation, supporting use of the parking lot for the flood storage, and pointing out the silliness (excessively positive word) of the DCR/Cambridge destruction. She stated there are excess Community Preservation Act moneys available could be used on a responsible version of the project. My comments at the meeting are included in this posting.
But, in the Cambridge tradition, Cambridge and the state has had the usual fake organization running protection for the destruction. The creator of this fake organization has been running around for fifteen years loudly proclaiming her love for Alewife and telling everybody to protect against everything except for the destruction of the core Alewife reservation by her friends.
She spent considerable time telling people how beautiful the dead replacement facility will be.
The presentation was done to a room which had far more suits in it than people concerned about the environment.
In the DCR tradition so clearly shown at the BU Bridge, the meeting was conducted in a blatantly inconvenient location for the people most directly affected, an auditorium on the far side of one or two large bodies of water, two miles from the destruction. There is a frequently used auditorium in the middle of the victims and convenient to almost all the other HUMAN victims, .9 miles down the street from the destruction site.
To make things worse, the acoustics were terrible. But the DCR and Cambridge checked the proper boxes.
The event made me lonely for reality as demonstrated in Monteiro v. Cambridge. There, truly responsible institutions looked at Cambridge and intoned: “outrageous misbehavior,” “reprehensible,” and $3.5 million penal damages.
Nothing different at Alewife.
They even made pious noises declaring their sainthood.
Tuesday, September 06, 2011
Environmental Secretary: Harvard Business School expansion on Charles allowed without review
This week’s Environmental Monitor provides a notice (http://www.env.state.ma.us/mepa/mepacerts/2011/sc/ad/harvardao.pdf) that Harvard can build in the last open space facing the Charles in the Harvard Business School for “Tata Hall.” No environmental review will be required.
This construction would create pretty much a continuous row of buildings facing the Charles River on the south side (Boston / Allston) between the Anderson Bridge and the Western Avenue Bridge, filling in what has been a nice lawn.
This construction would create pretty much a continuous row of buildings facing the Charles River on the south side (Boston / Allston) between the Anderson Bridge and the Western Avenue Bridge, filling in what has been a nice lawn.
Clarification of candidate’s night question concerning Cambridge City Manager
I have just read the Cambridge Chronicle’s on line report, at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x488549132/Cambridge-city-manager-becomes-an-issue-at-candidate-debate#axzz1XC8mzarb concerning the candidates night last Wednesday, August 31, 2011. I have commented on the Cambridge Day report of this event at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/cambridge-day-city-manager-is-key-issue.html.
There is a key difference in the approach of the two reports from my perspective. Cambridge Day’s report was marked preliminary, and Cambridge Day does a very good job getting things out fast. The difference between the reports can come from editing for space, and really most people would not be reading the report with the legal eye I am applying to it. You simply cannot expect legal perfection in a news report.
The Cambridge Chronicle’s report did provide the exact wording of the question being answered: “Lesley Phillips, chair of the Ward 6 Committee, . . said Healy’s performance, compensation and tenure has recently become a subject of attention. She asked the candidates, if they were to be elected, what would be their position on any potential extension of Healy’s contract.”
So the failure to talk to whether or not Healy should be fired for malfeasance in office was really not in front of the candidates.
I would very strongly suggest, however, a responsible candidate talking on this subject really should note that Healy’s malfeasance in office AS DETERMINED BY COURT WITH APPEAL makes him ripe for firing under very severe conditions. But then again, this is Cambridge, MA, USA. Reality is commonly irrelevant in political discussions.
There is a key difference in the approach of the two reports from my perspective. Cambridge Day’s report was marked preliminary, and Cambridge Day does a very good job getting things out fast. The difference between the reports can come from editing for space, and really most people would not be reading the report with the legal eye I am applying to it. You simply cannot expect legal perfection in a news report.
The Cambridge Chronicle’s report did provide the exact wording of the question being answered: “Lesley Phillips, chair of the Ward 6 Committee, . . said Healy’s performance, compensation and tenure has recently become a subject of attention. She asked the candidates, if they were to be elected, what would be their position on any potential extension of Healy’s contract.”
So the failure to talk to whether or not Healy should be fired for malfeasance in office was really not in front of the candidates.
I would very strongly suggest, however, a responsible candidate talking on this subject really should note that Healy’s malfeasance in office AS DETERMINED BY COURT WITH APPEAL makes him ripe for firing under very severe conditions. But then again, this is Cambridge, MA, USA. Reality is commonly irrelevant in political discussions.
