Monday, June 30, 2014

Mass. Pike (I90): Rapid Transit or another Cambridge con?

1. Green Line A, more detail.
2. Cambridge Machine proposes the Mass. Pike be rebuilt where Green Line A should go.


1. Green Line A, more detail.

Green Line A is the workable way for rapid transit to service Harvard’s new Medical School location.


It is the way to connect the Harvard Medical School to the world.  On one end, it would connect to the existing Green Line B / Commonwealth Avenue and then to Kenmore Square.  On the other end, it would connect to the existing Harvard Square Station by a tunnel which continues to exist but which has not been in active use since the Red Line went beyond Harvard Square.  It was intended to connect to the then subway storage yards, which are now Harvard’s JF Kennedy School of Government and the Charles Hotel complex, and the JF Kennedy Park on Memorial Drive.

Green Line A must fit between the Mass. Pike viaduct (soon to be torn down) and Boston University.

Green Line A could create stops at BU West, the new Harvard Medical School, and Harvard Business School, but the key stops for the neighborhood point of view would be two on North Harvard Street, one at Cambridge Street, the second at Franklin Street or Western Avenue.

I am going to have to do work on this off computer, but, here is the MassDOT map of the future Harvard Medical School.  The viaduct is the upper right area.  The middle is the future Harvard Medical School plus whatever gets created in this rearrangement.  The left side of this triangle is Cambridge Street, Allston, MA.  The small structures to the left of Cambridge Street are the residential neighborhood.

I handed out my previous map to the MassDOT committee last Wednesday evening.  It shows Green Line A placed in the right side of the viaduct, where the Cambridge Machine now proposes to move the viaduct, thus preventing Green Line A.  The better concept for Green Line A (soon to be placed on paper) would run Green Line A through the Medical School area to the street which hits Cambridge Street perpendicularly pretty close to the middle point of the neighborhood.  This is North Harvard Street.

The tall buildings next to the viaduct are Boston University’s new dorms.  That would be the first stop on the Green Line A.  Somewhere in the middle of the Harvard Medical School area would be the second stop.  After leaving the dorms, Green Line A would go underground and stay underground.  This would be “cut and cover”.  Basically, it would be created by digging an open trench for the subway line and then covering the trench over with highway or a building.

Storage for cars used on this line should be created parallel to plans for storage of trains servicing South Station.

The third stop would come at the intersection of North Harvard Street and Cambridge Street

Following North Harvard Street to the left, just before it goes off the map, it strikes another street which comes up from the lower right.  This is Franklin Street and is a reasonable square abutting the neighborhood.  This should be the second neighborhood stop.

Proceeding off this map, North Harvard Street goes to Harvard Square.  It travels, across Western Avenue, past the soon to be destroyed Charlesview formerly affordable housing complex, and between Harvard Stadium and Harvard Business School.

Green Line A should turn left just before Harvard Stadium, and then turn right behind Harvard Stadium, proceeding upwards toward Harvard Square and that still existing tunnel.  It would go under the Charles River.

A stop should be created for Harvard Business School / Harvard Stadium under North Harvard Street where Green Line A turns.

Behind Harvard Stadium should be created an underground layover area for trains waiting to go into Harvard Station.  A small yard could be created in this area to provide flexibility in access to the stump end at Harvard Station, all underground.

2. Cambridge Machine proposes the Mass. Pike be rebuilt where Green Line A should go.

A very professional engineering type presented this package to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation committee last Wednesday night.

The proposal would move the Mass. Pike viaduct on top of the area needed for Green Line A.

The result, of course, would be to shaft North Allston by restricting rapid transit to the future Harvard Medical School.  Because Green Line A could not exist.  The viaduct would be moved where Green Line A needs to be.

By contrast, Harvard’s Gold Plated Red Line extension would only have one stop, for the Harvard Medical School, between Harvard Square and, possibly, the Harvard / Longwood hospitals, although another stop might be proposed near the Fenway Park stop of the Green Line D (Riverside) Branch.

