Evaluation 2 of letter by FORMER Cambridge Women’s Commission Leader

The reality behind this letter is that two incumbent city councilors with terrible records are being praised for being pro civil rights with regard to the fight over the destruction of the life of the former head of the Cambridge Police Review Board in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.

The two people praised in her letter voted to fund the outrageous appeal to the Massachusetts Appeals Court which was treated with disgust by the Massachusetts Appeals Court.

The two people praised in her letter would not dream of implementing the court decisions and firing the Cambridge City Manager.

Cambridge is a city in which there is an awful lot of very pious proclamations of sainthood.

Cambridge has self proclaimed “environmentalists” associated with Team Healy who brag of a level of ethics with regard to heartless animal abuse which would embarrass Michael Vick.

Frankly, I do not see a great deal of reason to praise people who will not fire Healy for destroying that woman’s life, any more than I feel need to praise heartless animal abusers for their claims of environmentalism simultaneous with their bragging of those ethics which would embarrass Michael Vick.

I know of exactly one candidate for Cambridge City Council who would implement the court decisions and fire the Cambridge City Manager.

Jamake Pascual.

Cambridge politics are owned by Team Healy. Cambridge Politics is a world well worthy of the contempt of decent human beings.

Evaluation of letter by former Women’s Commission head

On looking at the Ryan letter I posted, I was surprised to see that she commented that two city councilors had been reported in the Chronicle to have questioned the appeal. My memory is that the Chronicle reported that THEY stated they had questioned the appeal.

My understanding is that the only member of the council to express a wish that the City Council seek independent council is Kelley. These other self serving, after the fact comments could be behind the Chronicle’s attempt to get the official record. The Chronicle very clearly wants to know what really happened behind closed doors. This would allow the Chronicle to make certain, among other things, that these self serving comments after the fact are in fact true.

Exactly ZERO incumbents or candidates, OTHER THAN JAMAKE PASCUAL, would accept the court opinion and fire Healy for destroying the life on Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for the filing the civil rights complaint.

I am still waiting for somebody to correct me on this last statement, or for that matter to provide exact citations to the validity of Ryan’s report that the two incumbents’ self serving statements were instead reports of the Chronicle. In any case, such statements, if true, would be far overshadowed by the failure to support getting independent council.

Then again, the current total lack of interest OTHER THAN BY JAMAKE PASCUAL, in firing the City Manager for Monteiro says everything.

Monteiro: Unexpurgated letter from the former head of the Cambridge, MA, Women’s Commission

I am very hesitant about using names if I can avoid it. Under the current situation, there seems no alternative and, taking her communication in context, it would appear that the source would find it acceptable to use her name.

The following letter was posted on the Cambridgeport listserve as part of a series of communications on the Monteiro / Cambridge City Manager situation.

Laura Blackwell is passing a letter from Nancy Ryan, the former head of the Women’s Commission which corresponds to the oped published by the Cambridge Chronicle on line which I have digested. I have not checked to ensure the two communications are identical. I have omitted Laura and Nancy’s email addresses and Nancy’s phone number.

****************

Got this letter from a person I really respect. Laura

****************

Dear Cambridge Friends—

I am deeply disturbed by the remarks of most Cambridge City Councilors that the issues raised in the Malvina Monteiro case are not serious enough to merit their concern. Most of the non-incumbents seem to share this dismissive attitude toward a case of racial discrimination that led to a jury’s verdict of retaliation at the highest levels of the city’s administration. The retaliation occurred after Monteiro filed a formal discrimination complaint. Councilors’ recent comments impel me to offer a very different perspective – one informed by my values and by my own experiences during the 13-year effort to bring these issues to the attention of City officials.

We must ask ourselves --do we expect City government officials -- both elected and appointed -- to stand up for the right of employees to get a fair hearing when they complain of discrimination? Can we allow retaliation to silence the diverse experiences and points of view in our city’s workforce? Are these not serious issues for our City Council to act on?

The treatment of Malvina Monteiro, according to Superior Court Judge Bonnie MacLeod Mancuso, involved “a deliberate, systematic campaign to punish the plaintiff as a reprisal for her effrontery in lodging a discrimination claim.” The judge’s “Memorandum of Decision,” issued in April, 2009, affirms the jury’s unprecedented award of $4.5 million for back pay, emotional distress and punitive damages; it states: “The jury, proceeding on the collective sum of their experiences, appear to have worked their way to dollar amounts that reflect the jurors’ assessment of the reprehensibility of Healy’s conduct, and what it will take to deter like conduct in the future.” [I will provide the judge’s complete Memorandum to anyone who requests it.]

It is important to note that City Council members had this document in hand in the Spring, 2009. Yet according to the Cambridge Chronicle, only two Councilors (Decker and Reeves) urged the City Manager not to appeal and to look seriously at the implications of the jury’s and the judge’s decision regarding the treatment of this Cape Verdean woman, the Executive Secretary of the Police Review and Advisory Board. In August, 2011, the Massachusetts Appeals Court rejected the City’s appeal, and the final award ballooned to $8.3 million. And now the City has reached a settlement with two other employees of color involved in the original discrimination suit.

But it’s not even about the money – for me, it’s about the values by which we live and work in Cambridge. Councilor Davis stated in a recent candidates’ debate that these concerns about discrimination and retaliation are not serious; Councilor Toomey brushed them aside with the claim that there are secret truths about Monteiro yet to be revealed; Councilor Seidel admitted that he hadn’t read the judge’s commentary when he supported the city’s appeal; Councilor Simmons, Mayor at the time of the jury’s decision and issuance of the judge’s Memorandum, has maintained silence regarding her role in closed-door meetings. Please ask all the Councilors where they stood when they might have made a difference. And ask every candidate about the real issues of this case – the chilling effects of retaliation and the outright or tacit rejection of any responsibility for the City’s actions.

Nancy Ryan (Executive Director, Cambridge Women’s Commission, 1981-2006)

(Please feel free to share this with others who might care about these issues)
___________________________

Nancy Ryan

Monteiro: FORMER Women’s Commission Head Condemns Cambridge Pols

On October 29, 2011, the Cambridge Chronicle posted at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x236282661/Guest-commentary-The-heart-of-the-Monteiro-case-a-matter-of-values-governance#axzz1c50xzNv4 an op ed written by Nancy Ryan who was executive director of the Cambridge Women’s Commission from 1981 to 2006. Presumably, the editor intends to publish this document in the hard copy on November 6, 2011.

The op ed commences:

“I am deeply disturbed by the remarks of most Cambridge City Councilors that the issues raised in the Malvina Monteiro case are not serious enough to merit their concern. Most of the non-incumbents seem to share this dismissive attitude toward a case of racial discrimination that led to a jury’s verdict of retaliation at the highest levels of the city’s administration.”

Ryan goes into the details of the Monteiro outrage. We have posted the key superior court decision at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html, and the appeals court panels comments at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.

She continues, “The treatment of Malvina Monteiro, according to Superior Court Judge Bonnie MacLeod Mancuso, involved ‘a deliberate, systematic campaign to punish the plaintiff as a reprisal for her effrontery in lodging a discrimination claim.’”

Ms. Ryan names incumbent City Councilors Davis, Toomey, Seidel and Simmons by name in her comments.

The Monteiro case is not at all unusual. It exactly fits the contempt for the environment and for beautiful, valuable animals communicated by the Cambridge Pols, Team Healy.

Response to former Cambridge Human Rights Commissioners

A few days ago, I posted a report on the letter printed by the Cambridge Chronicle that had been sent in some manner to the Cambridge City Council by former members of the Cambridge Human Rights Commission.

The letter shed new light on the Monteiro situation in Cambridge city government. Malvina Monteiro is a former head of the Cambridge Police Review Commission who, according to finding by judge, jury and appeals court had her life destroyed by the Cambridge City Manager in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint. $8.3 million has been paid by the city to her including $1.1 million actual damages and $3.5 million penal damages.

I am not able to find the letter in the City Council records. I have informed the Chronicle editor of this and checked the agenda for next Monday. The Chronicle editor had no comment on this oddity in the October 27 edition, so I assume he has checked things out and is confident in his source. I thus submitted the following response.

The original letter is posted by the Cambridge Chronicle at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x984138967/Letter-No-information-on-Monteiro-case-from-the-start#axzz1c50xzNv4.

Explaining the closing sentence, “Team Healy” refers to Cambridge City Manager Robert Healy.

Editor
Cambridge Chronicle

The letter from the FORMER human rights commissioners concerning Monteiro gives a rare insight into how the machine which controls Cambridge works.

The writers say their commission sought Monteiro information from the City Solicitor. They state “We were accused by the law department with interfering, told that our inquiry was out of line and informed that as a city-appointed body our interest and concern should be with city officials . . .”