Longwood Medical Area / Windsor School Environmental Certificate Impacts Charles River by protecting Urban Ring Planning.
1. Introduction.
2. The Urban Ring.
A. General.
B. Urban Ring — Orange Line.
C. Urban Ring — Street Cars.
D. Urban Ring — Silly Bus Proposal.
E. Impact of the ENF.
3. Grand Junction.
4. Urban Ring is not dead.
1. Introduction.
The situation on the Charles River is a massive nightmare. There is so much going on, and much of it has value, and can be done responsibly.
The problem is that the destructive people keep warping good things into bad.
On August 5, the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs issued a certificate saying that expansion by The Winsor School does not require the submission of an Environmental Impact Report. The decision is posted at http://www.env.state.ma.us/mepa/mepacerts/2011/sc/enf/14720eenf.pdf.
Windsor School does not directly impact the Charles, BUT the secretary includes allowances, at pages 8 and 9, for the Urban Ring.
The comment indicates that the Winsor School project will not interfere with Urban Ring tunnel plans.
2. The Urban Ring.
A. General.
This is the game, and a very nasty game, as usual, when destructive people get involved.
If you listen to City of Cambridge related people and organizations they influence, you would be given the impression that there is one and only one possible Urban Ring route.
The very major trouble is that, like too many things with City of Cambridge friends running around, that is a very false statement.
There are two possible Urban Ring alternatives. The one the City of Cambridge and friends are fighting for is inferior from a transportation and environmental point of view. It is quite destructive to the Charles River.
The responsible alternative has received state funding for a key part of the package, making the City of Cambridge’s “only one route” nonsense that much more irresponsible.
The Urban Ring is a subway line proposal that I have been working on since about 1985.
The responsible alternative I initially proposed in about 1986. It was formerly adopted as one of two alternatives in 1991 or so.
The basic concept is an alternate subway line to get people off the central Boston subway. It would connect from Roxbury / the Orange Line through the Longwood Medical Area through the area in dispute to Cambridge Kendall station / the Red Line to Cambridge Lechmere station / the Green Line and then to Boston Charlestown / the Orange Line.
The proposal was initiated as Heavy Rail subway / Orange Line. The problem area is between an agreed upon stop at MIT / Mass. Ave. / the Grand Junction Railroad crossing on one end, and the Longwood Medical Area at the other end.
B. Urban Ring — Orange Line.
The responsible Orange Line proposal would run under the MIT playing fields and the Charles River to a new station next to Kenmore Square, and then to the Longwood Medical Area at Louis Pasteur and Longwood.
That new station next to Kenmore is key.
It would be located under Brookline Avenue over the Massachusetts Turnpike, a few hundred at most from Fenway Park. On one end, it would provide an underground connection to the Green Line station at Kenmore Station with its three branches to Brookline and Brighton on one side and its connection to downtown / Back Bay on the other. The Urban Ring Station would connect in the other direction to Framingham / Worcester commuters and Yawkey Station.
The physical arrangement would provide ideal covered connections for rail commuters to the Urban Ring and the Green Line, plus provide excellent connection to Fenway Park.
The legislature has subsidized this arrangement with about $10 million to upgrade Yawkey Station.
An initial phase could connect downtown Orange Line trains to Longwood Medical Area and Kenmore Station by a spur ending at this new station, giving excellent service to the Longwood Medical Area, one of the big reasons for the route and one of the most important centers of employment and services in the state.
C. Urban Ring — Street Cars.
Cambridge and its friends are pushing the original alignment, lying that this is the only proposal on the table.
Their streetcar proposal would continue along the Grand Junction railroad rather than going under the playing fields. It would devastate the banks of the Charles and the habitat of the Charles River White Geese.
Instead of one station, it would have two, one at Mountfort and St. Mary’s, and one under Park Drive between Beacon Street and Longwood Station.
The proposal would move Yawkey Station away from Fenway Park and Kenmore Station so that it abuts the station in the Mountfort / St. Mary’s area.
This moving of Yawkey Station has rather clearly been forgone by the state funding of upgrades in the current location of Yawkey Station.
Mountfort / St. Mary’s is a block from and within sight of Boston University’s Marsh Chapel, the center of the BU campus.
Commuter rail passengers, rather than having covered connections to all Brookline / Brighton Green Line Branches and to the Urban Ring would have to transfer at one of the two stations.