The biggie, of course in the Cambridge Machine proposal would be the environmental destruction in Cambridge associated with that proposal, but that NEVER gets mentioned.

After all, the con is the con.

Sunday, June 29, 2014

Cambridge, MA, USA City Council: Attack, lies of holiness, beautiful victims.

1. General.
2. Beautiful victims on June 29, 2014.
3. Cambridge City Council claims holiness against the Other Guy.  How dare circus proprietors who are less vile than the Cambridge City Council misbehave!
4. Repeat of response to Cambridge City Council lie that they have no responsibilities on the Charles River.



1. General.

The Cambridge City Council destroys, destroys, destroys and lies that it is holier than thou by yelling at the other guy.

Cambridge killed acres of resident animals when it destroyed acres of the irreplaceable Alewife Reservation.

Cambridge joins the state bureaucrats in their goal of killing off or driving away all resident animals on the Charles in multiple ways.  The most visible victims are the Charles River White Geese, but many, many more victims are not as visible.  Deliberate starvation with a bizarre introduced wall of vegetation on a Charles River where ALL bordering vegetation is destroyed twice a year unless it is starving beautiful, valuable animals.

The outrages in the Magazine Beach / BU Bridge area are highly visible and highly ignored.  While this reprehensible body destroys, destroys, destroy on the Charles River , it loudly claim it has nothing to do with the Charles River, while yelling at circus proprietors who are only passing through Cambridge on their way elsewhere.

These extreme examples of holiness are blatant lies to fool people into thinking Cambridge has a responsible city government.

So the outrage on the Cambridge Common is going forward, no trees yet.  The outrages on the Charles River are allowed to stay in place protected by hypocritical company unions.  The Cambridge City Council has its own attacks on the Charles pending on the Grand Junction while designating to the Cambridge Machine the dirty work on the Mass. Pike and in House Bill H4099 destroying hundreds of trees and animal habitat from the Charles River White Geese’s Destroyed Nesting Area at the BU Bridge to the Longfellow Bridge, the second bridge to the east.

And one of their Cambridge Machine Groups is fighting in the Mass. Pike discussions to make things worse in Cambridge.  That one probably tomorrow.

2. Beautiful victims on June 29, 2014.

The Cambridge City Council is starving the Charles River White Geese by walling off their feeding place for most of the last 33 years with a bizarre wall of introduced vegetation which they paid for and do not want to know about.  Their coconspirators are joining in multiple attacks on them in their tiny foodless prison for which the Cambridge City Council is working on plans to make worse.

The first is an extended family shot, Grandma Brown Beauty, a child / grandchild, a baby.  The geese are very well organized.  Whenever they have a baby, as much as they can, they have three adults protecting the baby, the parents and a babysitter.  This babysitter is Brown Beauty, the daughter of the assassinated patriarch.  The Cambridge City Council was neutral with maximum guilt.  

When the killer of multiple nesting geese and of the leader of the gaggle graduated to rape and murder in the same location, the city council discussed the rape and murder for an hour.  They just did not want to know where their copycat committed the act.

And they are making their outrages worse and worse, while lying of their own holiness.



This guy is the other vestigial White Goose with Brown China markings.



This is one of the offspring, either of Brown Beauty or of the Toulouse who joined the gaggle.



Lovely day for a swim.



3. Cambridge City Council claims holiness against the Other Guy.  How dare circus proprietors who are less vile than the Cambridge City Council misbehave!

The latest con game, yelling at Circus proprietors (and do not look at the real record of the Cambridge City Council) may be read at:  


4. Repeat of response to Cambridge City Council lie that they have no responsibilities on the Charles River.

From letter to Cambridge City Council, June 11, 2014.

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

City Council has no business on Memorial Drive?

I have been hearing some strange comments that the Cambridge City Council has no business getting involved in Memorial Drive.

Save the world but don’t talk to us about Cambridge.