This mentality is shared by people who control “protective” organizations in Cambridge.

This mentality shows why the Cambridge machine’s “environmental” groups machine constantly “save the world” but do not want to know about Cambridge destroying Cambridge.

This mentality reaffirms the Globe columnist who said Cambridge fought the Monteiro case beyond any level of reason. That fight sends a message to the machine.

This mentality shows why, when one City Councilor wanted an outside legal opinion on pursuing the Monteiro appeal, NO other Councilor was interested.

This mentality shows how a group supposedly defending Alewife spent 15 years maneuvering people away from the totally avoidable public destruction of the animals and trees in the irreplaceable core Alewife reservation.

This mentality shows how the Alewife “protectors” “cannot understand” that the destruction of the core reservation cannot possibly protect North Cambridge from flooding. They are protecting against the worst possible rainstorm in any two year period. They need protection against the two fifty year floods which have hit the area in the last twenty years. There is a big difference.

This mentality shows how the Alewife “defenders” cannot look at the other side of Cambridge Park Drive from the Alewife reservation. It shows why they cannot see that massive parking lot which could protect against 50 year floods if it were used instead of the core Alewife reservation.

This mentality shows why certain people run around proclaiming that, if you support transportation, you MUST support the City Manager’s subway proposal under the Grand Junction, and why those people insist there is no other proposal. They do not want to know that MassDOT and the MBTA say there is a responsible alternative to the city manager’ irresponsible proposal. The responsible alternative was subsidized by the legislature in the rebuilding of Yawkey Station.

This mentality could show why, yet again, Council deliberations are being kept secret concerning Monteiro.

This mentality shows that all that REALLY counts to the Cambridge Machine is being part of Team Healy.

LMA Maneuvering toward responsible Urban Ring Subway Alignment

1. Report.
A. General.
B. Bus route CT2.
C. BU Bridge.
D. BU Rotary.
2. Analysis.
A. General.
B. Bus route CT2.
C. BU Bridge.
D. BU Rotary.
3. Summary.


1. Report.

A. General.

The Citizens Advisory Committee on the Urban Ring met October 24, 2011 in the Boston Redevelopment Authority board room in Boston City Hall.

This committee is hardly a citizens committee. It is overwhelmingly a bunch of big big entities, businesses and non profits.

Most of the meeting concerned Chelsea and other areas to the north. These areas are far advanced in planning but are not really relevant to this blog.

There were also extended discussions of Melnea Cass Boulevard traffic. That gets much closer since the portion of the traffic they are interested in also crosses the Charles River. Melnea Cass Boulevard is south of Ruggles Station. It connects Ruggles Station to the Southeast Expressway / I93.

Discussions in the area we are concerned about were favorable to responsible development in the area and thus, of course, a step back for the goals of Cambridge.

B. Bus route CT2.

The Longwood Medical Area’s transportation company has been studying rearrangements of bus routes impacting the area.

The Longwood representative emphasized that the institutions are the second largest sources of employment in the City of Boston. A comment was made that some of their efforts are on a scale larger than the comparable aspects in the state of Rhode Island.

The representative presented a report on a bus study they are doing.

Longwood reemphasized Longwood’s support for a bus tunnel starting near Ruggels station on the Orange Line and providing Longwood service at a station under the traffic circle at Longwood and Louis Pasteur, The tunnel would come to ground near Yawkey Station and thus near Kenmore Square.

Longwood is studying the possibility of moving service on the CT2 bus from the BU Bridge to the Mass. Ave (named “Harvard”) Bridge, then apparently stopping at Kenmore and going up Brookline Avenue. They are talking of merging CT2 and CT3.

C. BU Bridge.

Repairs will be completed within the next few months.

There were discussions that the lane alignment in the ultimate bridge are not completely firm yet. It seems firm that there will be bike lanes on either side and three auto lanes between them. The exact alignment of those travel lanes is still under discussion.

Cambridge affirmed its wishes that the three lanes be arranged with less travel lanes for vehicles entering the bridge and more for vehicles departing the bridge. Thus on the Cambridge side, the western of the three lanes would be heading toward Boston while the middle and southern lanes would be heading toward Cambridge. The opposite alignment would occur on the Boston side.

D. BU Rotary.

MassDOT wants to rebuild the bridge over the Mass. Pike that connects to the BU Bridge. The exact alignment is still uncertain but the entities are pushing for four lanes, two in each direction, connecting the BU Bridge to Mountfort Street. There were vague comments about Brookline’s concerns in the matter.

2. Analysis.

A. General.

The game on the Urban Ring is almost always the location of the ultimate subway line. As usual, Cambridge is supporting the destructive alternative which also performs inferior to the good alternative.

The friends of Cambridge complicate things with a barrage of lies that there is only one alternative subway line, the bad one. Last I heard this lie kept getting repeated on behalf of the local Sierra Club branch. Just a brief look at the key people there shows a bunch of people with connections to Cambridge’s extremely bad city manager / city council.

The environmentally responsible, functionally far superior alternative is the heavy rail Kenmore Crossing (of the Charles) alternative which I first proposed in 1986 and which was accepted as a formal alternative in 1991. This alternative uses the same technology as the subway systems Orange Line. It would connect to the Orange Line at Ruggles Station, a little south of the Longwood Medical Area, have a stop at the LMA’s Longwood / Louis Pasteur stop and then stop above the Massachusetts Turnpike under Brookline Avenue. It would provide direct connection to the existing Green Line (streetcar) station at Kenmore, have excellent connections to the Red Sox at Fenway Park and to Commuter Rail at Yawkey Station.

Cambridge’s alternative would, among other thing move Yawkey Station from its current location near Fenway Park to a location near Marsh Chapel, the heart of the Boston University campus.

The legislature has decided. The legislature is spending something like $10 million upgrading Yawkey station in place, thus choosing the responsible Kenmore alternative for the Urban Ring subway.

B. Bus Route CT2.

A highly responsible phase 1 for the Urban Ring subway would be a spur off the Orange Line to the Yawkey-Kenmore stop as a temporary terminus for the Urban Ring subway. This spur exactly fits the LMA bus tunnel proposal except that it would go slightly further on both ends, directly connecting to Ruggles and to the Yawkey-Kenmore stop.

The current route of the CT2 bus dates back to the thinking on this matter before my suggestion of the Kenmore crossing was made a formal part of the proposal. The idea was to have a busline which, as much as possible, followed the path of the Urban Ring subway.

The LMA suggestion of moving the CT2 bus to the Mass. Ave. bridge and then to Kenmore and Brookline Avenue, moves the path from Cambridge supported streetcar alternative alignment to the Kenmore Orange Line alignment.

The LMA is recognizing reality. It is going with the responsible proposal for the Urban Ring, with the Red Sox, and with the legislature.

And Cambridge is stuck with its friends running around lying that the alternative supported by the legislature, the LMA, and by people who understand the alternatives, does not exist.

So lies, as is so common, are pretty much all Cambridge has going for yet another bizarre, environmentally inferior proposal.

C. BU Bridge.

The Cambridge position seems to align it with MassDOT.

D. BU Rotary.

Here again, there are a lot of games going on.

The bureaucrats have changed the proposal on the table from subway to buses.

Bus improvements make excellent sense in the outer areas of the Urban Ring concept, and are going forward in the outer areas where they make sense.

The core area needs that subway system.

So the people fighting for Cambridge’s silly and destructive streetcar alignments maneuver over various bus proposals attempting to ensure that their silly alternative is made a fait accompli through maneuvers over buses.

They have lost, but they are backfighting through various techniques.

The BU Rotary argument is closely connected to the Grand Junction bridge which goes through the destroyed nesting are of the Charles River White Geese.

BU has agreed to destroy a building next to the BU Bridge which it has been using for an affiliate high school.

The idea is to maneuver traffic under the BU Bridge at that point and onto the Grand Junction bridge.

In the background as well, is Harvard.

Harvard bought an area in Allston roughly the size of Boston’s Back Bay neighborhood. This is the off ramp from the Massachusetts Turnpike to Allston and Cambridge, a portion of the Massachusetts Turnpike, and the Beacon railroad yards.

Harvard made this purchase months after a state study showed that the Grand Junction bridge could be used for an off ramp from the turnpike, thus allowing it to build on the current off ramps.

Anything which converts that railroad bridge to highway use also benefits Harvard. The distance of the rail yards from the destroyed nesting area by rail is perhaps half a mile. Harvard’s purchase is visible from Magazine Beach.

Another factor in the BU Rotary calculations is Harvard’s wish to provide access to its purchase.

The responsible way to provide Harvard access would be a streetcar line off the Commonwealth Avenue Green Line which starts as a spur above the Massachusetts Turnpike just west of the BU Bridge. That spur would be built on air rights until crossing Cambridge Street (the extension of the first bridge west of the BU Bridge), and then would go underground through the Harvard Business School / Stadium area and connect to an existing tunnel stub at Harvard Station.