Mountfort / St. Mary’s would connect to ONE Green Line Branch at the BU Central stop by means of a tunnel under St. Mary’s street which would drop them on the south sidewalk of Commonwealth Avenue and they would walk through all kind of traffic and weather to one of the branches.
The Park Drive station would provide connection to the Riverside Green Line branch in one direction and the Beacon Street Green Line branch in the other direction by a yet another new station under Beacon Street.
So the Cambridge proposal would provide inferior transportation to the Orange Line proposal for people wanting an alternative to going downtown, streetcars v. full scale heavy rail subway, and it would be inferior for commuter rail going into Boston, and it would be far worse for Fenway Park connection, and the $10 million upgrade to Yawkey is very close to a death knell.
D. Urban Ring — Silly Bus Proposal.
The bureaucracy is pushing buses as an interim phase of the Urban Ring.
The trouble is that while buses can make excellent sense in outer locations, they are very much silly in the area of the Charles.
What makes sense in the area of the Charles is the Orange Line proposal.
The Longwood Medical Area people have put into the Urban Ring bus proposal an underground bus tunnel. It would be way underground in parts. At one end it would ALMOST go to Ruggles Station. In the middle, it would provide the station at Louis Pasteur and Longwood. At the other end, the exact route gets vague. It ends almost at Yawkey Station, and the bus proposals run around it.
This proposal is silly for buses, but makes excellent sense connected to Ruggles at one end and to the Urban Ring station between Yawkey and Kenmore at the other end, with direct downtown connection and Orange Line trains.
E. Impact of the ENF.
The Expended ENF Certificate is based on assurances from Winsor School that their project will not impact the bus tunnel which makes excellent sense as the Urban Ring Phase 1 connecting downtown to Longwood Medical Area and Kenmore.
3. Grand Junction.
I have spent a lot of time discussing Cambridge’s maneuvers on the Grand Junction.
If Cambridge can move ALL the Worcester / Framingham commuters to the Grand Junction, they will render Yawkey Station and its $10 million upgrade meaningless because none of the commuters would be going through there. And that would help their silly and environmentally destructive streetcar proposal. One step at a time, first they move a few, then they move the rest.
4. Urban Ring is not dead.
The Secretary very clearly left that tunnel in play in the Winsor School planning.
2. The Urban Ring.
A. General.
B. Urban Ring — Orange Line.
C. Urban Ring — Street Cars.
D. Urban Ring — Silly Bus Proposal.
E. Impact of the ENF.
3. Grand Junction.
4. Urban Ring is not dead.
1. Introduction.
The situation on the Charles River is a massive nightmare. There is so much going on, and much of it has value, and can be done responsibly.
The problem is that the destructive people keep warping good things into bad.
On August 5, the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs issued a certificate saying that expansion by The Winsor School does not require the submission of an Environmental Impact Report. The decision is posted at http://www.env.state.ma.us/mepa/mepacerts/2011/sc/enf/14720eenf.pdf.
Windsor School does not directly impact the Charles, BUT the secretary includes allowances, at pages 8 and 9, for the Urban Ring.
The comment indicates that the Winsor School project will not interfere with Urban Ring tunnel plans.
2. The Urban Ring.
A. General.
This is the game, and a very nasty game, as usual, when destructive people get involved.
If you listen to City of Cambridge related people and organizations they influence, you would be given the impression that there is one and only one possible Urban Ring route.
The very major trouble is that, like too many things with City of Cambridge friends running around, that is a very false statement.
There are two possible Urban Ring alternatives. The one the City of Cambridge and friends are fighting for is inferior from a transportation and environmental point of view. It is quite destructive to the Charles River.
The responsible alternative has received state funding for a key part of the package, making the City of Cambridge’s “only one route” nonsense that much more irresponsible.
The Urban Ring is a subway line proposal that I have been working on since about 1985.
The responsible alternative I initially proposed in about 1986. It was formerly adopted as one of two alternatives in 1991 or so.
The basic concept is an alternate subway line to get people off the central Boston subway. It would connect from Roxbury / the Orange Line through the Longwood Medical Area through the area in dispute to Cambridge Kendall station / the Red Line to Cambridge Lechmere station / the Green Line and then to Boston Charlestown / the Orange Line.
The proposal was initiated as Heavy Rail subway / Orange Line. The problem area is between an agreed upon stop at MIT / Mass. Ave. / the Grand Junction Railroad crossing on one end, and the Longwood Medical Area at the other end.