Last I heard, the Cambridge City Council has routinely spoken out on matters in South America, Africa, and wherever.  Memorial Drive, by contrast, is in Cambridge, MA, and this destruction was run past the Cambridge Development Department.  

The contrast between saving the world and being “neutral” on irresponsible destruction in Cambridge, MA is striking to someone looking for the truth.

“Underpasses”

Additionally, the Cambridge City Council has blessed the “underpasses” outrage which has been condemned by MassDOT.  This destruction is targeted at the Western Avenue, River Street and Anderson (Harvard Square) Bridges and their environs.

Last I heard, the destructive “underpasses” you have gone on record supporting were located on Memorial Drive.

The most visible proponent has called the $24 million (H3332, predecessor to H4009) for massive tree destruction incidental to $4 million for the destructive “underpasses.”  So it would appear that the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” claims that your irresponsible support of $4 million destruction included even more irresponsible support of $24 million destruction.

Magazine Beach

Additionally, the Cambridge City Council spent between one and two million on the project at Magazine Beach which included destructive work which was either kept secret and which was a flat out lie directly in conflict with public contrary positions.  Portions of your achievement there include a bizarre wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River.  

The supposedly sacred “Charles River Master Plan” called for a lawn to the river.  It was modified to undo the blatant lie.  

You were promised better playing fields.  But you installed sickly grass to replace the healthy responsible grasses there for more than half a century.  You then fed it poisons to keep it alive, and then put in a complicated drainage system to drain off the poisons keeping alive the sickly introduced grasses.  The drainage system decreased the size of playing fields in contrast to the improvements which you were promised.

Your manager of the project repeatedly lied of “no intent” to harm the Charles River White Geese.  You have blocked them from their food of most of the last 33 years at Magazine Beach and have proceeded to starve them.  This does not sound like “no intent” to harm, but I speak English.  Additionally your agent has publicly bragged of starving them. 

The fine print of the “Charles River Master Plan” calls for killing off or driving away all resident animals, an achievement you and the DCR did in many acres when you destroyed irreplaceable woods at the Alewife reservation with the assistance of Company Union groups.

My letter of September 19, 2012 to the City Council is attached to my letter on the Grand Junction highway proposal being filed at the same time as this letter.

It includes persuasive photos of the outrage at Magazine Beach in its appendix 3.

Last I heard, Magazine Beach is on Memorial Drive.

Grand Junction bike highway to be extended beyond common sense.

You recently authorized preparation for funding of a bike highway along the Grand Junction.  

The responsible ending for this bike highway would come where the Grand Junction approached the bend in Vassar Street.  There is a tiny distance which would need to be taken through a parking lot there to connect to Vassar Street the distance of one building on either side of Vassar Street to Memorial Drive.

Instead of the responsible ending, the plans you are organizing funding for go beyond this point and cause major destruction in the formerly lush area to which you have confined the Charles River White Geese.  Plus you would install a fence dividing the animal habitat at the railroad tracks, preventing direct access between two areas to which major destruction has been done by your accomplice.

The supposed plans show photographs all over the place but lie through omission by not showing the goose habitat.  Your friends have helped you in the heartless abuse of these beautiful animals by doing very terrible things to the environment in that location already.

Photos of the destruction areas are below and in the appendix.

False description to you of state plans for the Grand Junction area.

An excellent example of the quality of the staff with which you are working is further information which was suppressed in the 2000s when the City of Cambridge upzoned the area near Putnam Avenue and the railroad tracks.  

The staff clearly communicated that, if the Urban Ring subway went forward, a train stop would go there.  Your staff lied by telling you there was only one Urban Ring option.  At the end of this report, I will provide the MBTA plans for both the alternative options in Cambridge.  The one your staff has lied does not exist was adopted as an option in 1991, five years after I first suggested it.  The one which “does not exist” is the likely winner of the two options.