All sorts of machinations are under the surface concerning transportation for that area.

3. Summary.

There are a number of links posted on the blog to past very extended discussions of the Urban Ring.

This meeting is a good sign.

The "reprehensible" (to quote that civil rights judge) government of the City of Cambridge moved a tiny bit back in this arena.

Bar Michael Vick, How about Cambridge and the DCR?

The following is a copy of an exchange and several other postings on the facebook page.

I think Friend would prefer to be anonymous. I would be pleased to identify him/her should he/she change his/her mind. I am positive there were more comments but I cannot find them. If anybody wants to pass on the other comments, they are welcome.

1. Friend: Michael Vick purchases Parrot - should not be allowed to do so.



















A. Comment 1.

This is worth posting more than once. Todd Marcuse of Birds Exotics just sold a Caique Parrot to Michael Vick!!!!! Please forward to everybody you know. He has already taken the picture down from his FB site.

B. Comment 2.

See Michael Vick in Birds Exotics who ended up purchasing a Caique Parrot from Todd Marcus. He must have been really desperate to sell to MV as he is going to lose a lot of business over this one.

2. Your Editor.

I see good reason why a lot of people have very major problems with Vick.

I do distinguish between Vick and Cambridge and the DCR, however. Vick has gone to jail and served time. Vick seems to be trying to claim that he has reformed.

Cambridge and the DCR do nothing of the sort. They have a long standing pattern of heartless animal abuse and massive environmental destruction combined with flat out holier than thou lies of environment sainthood.

The situation with regard to Vick is comparable to the Monteiro case, another situation which involves flat out lying of sainthood by Cambridge that they are saints on civil rights issues. In Monteiro, the Cambridge City Manager has been found civilly guilty of destroying a woman's life in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint. The jury said $3.5 million damages. The judge said "reprehensible." The appeals court panel said "ample evidence [of] outrageous actions."

Translation: The courts say that the Cambridge City Manager should be fired without his golden parachute and possibly without his pension. But a bad city council keeps him in office and gives no indication of firing him.

So Vick has served his time and looks like he is trying to reform. The Cambridge City Manager and City Council, on the contrary, are in the process of massive animal killings and have been deliberately starving the beautiful valuable Charles River White Geese for seven years.

I sympathize with the concerns for Michael Vick, but, in my very strong opinion, the key actors on the Charles and at Alewife are far beneath him.

3. Friend.

Vick can not reform as he wasn't punished properly. He was glorified by HSUS and they downplayed all that he did wrong. He is a murderer he has killed many dogs and is not the least bit sorry for it. Some of his dogs are still at best friends in utah trying to recover from the horrendous acts of MV. Nobody should sympathize with this cold blooded murderer. And now this idiot sold him a bird? What will he do when the bird bites him? Throw him up against the wall and break his neck?

4. Friend.

Anybody that deliberately kills animals whether it be by poisons, taking away their environment or fighting they all should be punished accordingly.

5. Your Editor.

Correction: The Monteiro jury said $3.5 million PENAL damages. Actual Damages were about $1.1 million. $8.3 million has been paid with likely cost to Cambridge in excess of $10 million.

And the animal pogrom at Alewife is still on track.

And the heartless animal abuse on the Charles with much more scheduled is still on track.

And their nonstop lies of sainthood on environmental issues has not missed a beat.

Former Cambridge Human Rights Commissioners go public on Monteiro

1. Their comments.
2. Source on line.
3. Comment.
4. Other links.
5. Addendum, added two hours after posting.


1. Their comments.

Former Cambridge, MA, USA Human Rights Commission commissioners commented in a letter to the Cambridge City Council that the then members of the Cambridge Human Rights Commission first learned of the Monteiro case in the media. Apparently, the human rights commission, in accordance with its charge, requested information on the case.

“Our attempt in 2005 to acquire general information about city employee complaints of discrimination, to receive a copy of the Monteiro complaint and to request the city law department to meet with us simply to provide us with the information, which the ordinance clearly mandates that we should have, was met with hostility. We were accused by the law department with interfering, told that our inquiry was out of line and informed that as a city-appointed body our interest and concern should be with city officials, when our mandate is to be concerned with ant ‘protect . . . the human rights of all city . . . employees.’ Further our attempt to be ‘properly informed,’ we were told, carried the threat of a conflict of interest.”

2. Source on line.

We learned of this letter from the Cambridge Chronicle which published it on pages 10 and 11 of the October 20, 2011 edition. It appeared as the second letter of the issue. Almost all of the letter was printed in letters to the right of the editorial. The first letter was a letter from a city council candidate calling for disclosure of closed session information concerning the Monteiro Case.

The Chronicle’s complete publication of the letter is on line at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x984138967/Letter-No-information-on-Monteiro-case-from-the-start#axzz1bb63kGDe.

According to the Chronicle, the letter was sent by the former commissioners “last week”.

I searched the records of last Monday’s meeting and did not find the letter. The next prior meeting, two weeks earlier, did not include it either.

If I had been able to find the letter, I would have published it in total. This partial publication is made out of respect for the Cambridge Chronicle.

3. Comment.

The response attributed to the Cambridge City Solicitor is very much consistent with the mentality of various fake "protective" groups in Cambridge. The supposedly independent groups are clearly more free than appointed entities. Nevertheless, this mentality is the rather obvious reason why many groups are fake.

Writing this letter took a lot of guts.

4. Other links.

The superior court decision on Monteiro may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html.

The appeals court comments on Monteiro may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.

A partial summary of Department of Conservation and Recreation outrages may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/10/charles-river-connectivity-bizarre.html.

All environmental outrages in Cambridge are coordinated by the DCR with Cambridge. There are many environmental outrages by Cambridge on its own.

It all has the same stench.

5. Addendum, added two hours after posting.

Addendum: I have searched the agenda for tomorrow’s meeting without finding the letter. I have also checked reports on communications from city officers both for tomorrow’s and last Monday’s meeting without success.

Cambridge Chronicle: City Manager ”in office too long”

“It is imperative to democracy that there is governmental oversight, especially in Cambridge where we have a strong city manager who’s been in office too long and an anemic City Council that seems to be ineffective in reining him in.”

This paragraph is the fifth paragraph the Cambridge Chronicle’s editorial on page 10 of the edition of October 20, 2011, published on line at. http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x268459622/Editorial-Coakley-should-take-city-of-Cambridge-s-stonewalling-seriously#axzz1bb63kGDe.

The editorial is a plea to the Massachusetts Attorney General to provide disclosure of the minutes of executive sessions of the Cambridge City Council concerning the handling of the Monteiro cast. The judge’s “reprehensible” comment is featured prominently. The editorial seeks the Attorney General’s action to force disclosure “before Election day [of] details that may change the way voters think of certain sitting councilors.”

The editorial’s description of the Cambridge City Council is too kind.

The jury, judge and appeals court have found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.

Monteiro fits the stench of environmental outrages.

The superior court decision may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html.

The appeals court comments may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.

A partial summary of DCR outrages may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/10/charles-river-connectivity-bizarre.html.

All environmental outrages in Cambridge are coordinated by the DCR with Cambridge. There are many environmental outrages by Cambridge on its own.

NOTE: This is the 700th entry in this blog dating back to November 19, 2005. Before that, commencing on March 6, 2000, we published more than 600 editions of our on line newsletter. The newsletter reached a distribution of over 1300. The computer file of the newsletter contains 646 entries.

Charles River Connectivity, third meeting

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) conducted their third presentation on "Charles River Connectivity" on Tuesday evening, October 18 at the Morse School in Cambridge, MA, across Memorial Drive from Magazine Beach.

Our report on the second meeting is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/10/charles-river-connectivity-bizarre.html. The posting includes a blow by blow but necessarily incomplete summary of fairly recent DCR attacks on the environment and on resident / visiting animals.

The third meeting concentrated on the Charles River east of the Eliot Bridge. The Eliot Bridge, in turn, crosses the Charles River just east of the WBZ studios. It is the fourth full sized bridge over the Charles River west of the BU Bridge.

As I previously reported, MassDOT and DCR have rejected what they call the “Cambridge plans” for even more massive environmental destruction on the Cambridge side.

The “Cambridge plans” call for the construction on the Cambridge side of a bizarre new highway in the Charles and on its banks. This bizarre new highway would run from the area between the Eliot and Anderson (Harvard Square) Bridges to the Memorial Drive split just east of the Hyatt, the BU Boathouse, the mostly vegetation destroyed ghetto to which the Charles River White Geese are confined, and the BU Bridge.