B. Urban Ring — Orange Line.
The responsible Orange Line proposal would run under the MIT playing fields and the Charles River to a new station next to Kenmore Square, and then to the Longwood Medical Area at Louis Pasteur and Longwood.
That new station next to Kenmore is key.
It would be located under Brookline Avenue over the Massachusetts Turnpike, a few hundred at most from Fenway Park. On one end, it would provide an underground connection to the Green Line station at Kenmore Station with its three branches to Brookline and Brighton on one side and its connection to downtown / Back Bay on the other. The Urban Ring Station would connect in the other direction to Framingham / Worcester commuters and Yawkey Station.
The physical arrangement would provide ideal covered connections for rail commuters to the Urban Ring and the Green Line, plus provide excellent connection to Fenway Park.
The legislature has subsidized this arrangement with about $10 million to upgrade Yawkey Station.
An initial phase could connect downtown Orange Line trains to Longwood Medical Area and Kenmore Station by a spur ending at this new station, giving excellent service to the Longwood Medical Area, one of the big reasons for the route and one of the most important centers of employment and services in the state.
C. Urban Ring — Street Cars.
Cambridge and its friends are pushing the original alignment, lying that this is the only proposal on the table.
Their streetcar proposal would continue along the Grand Junction railroad rather than going under the playing fields. It would devastate the banks of the Charles and the habitat of the Charles River White Geese.
Instead of one station, it would have two, one at Mountfort and St. Mary’s, and one under Park Drive between Beacon Street and Longwood Station.
The proposal would move Yawkey Station away from Fenway Park and Kenmore Station so that it abuts the station in the Mountfort / St. Mary’s area.
This moving of Yawkey Station has rather clearly been forgone by the state funding of upgrades in the current location of Yawkey Station.
Mountfort / St. Mary’s is a block from and within sight of Boston University’s Marsh Chapel, the center of the BU campus.
Commuter rail passengers, rather than having covered connections to all Brookline / Brighton Green Line Branches and to the Urban Ring would have to transfer at one of the two stations.
Mountfort / St. Mary’s would connect to ONE Green Line Branch at the BU Central stop by means of a tunnel under St. Mary’s street which would drop them on the south sidewalk of Commonwealth Avenue and they would walk through all kind of traffic and weather to one of the branches.
The Park Drive station would provide connection to the Riverside Green Line branch in one direction and the Beacon Street Green Line branch in the other direction by a yet another new station under Beacon Street.
So the Cambridge proposal would provide inferior transportation to the Orange Line proposal for people wanting an alternative to going downtown, streetcars v. full scale heavy rail subway, and it would be inferior for commuter rail going into Boston, and it would be far worse for Fenway Park connection, and the $10 million upgrade to Yawkey is very close to a death knell.
D. Urban Ring — Silly Bus Proposal.
The bureaucracy is pushing buses as an interim phase of the Urban Ring.
The trouble is that while buses can make excellent sense in outer locations, they are very much silly in the area of the Charles.
What makes sense in the area of the Charles is the Orange Line proposal.
The Longwood Medical Area people have put into the Urban Ring bus proposal an underground bus tunnel. It would be way underground in parts. At one end it would ALMOST go to Ruggles Station. In the middle, it would provide the station at Louis Pasteur and Longwood. At the other end, the exact route gets vague. It ends almost at Yawkey Station, and the bus proposals run around it.
This proposal is silly for buses, but makes excellent sense connected to Ruggles at one end and to the Urban Ring station between Yawkey and Kenmore at the other end, with direct downtown connection and Orange Line trains.
E. Impact of the ENF.
The Expended ENF Certificate is based on assurances from Winsor School that their project will not impact the bus tunnel which makes excellent sense as the Urban Ring Phase 1 connecting downtown to Longwood Medical Area and Kenmore.
3. Grand Junction.
I have spent a lot of time discussing Cambridge’s maneuvers on the Grand Junction.
If Cambridge can move ALL the Worcester / Framingham commuters to the Grand Junction, they will render Yawkey Station and its $10 million upgrade meaningless because none of the commuters would be going through there. And that would help their silly and environmentally destructive streetcar proposal. One step at a time, first they move a few, then they move the rest.
4. Urban Ring is not dead.
The Secretary very clearly left that tunnel in play in the Winsor School planning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)