Appendix 1 to the attachment, pages 2, 5, 6 and 7 provide the MBTA’s maps.  The Kenmore Crossing is the one that the Development Department has lied for more than 20 years that it does not exist, and which is now most likely to be the winner.

Summary on argument which should not exist.

I have no respect for claims that the Cambridge City Council has no business on Memorial Drive.  

The claim translates as a claim that the Cambridge City Council has a right to destroy but not to defend the environment.  The claim has the same value as the Development Department Staff’s 20 year insistence that the Urban Ring option which is likely to be the winner does not exist.

Unexercised rights of the Cambridge City Council on Memorial Drive.

The deal by which you inflicted destruction on Magazine Beach included a provision that the City of Cambridge would take over management.

That has not happened.

I would anticipate it has not happened because the Cambridge City Council does not want to “know” of the outrages achieved there by Cambridge and the DCR.

Exercise your rights.  Insist first, however, that the bizarre wall be treated the same way as bordering vegetation everywhere else on the Charles River Basin, and be chopped down.

Insist that the poisons be stopped and the responsible grasses returned.

Insist that the playing fields delivered to you be the same or better than they were before the destruction commenced.

Insist that the expansion of this outrage blessed through corrupt action of the local Company Union not take place.

The outrage on Memorial Drive, the secret part of the Grand Junction proposal.

The supposed plans do not show what you are destroying.  This is part of the usual packages of omissions.  Keep it secret.  I will go into this outrage in a separate communication concerning this deliberately secret destruction.

Conclusion.

I beg of you.

You claim to be pro environment.

This outrage is most definitely not pro environment.  It is highly destructive of the environment and exactly the opposite of your claims of being pro environment.

Please oppose House Bill H4009, Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

Saturday, June 28, 2014

Lovely Blessing of the Animals in Jamaica Plain, Boston, USA

I want to thank the folks at the First Baptist Church in Jamaica Plain for their lovely Blessing of the Animals this afternoon, and for their invitation to Friends of the White Geese.

Regrettably, members of the gaggle are very loath to leave their home, so I brought a stand in provided by my sister Jeanne, a lovely little white baby waterbird doll.

The folks from First Baptist prepared a very thoughtful welcoming, including photos of dogs, cats, and even one Mallard.

Their address is

First Baptist Church in Jamaica Plain
633 Center Street
Jamaica Plain, MA 02130
617-524-3992 / 508-840-6479
kyannabeech@live.com

Here are a few photos of participants.  Dogs tend to be the most social animals.  A number of them happily enjoyed the day.





I apologize for the paucity of photos.  I had a good time.  I spent so much time patting dogs that I forgot to create much of a photo record.  And I am afraid that I realized that I had messed up only when I went to post the photos.

It was a lovely day, a lot of nice people and uniformly nice dogs.

Jamaica Plain is a neighborhood of Boston on the other side of Brookline and the Charles River from Cambridge.  It is close, but separated.  It has a very significant former Cambridge population.  And it has neighborhoods which are significantly less dense than Cambridge.  Jamaica Plain may be the most popular single destination for folks driven out of Cambridge by the Cambridge costs.

Sunday, June 22, 2014

Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA, Babies enjoy the Charles River

1. Babies enjoy the Charles River.
2. Links to latest reports of outrages.
3. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
4. Tip.

1. Babies enjoy the Charles River.

Here are some photos from June 18, 2014.

The proud parents took the two babies I have been following swimming.

They enjoyed themselves.

The area they went swimming off is near the big tree which is beloved by the gaggle.  Fortunately, the destruction has been minimal in this tiny, beloved area.

The photos start in the Charles River and follow them leaving the river and returning to dry ground.








2. Links to latest reports of outrages.

The plans for destruction under House Bill H4009 are in my letter to the Cambridge City Council posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/h4009-destruction-of-hundreds-of-trees.html

These are the official plans posted when they sought Obama moneys, lying of disease to the public.  They have been fighting to destroy these trees for 10 years.  Do not be conned.  Any deviation from these plans will be minor.