New comments of note in the presentation by MassDOT / DCR include:

1. Concerns for the approaches to the BU Bridge on the Boston side, particularly above the Masachusetts Turnpike.

2. Concerns for the lack of direct connection between the BU Bridge and the park under the BU Bridge between Soldiers Field Road / Storrow Drive and the Charles River. Note there are stairs being reconstructed connecting the BU Bridge to the area further from the Charles on the south side of Storrow Drive / Soldiers Field Road.

3. Concerns for the lack of direct connection between the park on the Charles River and the Muddy River Reservation / Fens in association with the highway connector between Storrow Drive / Soldiers Field Road and the highway system connected to the Fens / Muddy River Reservation.

All of their concerns have possible environmental problems, but at least MassDOT / DCR have rejected outright the very irresponsible package of the Cambridge machine for further destruction on the Cambridge side.

Please note that I was only able to stay for the formal presentation and was not able to stay for public comments. Timewise, this means I missed about two thirds of the meeting.

Charles River Connectivity, Bizarre Sainthood Claims, Possibly Acceptable Plans

1. General.
2. Sainthood claims, as usual, are bizarre.
A. General.
B. Alewife.
C. Magazine Beach to BU Boathouse.
(1) Work at Magazine Beach Unnecessary.
(2) Poisons dumped to keep alive sickly grass planted in place of environmentally responsible grass which was destroyed.
(3) Playing fields destroyed to drain off poisons which should not be dumped in the first place.
(4) Bizarre wall of bushes replaces wetlands, starves Charles River White Geese.
(5) Boat dock apparently destroyed.
(6) Transition area designed to provide additional barriers to access from the Charles to Magazine Beach.
(7) Almost all ground vegetation destroyed from BU Bridge to BU Boathouse.
(8) Food in area across from Hyatt barred to Charles River White Geese at same time as use of Magazine Beach taken.
(9) BU Bridge repairs needlessly destructive. DCR refuses to ameliorate harm to Charles River White Geese.
(10) DCR plans to destroy picnic area south of Magazine Street.
D. Massive Tree Destruction Planned, Memorial Drive, Magazine Beach to Longfellow Bridge
E. Greenough Boulevard.
F. Herter Park area.
G. Dumping of Poisons near Mass. General. Annual infestation of algae caused.
H. Poisoning of the Eggs of Migratory Waterfowl.
I. Protective vegetation in general.
J. Nonantum Road.
K. Other locations.
3. Connectivity Plans could be acceptable, include one commendable part.
A. Good parts.
(1) Rejects New Highway.
(2) Western Avenue / Arsenal Street Bridge Area.
B. Inferior parts.
(1) Greenough Boulevard between Arsenal Street and North Harvard Street.
(A) Naming.
(B) Greenough Boulevard.
(2) Greenough Boulevard / North Beacon Street intersection.
(A) Naming.
(B) The intersection.
4. Formal response.

1. General.

The Charles River Connectivity Report, as presented at the October 13, 2011 meeting on Nonantum Road has at lease one aspect which is downright commendable. Overall, with care, the study could result in responsible behavior.

The meeting was severely marred, however, by Manager A’s responding to my comments on existing animal and past animal abuse with my hope that the report not segue into future animal abuse.

I really do not want to go through yet another attack on the Department of Conservation and Recreation but it is unavoidable. Section 2 is that, hopefully as concise as possible. Should I, in my attempts at concise presentation inadvertently omit something, the omission is not deliberate.

Section 3 is my report on the meeting.

Section 4 is my formal submission at the meeting, names of the guilty redacted.

2. Sainthood claims, as usual, are bizarre.

A. General.

In response to objections I will go ahead with later, Manager A denied that the DCR has been doing any harm to animals.

As I recall, the denial was past tense. Manager A is key

Manager A was responding to my comment on Greenough Boulevard.

I responded to his claims of sainthood that the DCR’s plans for the Charles River call for parks.

The DCR’s secret definition of parks is no resident animals.

But this is yet another excellent example of pretty much non stop lies, and you can only respond to so much outrageous comments. He made further comments while I was very visibly writing up my written comments and transcribing them onto my laptop. I did not dignify his further comments with further response.

As with so many of the Cambridge City Manager’s “protective” groups, “You can’t possibly be that stupid.”

The DCR and their fellow travelers brag of seeing a lot of animals. They do not state that many of the “sightings” are of animals which are pretty much unthinkable on the Charles River Basin. Others, such a migratory waterfowl, are animals they are determined to get rid of and actively working to get rid of and that determination is implied in the statement.

Their stated goal, once you get through the secret definitions, is to kill off all resident animals. And they are working constantly toward that goal.

B. Alewife.

Past tense, as I said was key.

The plans here are for massive and heartless killing of resident animals unless they are able to escape massive and very destructive machines.

The plans are flatly and simply bizarre because they admit when questioned that the destruction cannot achieve its stated goals and because there is a readily available alternative which can achieve those goals without environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.

Alewife is subject to flood because Cambridge has allowed so much of the watershed to be destroyed.

Alewife has seen two storms in the past twenty years equal to the worst storms expected in any fifty year period.

The “solution”: massive destruction of an excellent virgin forest and its wildlife to achieve protection against TWO YEAR STORMS.

The problem is flooding. They are protecting against moderately bad rainstorms.

Directly across Cambridge Park Drive and visible from the initial destruction area is a massive parking lot which extends to railroad tracks to the south and Alewife Brook Parkway to the east.

This parking lot could be dug up and turned into the necessary massive tanks to catch flood waters and release those flood waters in a responsible matter.

The nearest part of the parking lot was slated for development before the market crash.

It would be readily achievable to take the parking lots by eminent domain and build the building on air rights about the flood storage. But those parking lots will readily disappear under the current plans.

C. Magazine Beach to BU Boathouse.

Heartless starving of the Charles River White Geese by denying them access to their food at Magazine Beach by the introduction of the bizarre bushes very clearly is “harm.” Manager A’s associate, Manager B, the local manager, has bragged of starving the Charles River White Geese. Their names were provided in the unredacted comment reported in section 4, below.

(1) Work at Magazine Beach Unnecessary.

Throughout the build up for the massive destruction, normal humans looking at Magazine Beach clearly were of the opinion that there was no need to “improve” it, some possible need to the west but not in Magazine Beach proper.

The “improvements” which have occurred are things which could have been done without the massive destruction and heartless animal abuse.

(2) Poisons dumped to keep alive sickly grass planted in place of environmentally responsible grass which was destroyed.

Native grasses which survived the better part of a century without poisons being dumped on them were casually destroyed, seven acres of them.

The grasses introduced in place of the healthy grasses killed off are so blatantly inappropriate that they cannot survive without poisons to keep them going.

Naturally, the poisons poison waterfowl feeding off them.

(3) Playing fields destroyed to drain off poisons which should not be dumped in the first place.

They are dumping poisons to keep alive the sickly grasses which are unfit for the location. To keep the sickly stuff alive and keep the poisons out of the Charles River, they have destroyed playing fields for drainage.

They replace the poisons with seeds for the healthy grass they irresponsibly destroyed. They return the healthy grasses, they can return the drainage system to playing fields.

(4) Bizarre wall of bushes replaces wetlands, starves Charles River White Geese.

The “planners” claimed there was a water problem. Translation: it was wetlands.

Nature and humans coexisted on Magazine Beach for the better part of a century. Those wetlands were crucial transition between the playing fields and the Charles River.

The DCR claims they want water related activities.

The work at Magazine Beach was delayed years because their wall of fancy bushes kept dying. It died because their “native” bushes were unfit for the Charles River. Once they got something which would survive, they simply let it grow.

Everyplace else on the Charles River Basin, bordering vegetation is killed off / chopped down twice a year, to the great harm of migratory waterfowl.

At Magazine Beach, that bizarre wall keeps growing, and starving the Charles River White Geese who lived on Magazine Beach for the better part of the last 30 years, feeding off the grasses and sleeping there at night.

Manager B has bragged that the wall starves the Charles River White Geese.

And the DCR brags that they want water related activities when they are barring access between water and playing fields for humans and animals?

Chop it down. The native vegetation they destroyed there has shown signs of returning anyway.

That native vegetation which was a target of the wetlands destruction was mentioned by the Boston Conservation Commission when they objected to the DCR / fake conservancy’s destruction. The BCC was concerned about their blatant contempt for the needs of migratory waterfowl.

(5) Boat dock apparently destroyed.

The DCR claims they want water related uses. A boat landing was at Magazine Beach for the better part of a century.

It is still there, but you can’t get at it. Access to back up cars is clearly blocked.

(6) Transition area designed to provide additional barriers to access from the Charles to Magazine Beach.

There is very much a line of barriers which has been created inside the bizarre wall of introduced vegetation.

(7) Almost all ground vegetation destroyed from BU Bridge to BU Boathouse.

Starting in 2003 when the fake conversancy commenced environmental destruction for the DCR, ground vegetation began being destroyed.

