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.