The exact citation is House Bill H4009 is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

a. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
b. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

On June 3, 2014, I posted on YouTube my presentation of that letter, at http://youtu.be/FgQ9ojVuMxM.

My objection to the Cambridge City Council on the Grand Junction highway proposal is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/cambridge-ma-usa-destructive-grand.html.

3. Contacts: Protect against destruction.





I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4009 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

4. Tip.

The key with the Cambridge City Council is that their weakness is a very distressing and continued lie that they are pro-environment.

One of the major purposes of the fake company union groups is to perpetuate this lie.

It is a very major weakness, but the lack of response to complaint concerning their destruction on the Cambridge Common is not encouraging.

There are four out of nine newcomers.  One might be subject to persuasion.  The balance could be possibly be embarrassed into decency.  I have major zoning victories as an environmental technique in Cambridge.  It was common to get approvals from the “conservatives.”  The “liberals” were then embarrassed into compliance with their claimed positions.

The current situation on the Cambridge Common gives good reason to question whether any of the newcomers have environmental decency.

Of major importance with legislators is a widespread contempt for the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its destructiveness.  Cambridge, MA, is a distinctive entity which is in sync with the problems that the DCR embodies.

Friday, June 20, 2014

Cambridge, MA, USA Common: NINE city councilors start destruction of excellent trees.

1. Bad Report.
a. Introduction.
b. The outrage Thursday evening.
c. Past Postings.
d. The record.
e. Leafleting.
2. Links to latest reports of outrages.
3. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
4. Tip.



1. Bad Report.

a. Introduction.

The biggest problem with the Cambridge City Council is that the non stop lies of environmental sainthood leaves you with the automatic impression that “they would never stoop so low.”

That is a very severe error.

Thursday evening, June 19, 2014, at about 5 pm or so I was driving past the Cambridge Common.  I keep making the mistake of thinking, “They would never stoop so low.”

The Cambridge City Council has taken the first step toward destruction of those excellent trees on the Cambridge Common.

b. The outrage Thursday evening.

Here is the horror I saw Thursday evening.

Trees protected by wood will not be destroyed.

Trees not protected by wood are highly likely to be destroyed.

I did not look for the orange mark of death, but the situation looks thorough, and outrageous.

The view coming from Harvard Square is horrendous.













c. Past Postings.

I posted here a copy of my letter with photos to the Cambridge City Council.  It was dated May 26, and delivered in hand on May 27, and due May 29 to make the June 2, 2014, city council meeting.

My photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

(A) http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
(B) http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

The letter gives a number of excellent photos of the impending outrageous destruction on the Cambridge Common next to Harvard Square.

My presentation of that letter live on my Cable Show on June 1, 2014, from my post on this blog, is posted on YouTube at http://youtu.be/FgQ9ojVuMxM.

d. The record.

I have checked the city clerk’s record of last Monday’s meeting.  There was no action Monday.  Next Monday is a special format under which normal business is not conducted.  Nine city councilor s are fully aware of this and had a chance to take action last Monday.

There is any sign of decency from any member of the Cambridge City Council.

All five returning city councilors reaffirmed their destructiveness by silence.

All new four city councilors have adopted the destructiveness by silence.  Silence in the face of outrage is acceptance, confirmation.

NINE city councilors are destroying those excellent trees.

e. Leafleting.

I was on my way to a city council committee meeting at a school in West Cambridge.  The leaflet I passed out in front of the school features the outrage on the Charles River with a box providing the URL for the YouTube presentation of the letter to the Cambridge City Council on Cambridge Common.

I pointed out to various people that the Cambridge City Council’s record is consistently reprehensible.

Destruction on the Charles River.
Destruction of acres of the Alewife reservation.
Destruction of the Cambridge Common.

The responses were knowing and not happy looks.

I did speak with one of the new councilors.  I got a very carefully worded no comment.