The vegetation that was destroyed can readily be observed in the lush hillside holding up Memorial Drive and its off ramp to the north of the animal habitat. That vegetation is lush and the ground vegetation used to exactly that lush.

The small areas which were not destroyed by the fake conservancy or by the much too large BU Bridge construction area is just as lush, but there is very little of it.

(8) Food in area across from Hyatt barred to Charles River White Geese at same time as use of Magazine Beach taken.

At the same time as the DCR walled off Magazine Beach from the Charles River, the DCR’s accomplices at Cambridge did a “sewage control project” across from the Hyatt.

When they left, they left a wall of plastic barring access to the grasses on the river bank from the river.

(9) BU Bridge repairs needlessly destructive. DCR refuses to ameliorate harm to Charles River White Geese.

The BU Bridge repairs needed access from underneath. That portion of the destruction was necessary.

The DCR’s plans included a massive parking lot sticking into the animal habitat and excellent vegetation along the northern side under the on ramp to Memorial Drive. That was totally unnecessary and cruel.

The access area and parking lot continues to this day to be barred to animals.

DCR refused to ameliorate harm to the Charles River White Geese.

Why?

Their plans are to kill off all resident animals since their plans are to kill off all resident animals, they have no need to avoid utter cruelty.

A responsible entity would have allowed them to return to Magazine Beach, chop down the bizarre wall, replace the sickly grass and its poisons with the environmentally responsible grass they destroyed.

(10) DCR plans to destroy picnic area south of Magazine Street.

This is a location used by the little guy for barbeques. They are just going to take out the access openings and tiny parking lot. No explanation. The riffraff is offensive to them.

D. Massive Tree Destruction Planned, Memorial Drive, Magazine Beach to Longfellow Bridge

Cambridge and the DCR are working to destroy hundreds of excellent trees on Memorial Drive between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge. This includes devastation of an excellent grove of 105 trees at the Memorial Drive split. I have twice posted photos of these trees, in winter and in late summer.

The DCR has been lying that these trees are diseases. The diseased trees were destroyed more than five years ago. The DCR’s filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission confirmed the health of these trees.

Using that lie, they tried to get Obama moneys, but did not succeed. It is possible that Governor Patrick blocked the Obama moneys when he received documentation of the lie.

It is possible that this destruction is being sneaked into the state budget.

E. Greenough Boulevard.

Please see my comments below in section 3.B.(1).

F. Herter Park area.

Herter Park is located between Soldiers Field Road and the Charles River at the end of Everett Street. Everett Street is the traditional dividing line between Boston’s Allston and Brighton neighborhoods. It is near the WBZ studios and across from a medium height hotel whose name has changed a number of times. It is between the Elliot Bridge and the Arsenal Street Bridge.

Herter Park has been subjected to massive destruction of animal areas during the past decade.

G. Dumping of Poisons near Mass. General. Annual infestation of algae caused.

The dumping of poisons on the playing fields at Magazine Beach copies environmental destruction at playing fields across Storrow Drive / Soldiers Field Road / Charles Street from Massachusetts General Hospital.

At these playing fields, the DCR figured their favored poisons were not sufficiently destructive. So they dumped poisons marked with a prohibition against use near water.

THE NEXT DAY, the Charles River was dead from the Charles River Dam to the Mass. Avenue (Harvard) Bridge, choked with algae.

Last I heard the algae infestation returns annually now.

H. Poisoning of the Eggs of Migratory Waterfowl.

In 2003, the DCR started poisoning the eggs of as much migratory waterfowl as it could get away with. I am not aware that the poisonings have stopped.

Their agent has been the falsely named “Charles River Conservancy.”

I. Protective vegetation in general.

Massive destruction throughout the Charles River Basin commencing during the past ten years. The only bordering vegetation which is not destroyed twice a year is the bizarre, destructive stuff introduced at Magazine Beach since 2004. And that is very clearly left there to starve the Charles River White Geese.

The entity doing the destruction is, once again, the falsely named “Charles River Conservancy.”

I have sat through a meeting of the Boston Conservation Commission in which members of the Boston Conservation Commission were disgusted at the destructiveness of the “Charles River Conservancy” on the Boston side of the Charles River.

J. Nonantum Road.

I have gone into detail as to why this entity is really Soldiers Field Road.

That monstrous boathouse where the meeting was conducted is an outrage.

K. Other locations.

I have received quite distressed communications concerned wildlife on the Mystic River.

In any case, this communication has been prepared, for the most part, off the top of my head. It is highly likely there are omissions.

3. Connectivity Plans could be acceptable, include one commendable part.

It is a shame that a pretty good report was sullied by the blatant falsehoods of sainthood on treatment of animals.

The report is on how the various properties on the Charles River Basin interrelate.

The Nonantum Road meeting was pretty much limited to the Elliot Bridge (west of Harvard Stadium, large formal interchange connecting to Fresh Pond Parkway) and west. Tuesday’s Cambridge meeting was announced to be concerned with east of the Elliot Bridge. A meeting the prior Tuesday at the Shriner’s Burn Center presumably concerned areas farthest to the east but they did not specify.

A. Good parts.

(1) Rejects New Highway.

The report rejects the concept of a new highway in and abutting the Charles River pretty much throughout Cambridge. Manager A referred to that in response to my comment as the Cambridge proposal.

(2) Western Avenue / Arsenal Street Bridge Area.

The report accurately states that the interchange is bad between Western Avenue, the Arsenal Street Bridge and Soldier’s Field Road.

B. Inferior parts.

I say inferior because, except for the bizarre claim of sainthood in response to my Greenough Boulevard discussion, it is really not particularly bad.

(1) Greenough Boulevard between Arsenal Street and North Harvard Street.

(A) Naming.

Massachusetts traffic planners maximize confusion and thus accidents by drivers by any number of incompetent traffic actions. One of those excellent examples of incompetence is the arbitrary changing of names of what are very frequently the same road.

Greenough Boulevard is Memorial Drive with a name change. The name changes at Fresh Pond Parkway / the Elliot Bridge.

(B) Greenough Boulevard.

The sidewalks and bike paths in this area are not fancy. This area has much less traffic than Memorial Drive. There really is not a great deal of need to spend a bunch of money on this area. It is quite fine the way it is.

Work in the past decade emphasized the DCR’s contempt for wildlife.

Hell’s Half Acre is to the most part a former animal habitat just west of the Elliot Bridge across from Buckingham, Brown and Nichols School. The DCR devastated the portion of Hell’s Half Acre nearest the river during their environmental destructions of the past decade. The DCR devastated wildlife areas to the west of Hell’s Half Acre running to Arsenal Street by scorched earth development of what had been excellent ground cover.

I objected to the Greenough Boulevard plans because change is really not necessary and because change would probably wipe out too many of what few free animals they did not kill off or drive away during the destruction in the past ten years. If they can do the changes with no impact on the environmental areas, fine, but the DCR has no reason to be trusted. Plus, it is not really needed and their record is too extremely bad.

(2) Greenough Boulevard / North Beacon Street intersection.

(A) Naming.

The stretch of Greenough Boulevard between Arsenal Street and North Beacon Street reemphasizes the determination of traffic planners to maximize accidents by confusing drivers.

There is no meaningful connection between the two segments of Greenough Avenue. They both connect with Arsenal Street but the connections are several hundred feet apart.

If Massachusetts had responsible traffic planners, the Arsenal - North Beacon segment would be named Greenough Avenue and the Elliot Bridge - Arsenal segment would be named Memorial Drive.

(B) The intersection.

The Greenough Boulevard - North Beacon Street intersection is an excellent example of how traffic gets lazier and lazier the further west you go.

Arsenal Street is a nightmare in rush hour and frequently outside of rush hour. Soldiers Field Road at the rotary between Soldiers Field Road and North Beacon Street and Nonantum Road is a nightmare in rush hour.

The corresponding section of Greenough Boulevard is quiet and its intersection with North Beacon Street is quiet.

The planners are proposing a traffic light. It seems a waste of money. A man followed my comments with reasonable sounding comments in favor of the traffic light. I really did not understand the comments. It just looks to me like a fairly quiet intersection which really does not need the added interference to traffic flow, not to mention the expenditure of funds.

4. Formal response.

I left the following written comment. This transcription was made on my computer from the writing during the presentation. A brief review of section 2 will clearly indicate that this comment was too kind, very much too kind.

******

I strongly object to the blatant falsehood by [Manager A]:

His denial of doing any harm to animals. You have been deliberately starving the Charles River White Geese. [Manager B] has bragged of it in a public meeting.

The bizarre wall of introduced bushes at Magazine Beach is the only bordering vegetation which is not destroyed twice a year.

You claimed water based uses and have walled off Magazine Beach without meaningful explanation other than deliberate heartless starvation.

You add that to that the destruction of nearly all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and BU Boathouse, the only part of their habitat you have not taken away.

Monstrous building on Nonantum Road, update on meeting report

This replaces an earlier post. I got a bit confused as to attributions.

Kathy Podgers has responded to my posting announcing the Nonantum meeting on the Cambridgeport listserve.

The relevant part of my original posting on the listserve read:

Nonantum Road is yet another name for Storrow Drive / Soldiers Field Road. Nonantum Road starts after the rotary after the Soldiers Field Road Staples. I assume Community Rowing Boathouse is the monstrous new structure a little bit further to the west.

There were comments by some confused people or worse.

Kathy’s responses to the confused people were:

1. The Charles River Estuary has been under assault for decades. It is no wonder some do not understand how development along Mother Nature's masterpiece is Monsterous to those who value wildlife habitat over Architectural awards and other ego stroking hubris.

2. All over the world, migrating waterfowl have been settling down on 'controlled' rivers due to extensive ongoing habitat loss, caused by both human incursion into wetlands due to over-development and climate change.

The melting of the tundra results in seasonal lakes not forming in the north, and in the south some 50% of wetlands habitat has vanished. Closer, to Boston, the preserve on long island has lost 24% of habitat that hosted migrating waterfowl.

While I know that many have eschewed religious morals, I still believe we have a duty to protect the precious waterfowl, and other wildlife that seek refuge fron the storm of climate change, and I do not see wildlife as monstrous at all.

I see it as Mother Nature's gift of life.

Thank goodness.

********

Thank you Kathy.

Last two Monteiro plaintiffs settle

Boston.com reports that former Cambridge city lawyer Linda Stamper and current city employee Mary Wong, the last two of the five Monteiro plaintiffs, have settled their cases.

Malvina Monteiro was recently paid $8.3 million by order of superior and appeals courts as a result of a judgment which found that Cambridge destroyed her life in retaliation for her filing one of five civil rights complaints which were joined in one legal action against Cambridge.

The boston.com article looks like a good summary of the situation.

Key quote in Boston.com of Attorney Zucker representing the plaintiffs:

“Miss Wong and Miss Stamper, with the resolution of this case, believe that their work is done here,’’ said Zucker, who added she cannot disclose details of the settlement. “It’s really up to the city’s citizens and its leadership to decide what lesson they want to learn from the concerns that were raised, and the resolution, of this matter.’’

http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrodesk/2011/10/cambridge-two-women-settle-discrimination-claims-dating-back/WHHGx2qeEATJ0YThz7yT2J/index.html?p1=News_links

Blackballed for being pro-environment?

1. Unacceptable (?) Behavior by Your Editor.
2. Blackballed?
3. My opinion.
4. The threat.


1. Unacceptable (?) Behavior by Your Editor.

Yesterday, October 13, 2011, I posted on the Blog and on facebook directions to the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) / Department of Transporation (MassDOT) meeting that evening as follows:

“Nonantum Road is yet another name for Storrow Drive / Soldiers Field Road. Nonantum Road starts to the west of the rotary to the west of the Soldiers Field Road Staples. I assume Community Rowing Boathouse is the monstrous new structure a little bit further to the west.”

2. Blackballed?

I got the following reply in response to a nearly identical notice by email on a listserve:

“Community Rowing Boathouse is a beautiful structure--inside and out. You ought to be watching what you say.”

3. My opinion.

This structure strikes me as one of the many reasons why DCR managers should be fired for their contempt for the environment.

The structure is smack dab on the river and is way out of scale.

4. The threat.

It is very silly to count developer type “positions” as meaningful with regard to any construction project.

It is very dangerous for developer types to condemn any structure being built, no matter how irresponsible.

Developer types can have their livelihood taken away from them. A member of the development community who does not comport with the mandatory demands for praise will simply have all work taken away from him / her.

There is no such thing as free speech in the developer community.

Very clearly, this is a threat to blackball, or worse.

Charles River Connectivity meetings

I picked up a possibly valuable meeting in fine print on a reference which had nothing to do with the meeting. That could mean yet another secret public meeting being hidden as much as possible by the Department of Conservation and Recreation while loudly proclaiming their sainthood. The more these things get hidden, the more likely they are to be important.

There are three public meetings scheduled. These meetings are sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, MassDOT, and DCR with DCR apparently in the lead.

1. Tuesday, the day before yesterday, at Shriner’s hospital, next to Mass. General.

2. Tonight, October 13, 6:30 to 8 pm

It will be at the Community Rowing Boathouse, 20 Nonantum Road, Brighton.

Nonantum Road is yet another name for Storrow Drive / Soldiers Field Road. Nonantum Road starts to the west of the rotary to the west of the Soldiers Field Road Staples. I assume Community Rowing Boathouse is the monstrous new structure a little bit further to the west.

3. October 18, 2011, 6:30 pm to 8 pm, Morse School, Cambridge.

Morse School is directly across Memorial Drive from Magazine Beach.

Boston Conservation Commission Meeting, October 19. Two possible hearings of interest

The following is excerpted from a much longer notice of hearing which was sent on October 11.

The short of it is that hearings will be conducted on October 19, 2011 (1) at 7 pm on Boston Latin School work at 525 Western Avenue, Allston and (2) at 7:30 pm on the Department of Conservation and Recreation’s plans for vegetation destruction on the Charles.

PUBLIC HEARING

In accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, M.G.L. Chapter 131, Section 40, the Boston Conservation Commission will hold a public hearing in Boston City Hall, Room 801 on October 19, 2011 to review the following projects to determine what conditions, if any, the Commission will impose in order to protect the interests of the public and private water supply, ground water, prevention of pollution, flood control, prevention of storm damage, protection of fisheries and land containing shellfish, and protection of wildlife habitat:

*********

7:00 PM Request for Determination of Applicability from Friends of Boston Latin School Crew for improvements to an existing boathouse and installation of stormwater management infrastructure and gravel pads, at 525 Western Ave, Charles River Reservation, Brighton, Charles River (100-foot Buffer Zone to Inland Bank).

[Ed: Google Maps puts this in the middle of the Charles River by Herter Park. That does not compute. My educated guess is that this facility is located just north of the Western Avenue access to the bridge going to Watertown and is between Soldiers Field Road and the Charles River. Perhaps a better guess would be the former DCR horse stables at the intersection of and between Western Avenue and Soldiers Field Road. I would love to get corrected by someone with better knowledge.]

*********

7:30 PM Report from the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation on the annual seasonal cuttings of vegetation, pursuant to the Order of Conditions DEP File No. 006-0971, for the Charles River Basin Shoreline Vegetation Management Plan, Charles River, Boston (Riverfront Area, Inland Bank, 100-foot Buffer Zone).

[Ed. The last time I was in a Boston Conservation Commission meeting, the committee was highly displeased at the environmental destructiveness of the falsely named Charles River Conservancy acting on behalf of the DCR.]

Boston Globe praises Charles, very clearly omissions in its view of reality

1. Archie’s Report.
2. Editor’s Comment.

1. Archie’s Report.

Today's (10/11/11) Boston Globe features on its Opinion page columnist Derrick Z. Jackson's "Clear And Clean - In 20 years, the Charles goes from embarrassment to a wild river." The article is upbeat and this quote is highlighted:

One by one, people started believing, and we hit that tipping point where people remembered that their grandmothers swam in the Charles and wanted that for themselves again." (Bill Walsh-Rogaleski, attorney in the EPA's New England office)

The photo for his article appears to have been taken from the BU Bridge depicting the view to the east.

Yes, it is an upbeat article, but this portion seems to be missing something:

"Another visible tipping point of the Charles is the wildlife. The river now hosts otters, beavers, fishers, heron, hawks, herring and migrating loons. Maury Eldridge, one of the river's most most dedicated kayaking photographers, says it has become more a 'national park or wildlife sanctuary than an urban/suburban river.'"

Perhaps Mr. Jackson is not aware of the plight of the Charles River White Geese. Visitors to this Blog might Email Mr. Jackson, who is an excellent columnist, to let him know about the Charles River White Geese and how their hosts, the Commonwealth and the City of Cambridge, have been mistreating them. Mr. Jackson can be reached at: jackson@globe.com.

Archie Mazmanian

2. Editor’s Comment.

Sounds like the kind of people who support the imminent destruction of the Alewife reservation as well.

The wildlife the author praises are very clearly targeted for destruction on the Charles River Basin by policies adopted by the DCR. The DCR has no world for wildlife.

Aside from that the Globe is living in reality.