2. Links to latest reports of outrages.

The plans for destruction under House Bill H4009 are in my letter to the Cambridge City Council posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/h4009-destruction-of-hundreds-of-trees.html

These are the official plans posted when they sought Obama moneys, lying of disease to the public.  They have been fighting to destroy these trees for 10 years.  Do not be conned.  Any deviation from these plans will be minor.

The exact citation is House Bill H4009 is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

a. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
b. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

On June 3, 2014, I posted on YouTube my presentation of that letter, at http://youtu.be/FgQ9ojVuMxM.

My objection to the Cambridge City Council on the Grand Junction highway proposal is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/cambridge-ma-usa-destructive-grand.html.

3. Contacts: Protect against destruction.





I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4009 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

4. Tip.

The key with the Cambridge City Council is that their weakness is a very distressing and continued lie that they are pro-environment.

One of the major purposes of the fake company union groups is to perpetuate this lie.

It is a very major weakness, but the lack of response to complaint concerning their destruction on the Cambridge Common is not encouraging.

There are four out of nine newcomers.  One might be subject to persuasion.  The balance could be possibly be embarrassed into decency.  I have major zoning victories as an environmental technique in Cambridge.  It was common to get approvals from the “conservatives.”  The “liberals” were then embarrassed into compliance with their claimed positions.

The current situation on the Cambridge Common gives good reason to question whether any of the newcomers have environmental decency.

Of major importance with legislators is a widespread contempt for the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its destructiveness.  Cambridge, MA, is a distinctive entity which is in sync with the problems that the DCR embodies.

Monday, June 16, 2014

Charles River White Geese:  Grandma, babies and a reprehensible government agency.

1. Reprehensible Government Agency.
2. Grandma, babies and the crushed stone.
3. Links to latest reports of outrages.
4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
5. Tip.


Here are a few photos from today, June 16, 2014.

1. Reprehensible Government Agency.

The irresponsible crushed rock dominates the core part of the nesting area.

This stuff was “properly” dumped as part of two highways supposedly making up for work related to the BU Bridge repairs.

When the irresponsible railroad workers used the most sensitive area for parking, they dumped more crushed stone because the area had been denuded by the Charles River “Conservancy” and by prior irresponsible workers.  And the workers were too lazy to walk a few hundred feet from the area under the Memorial Drive overpass.

When they left, “somebody” came back and dumped another load.



In the middle of this outrage, the Executive Director of the Cambridge Conservation Commission condemned the irresponsible parking and the most destructive manager told them to get out of the tiny area protected by the Cambridge Conservation Commission but encouraged the irresponsible parking outside the tiny protected area.

The destructive manager goes back and forth between lying about being a decent human being and bragging about how irresponsible his agency is.  Their goal is to kill off or drive away as many resident animals as they can get away with.  So he lies “no intent to harm” and brags about starving them.

2. Grandma, babies and the crushed stone.

In my last goose photos, I pointed out a gander with vestigial Brown China markings and commented that there was another with similar vestigial markings, but I thought she might be dead.

Brown Beauty lives!!!

I have the same problem, thankfully, with Brown Beauty as I do with the Charles River White Ducks.  I do not see her a few times and I think she is dead.

She is alive and in the nesting area.

I will not do a photo by photo analysis, but here are photos from today.

There are a couple of photos of a single baby who is changing colors from yellow to white.  He is approaching adolescence.

A number of other photos follow the pair I have been keeping an eye on.  Those photos also include a brown goose.  That is Brown Beauty.  She is now elderly, but she is now with us.  18 years old.

You may notice among other members of the gaggle, various geese who have black markings mixed in with their whiteness.  These would be grandchildren of Brown Beauty or offspring of the Toulouse Goose who was dropped in the area in 2000.  My memory is that the black markings, at least for Brown Beauty’s progeny, show up in the second generation.  Black Markings also appear in the progeny of the Toulouse, but I do not recall if her first generation babies were like that.  Brown Beauty’s babies have small black markings at most.  It is some of Brown Beauty’s second generation offspring who have the significant black markings.