Strong column in Boston Globe against Cambridge City Manager, whistleblowing analysis

1. Archie Mazmanian reports.
2. Archie’s Whistle Blower Series.
3. Editor's Comment.

1. Archie Mazmanian reports.

Adrian Walker's Boston Globe column this past Saturday (10/8/11) "Change is overdue" comments on the 30-years tenure of Cambridge City Manager Bob Healy, focusing upon the retaliation lawsuit of Malvina Monteiro that was recently resolved. [I was unsuccessful in finding a link to the column.] The column closes with this:

"Which means that every city employee remains under the direction of a city manager found to retaliate against those who cross him and who has demonstrated that he will wage such battles far beyond the point of reason. Two other retaliation cases are still pending against the city. Malvina Monteiro has gotten justice. But has her long battle guaranteed anything for the next woman who s teps out of line?"

A couple of years ago, I contributed a post to your Blog on the MA Whistleblower statute, General Laws Chapter 149, Section 185, reporting on my search at Cambridge City Hall for notices required by subsection (g):

"An employer shall conspicuously display notices reasonably designed to inform its employees of their protection and obligations under this section, and use other appropriate means to keep its employees informed. Each notice posted pursuant to this subsection shall include the name of the person or persons the employer has designated to receive written notification pursuant to subsection (c)."

I reported that I could not locate any such notices on the several bulletin boards at City Hall. I don't know if any such notices have since been posted there or at other city offices, or whether the city has formally adopted a "Whistleblower Policy" pursuant to the statute or otherwise complies with its requirements. Perhaps Cambridge employees/residents might follow up and inform this Blog. While the MA Whistleblower statute is not perfect, it does afford protection to Cambridge employees against retaliation as well as protect taxpayers/residents with some transparency of possible municipal misdeeds.

2. Archie’s Whistle Blower Series.

I find the following posts on the Whistle Blower series:

Part I: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/whistling-in-dark-part-i.html.
Part II: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/whistling-in-dark-part-ii.html.
Part III: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009_12_30_archive.html.
Part IV: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2010_01_04_archive.html, second posting.
Part V: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2010_01_31_archive.html.

3. Editor's Comment.

The fake "protective" group which spent 15 years loudly proclaiming its love of Alewife and which just praised its imminent destruction is not at all unusual in Cambridge.

And there are very real connections to the Cambridge City Manager.

This group is probably the most important single factor in the imminent destruction of this irreplacable part of our world by a city government which constantly lies about its environment sainthood.

Monteiro follow up delayed again, New Report posted.

1. Monteiro follow up delayed again.
2. Cambridge Day provides new information?

1. Monteiro follow up delayed again.

We have been reporting on the case of Malvina Monteiro v. City of Cambridge for quite awhile.

This is a civil rights matter which has the same stench as the environmental destruction which is so much the norm with the City of Cambridge, MA, USA, while constantly, and falsely, declaring themselves saints on environmental and civil rights matters.

The Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of black, Cape Verdean, female department head Malvina Monteiro in retaliation because she filed a civil right complaint. The jury said $3.5 million penal damages in addition to about $1.1 million actual damages. The judge went into detailed analysis of the City Manager’s testimony and summparized with the word “reprehensible” in her key opinion. The appeals court panel treated Cambridge's appeal with disgust and spoke of “ample evidence [of] outrageous conduct”.

Cambridge has paid Malvina Monteiro $8.3 million and the total cost will apparently exceed $10 million.

Monteiro was one of five related cases filed together. Two were apparently settled handsomely. Two have yet to be tried.

The final pre-trial hearing on the fourth case has been repeatedly delayed during the appeals court process and thereafter. It was scheduled for Tuesday, October 11.

The final pre-trial hearing has, by agreement between the parties, been rescheduled yet again, to January 10, 2012, at 2 pm in Session (courtroom) F at the Superior Court building in Woburn, MA.

It could be strictly a coincidence, but that timing puts the hearing a week or so after the newly elected Cambridge City Council is sworn in.

For the record, final judgment in Malvina Monteiro’s case was entered into the Superior Court docket on September 21, 2011.

2. Cambridge Day provides new information?

Cambridge Day has posted an extended analysis of the case with comments associated with City Councilor / Representative Toomey. This, in turn, cites a YouTube posting which has been pulled and reposted.

http://www.cambridgeday.com/2011/10/09/toomey-says-public-lacks-full-story-of-monteiro-firing/

Student in critical condition after being pulled from Charles River in the BU Bridge area of Boston at about 1 am

Passing on a post from boston.com.

This woman was pulled from the Charles River on the opposite end of the BU Bridge from the destroyed nesting area of the Charles River White Geese. This was at about 1 am on October 9, 2011.

Details are not apparently available.

However, this area is posted with signs warning against use at night because of mugging and sexual assaults. Not that long ago, a woman was assaulted near the next bridge to the east on the Boston side of the Charles River.

These areas are very dangerous.

The environmental destroyers are fighting to repeat this haven for muggers on the Cambridge side.

They neglect to mention the muggings on the Boston side.

They neglect to mention the environmental destruction and further heartless animal abuse involved in their plans.

They neglect to mention the massive destruction of trees involved in their plans.

A bunch of their friends are on the verge of destroying the Alewife reservation in another bizarre project.

But they do run around praising each other for their shared sainthood.

http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrodesk/2011/10/student-pulled-from-river-critical-condition/Y8PRLuNiTT2dXus4qOfKWP/index.html?p1=News_links

Belmont targeted op ed on Alewife

I have just sent the following, realizing that destruction of the core Alewife reservation is imminent.

Editor
Belmont Citizen-Herald

Residents of Belmont are, for good reason, concerned about Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation’s plans in the Alewife area.

The two are about to go forward with a destructive, bizarre proposal, a proposal which is consistent with bad environmental behavior elsewhere.

The core Alewife reservation starts pretty close to Alewife Station and runs into Belmont. The northern boundary is Little River. On the south, it approaches the railroad right of way near Belmont and, in Cambridge, it comes close to Cambridge Park Drive.

The massive development Cambridge has allowed has done severe harm to the watershed. There have been two fifty year floods in the area in the past twenty years. That portion of Cambridge between Cambridge Park Drive and the railroad, north and south, and running on the east to Alewife Brook Parkway include a massive parking lot which occupies easily half the area.

That massive parking lot would be ideal for flood storage at the level needed to protect against 50 year storms or worse. Major tanks could be placed underground for storage in emergencies with gradual emptying after the emergency. The owner of the biggest contiguous parking lot has plans for major buildings and intended to go forward before the collapse of the financial market.

A joint project would be ideal, starting with a taking by eminent domain. Cambridge has quite a bit of Community Preservation Act moneys which could be used for flood storage, about a million I understand. Moneys of this sort have been spent by Cambridge in the past on property in Lincoln.

Instead, Cambridge and the DCR propose to destroy the core Alewife reservation and intend to go forward with logging / clear cutting in October, within days, lasting for a month.

The “protection” provided by the project would be a pittance. It would protect against the worst storm likely in any two year period. What is needed is 50 year or more protection. They protect against a rain storm. We need protection against floods.

Cambridge and the DCR’s bizarre project fits bizarre projects by Cambridge and the DCR on the Charles River.

The leader of a “protective” group which claims to defending Alewife has been telling people to look at everything but the core reservation for something like 15 years. This is in spite of the fact that Cambridge has a City Council which claims to be environmental saints. The group has been fighting long shot fights on less important property in private ownership. The group has been telling people to ignore this bizarre needlessly destructive project by their friends.

The leader of the group has recently gone public in the Cambridge Chronicle supporting destruction of the irreplaceable core Alewife reservation in spite of the reservation’s excellence, excellence she has praised for years, and in spite of the fact that destroying the core Alewife reservation is downright silly.

I have 35 years experience working for the environment in Cambridge. I have been the most visible person standing up to the bizarre destruction on the Charles. Using the tool of zoning for environmental protection, I have written more successful zoning changes in the City of Cambridge than any other person not employed by the City of Cambridge.

My most visible victories are: (1) the Inn at Harvard, which Harvard wanted to build 72% larger and built to the lotline and (2) the return to the environment of the large parking lot which used to be located between Alewife Station and Route 2. I have downzoned approximately 85% of Massachusetts Avenue between Harvard University and City Hall.

My biggest problem in my environmental efforts has been “protective” groups which have connections to the Cambridge City Manager and City Council. These groups have a distressing tendency of achieving the opposite of what they claim to stand for.

The Alewife “protective” group has such connections and has just admitted it supports destruction of the core Alewife reservation.

It is not too late to save Alewife.

Governor Patrick has, apparently, blocked plans of Cambridge and the DCR to get Obama moneys to destroy hundreds of excellent trees on Memorial Drive between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge. The DCR lied that the trees were all diseased. The diseased trees were destroyed five years earlier. Governor Patrick received a copy of the DCR’s filing with the City of Cambridge which proved the diseased tree argument to be a lie.

I should think Belmont officials would be very interested in reality at Alewife and there are a number of things they could do.

Belmont has reps and senators who claim to be concerned about our world.

A lot can be done, but the outrageous and needless destruction is occurring almost immediately. And that parking lot will not remained unbuilt upon forever.

Press Release, Franciscan Fathers Bless the Animals of the Charles and Alewife

We have issued the following press release:

Press Release

Franciscan Fathers Bless the Animals of the Charles and Alewife

Contact: Robert J. La Trémouille, chairman, Friends of the White Geese, 617-283-7649 or boblat@yahoo.com.

On October 2, 2011, the Franciscan fathers of St. Anthony’s Shrine and Missionary Center blessed the Animals of the Charles and Alewife as part of their Franciscan Blessing of the Animals in celebration of the Feast of St. Francis of Assissi. The Franciscan Friars respected the needs of the resident animals by blessing them.

Services were conducted as an open air service in their block of Arch Street in Downtown Crossing, Boston, MA.

Robert J. La Trémouille, chairman of Friends of the White Geese presented as a representation of the Animals of the Charles and Alewife a plush raccoon which he carried with me.

The service was well attended, overwhelmingly by dogs with their masters. There was one cat.

The service was quite lovely. The dogs were uniformly well behaved. There was a significant amount of barking, but it was happy barking of dogs saying hello to their canine friends.

The Franciscans provided La Trémouille a certificate signed by Father Jim Kelly, Guardian and Executive Director of St. Anthony’s Shrine and Ministry Center indicating that “Animals of the Charles and Alewife received a special blessing for the Feast of St. Francis of Assissi” on Sunday, October 2, 2011.

The animals of the Charles River Basis are subject to ongoing abuse by Cambridge and its friends. This has extended to deliberate starvation of the Charles River White Geese, the most visible of the few remaining animals who have not been killed or driven out.

The animals of Alewife are about to be subjected to killing on mass. Killing will commence in October 2011 and last for a month as part of a massive logging and clear cutting project for “flood storage” which amounts to a pittance of the flood storage needed.

Directly across Cambridge Park Drive in Cambridge from destruction zone is a massive parking lot which could readily hold, if taken by eminent domain, a very large multiple of flood storage needed.

The Alewife area, as a result of overdevelopment allowed by Cambridge, has seen two storms in the last twenty years each of which normally would be the worst storm expected to occur in a 50 year period, 50 year storms. The massive destruction of trees and animals which is imminent will protect against two year storms, a fraction of the storage needed.

Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation admit the pittance of storage their destruction will provide, but have no intention to put the storage across Cambridge Park Drive where it could do good and would not kill a lot of animals.

The two have now officially declared the Charles River Basin off limits to resident animals. They have stated they will allow no use except as a “park” with “park” defined as no animals. While they were doing earlier destruction on the Charles, they specifically claimed they no intent to harm the Charles River White Geese who have lived on the Charles River as very valuable residents and tourist attractions for more than 30 years now..

For further details, please see our blog report at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/10/franciscan-fathers-bless-animals-of.html.

North Shore Flooding Emphasizes the extreme irresponsibility at Alewife

New England Cable News network this morning is dominated by pretty much non stop helicopter footage of the flooded Peabody, MA, downtown area. This flooding apparently occurred in a period of about an hour or so, with something like 3.5 inches of rain. The damage apparently extends over major parts of the Massachusetts North Shore region.

Flooding like this has occurred twice in the past twenty years at Alewife. http://www.openeyesvideo.com/Floodpix.html is a group of pictures of the flooding in 1997?

The extreme irresponsibility at Alewife is the imminent project which will destroy an irreplaceable virgin forest and untold thousands of animals for storm drainage which will only drain a tiny fraction of the flood impact by the two major storms.

The con game, and so much in Cambridge is con games, is the constant nonsense that they are protecting, and the nonsense is proven nonsense when you ask the level of protection. TWO YEAR STORMS, the worst rainstorm in the average two year period. The flood danger is those two fifty year storms.

Directly across Cambridge Park Drive from the destruction area is that massive parking lot which should be able to hold 50 year storms or more.

The difference can be seen on Google Maps, http://maps.google.com, satellite view. Go to 100 Cambridge Park Drive, Cambridge, MA. Look at the virgin forest above and the massive parking lot below. Too much of the virgin forest has been destroyed in “preliminary” work, but the satellite map is from earlier photos.

As with the repeated bizarre environmental destruction on the Charles River, the destruction at Alewife is impossible to explain as the behavior of normal, responsible people.

The only explanation approaching reason is flat out contempt for the environment and its animals.

Cambridge and the DCR are doing things which can only be explained by contempt for nature and nature’s beings.

It is made much easier by the massive organization in Cambridge of which the fake protective groups are only the visible part.

They quite simply have no shame, and they know their machine will protect them.

Discontinuance of Cambridge (MA) Election Question Reports

I have been religiously following the Cambridge Chronicle’s questioning of City Council candidates in the forthcoming November elections: “Do you think it is time for a new City Manger?”

I have seen enough.

The candidates are split as to whether they would rehire Cambridge City Manager Robert Healy when his latest contract ends.

The candidates make no mention of the decision in Monteiro v. City of Cambridge in which judge and jury at the superior court level and the appeals court panel rather clearly have indicated that Healy should be fired for malfeasance in office. Under these decisions, it is quite certain that the courts would look favorably on Healy being fired without his golden parachute and possibly without his pension.

For the city council candidates to treat these very serious and meaningful communications as non entities shows once again that reality is irrelevant in Cambridge, MA, politics.

I have better things to do than report on silliness.

If any of these answers approaches reality, I will let you know. However, I am not at all positive that I will spend a lot of time reading this nonsense.

Thank you Chronicle for the question. It was a nice try.

Franciscan Fathers Bless the Animals of the Charles and Alewife

Today, October 2, 2011, St. Anthony’s Shrine and Missionary Center conducted an open air service in their block of Arch Street in Downtown Crossing, Boston, MA.

They conducted the Franciscan Blessing of the Animals in celebration of the Feast of St. Francis of Assissi.

Included in their blessing were the Animals of the Charles and Alewife.

The service was well attended, overwhelmingly by dogs with their masters. I did see one cat. I carried with me as a stand in for the Animals of the Charles and Alewife a lovely plush racoon loaned to me by my sister Jeanne.

At the service, I was pleased to say hello to Maynard S. Clark who persuaded me to participate and, more importantly, Rev. Jim McIntosh, with whom Maynard put me in contact to clear our participation.

The service was quite lovely. The dogs were uniformly well behaved. There was a significant amount of barking, but it was happy barking of dogs saying hello to their canine friends.

The Franciscans were kind enough to give me a certificate signed by Father Jim Kelly, Guardian and Executive Director of St. Anthony’s Shrine and Ministry Center indicating that “Animals of the Charles and Alewife received a special blessing for the Feast of St. Francis of Assissi” on Sunday, October 2, 2011.

When you get away from the pols who dominate politics in Cambridge and their friends in the state bureaucracy, the Department of Conservation and Recreation, people are very uniformly decent and commendable. The good reception by the Franciscans was quite lovely and a very pleasant breath of fresh air away from what is the political world in Cambridge, MA, USA.

The animals of the Charles River Basis are subject to ongoing heartless abuse by Cambridge and its friends. The animals of Alewife are about to be subjected to killing on mass.

Whatever excuse the destroyers can get away with they use. The excuses are commonly decidedly bizarre.

At Alewife, which they will destroy within days, they even admit they cannot achieve their stated goals. They do not admit they can achieve their stated goals, meaningful flood protection, by taking the massive parking lot directly across Cambridge Park Drive and using that for flood protection. Why not?

Why have they killed off or driven away pretty much all of the animals on the Charles River Basin? Why are they starving and abusing the most visible remaining residents, the Charles River White Geese?

The destoyers have publicly stated that, on the Charles River Basin, they have contempt for animals. At Alewife, they have not done the really horrible thing yet. Now they are lying that they are decent human beings. Once they do the killing, as they “clarified” their position on the Charles, after the mass killing, Cambridge and the DCR will brag of their heartlessness as they brag of their heartlessness on the Charles.

Once it is too late.

Reality is the ruling of the superior court judge and jury and the appeals court in Monteiro where Cambridge was found guilty of destroying a woman’s life because she filed a civil rights complaint: “Reprehensible”, $3.5 million penal damages, “ample evidence [of] outrageous actions.” They have paid $8.3 million so far.

Monteiro is not isolated. Monteiro is just one decision obtained because the representative of the victim were willing and able to spend millions of dollars standing up to these people. The Monteiro case was kept away from their fake protective groups.

As I said, it is always a pleasure to get away from the “reprehensible” situation in Cambridge. The Franciscans are commendable. The Franciscans fit in with a very decent world, outside the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.