The vestigial Brown China male is from a different family in the gaggle.






This last photo is a good breakout of the baby pair, their parents, and Brown Beauty.  The two babies are center front close together.  One is half in the shadow.  Behind them and to the right are their parents.  Behind them and to the left is Brown Beauty.

In the preceding two photos, the family gets further and further away from the camera.  The two photos before that are of the baby nearing adolescence.

And this last photo is an excellent demonstration of the rottenness of the "people" with whom we are dealing. In the rear is the eastern of the two formally created pathways.  You can see where the path ends.  The rest of the crushed stone is pure rottenness.

All a gift of a Sierra Club branch which praises environmental destroyers.


3. Links to latest reports of outrages.

The plans for destruction under House Bill H4009 are in my letter to the Cambridge City Council posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/h4009-destruction-of-hundreds-of-trees.html

These are the official plans posted when they sought Obama moneys, lying of disease to the public.  They have been fighting to destroy these trees for 10 years.  Do not be conned.  Any deviation from these plans will be minor.

The exact citation is House Bill H4009 is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

a. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
b. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

On June 3, 2014, I posted on YouTube my presentation of that letter, at http://youtu.be/FgQ9ojVuMxM.

My objection to the Cambridge City Council on the Grand Junction highway proposal is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/cambridge-ma-usa-destructive-grand.html.

4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.





I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4009 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

5. Tip.

The key with the Cambridge City Council is that their weakness is a very distressing and continued lie that they are pro-environment.

One of the major purposes of the fake company union groups is to perpetuate this lie.

It is a very major weakness, but the lack of response to complaint concerning their destruction on the Cambridge Common is not encouraging.

There are four out of nine newcomers.  One might be subject to persuasion.  The balance could be possibly be embarrassed into decency.  I have major zoning victories as an environmental technique in Cambridge.  It was common to get approvals from the “conservatives.”  The “liberals” were then embarrassed into compliance with their claimed positions.

Of major importance with legislators is a widespread contempt for the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its destructiveness.  Cambridge, MA, is a distinctive entity which is in sync with the problems that the DCR embodies.

Sunday, June 15, 2014

Charles River Update: Cambridge, MA, USA City Council, MassDOT, Sierra Club

1. Cambridge City Council.
2. Massachusetts Department of Transportation.
a. Harvard’s Created Housing Area - The location of the meeting.
b. Meeting report.
3. Boston Sierra Club.


1. Cambridge City Council.

A few weeks ago, I filed photos of excellent trees on the Cambridge Common slated for destruction, many because they block the view.

All five continuing Cambridge City Councilors voted to destroy.  All four new Cambridge City Councilors seemed “neutral.”

I have kept an eye of the City Clerk’s report on the City Council meetings and agendas since then.

I have seen no signs of environmental decency from any of them on this outrage.

And remember (see point 3) the Boston Sierra Club has repeatedly endorsed incumbents / candidates for Cambridge City Council.

The key to the endorsements, however, is the very visible presence in the Boston Sierra Club was unapologetic members of the reprehensible Cambridge Machine.

2. Massachusetts Department of Transportation.

Last Wednesday, MassDOT conducted the third meeting of its advisory committee on the major work proposed for Interstate 90 (Mass. Pike) near the Charles River.

a. Harvard’s Created Housing Area - The location of the meeting.

The address of the meeting was new to me.

It turned out to be the former location of the larger portion of the neighborhood Shopping Center on Western Avenue in Allston.  This is the shopping center Harvard destroyed by refusing to rent the stores in what is now the former location.

The tactic was blatant hostage taking targeted at the Charlesview affordable housing at Western Avenue and North Harvard Street which Harvard wanted to turn into part of its empire.

Harvard succeeded in the hostage taking and the owners of Charlesview “voluntarily” agreed to sell Charlesview and to move the facility to the location of the former stores.

I drove past the mostly abandoned Charlesview housing on the way to the meeting.  It was very depressing.

I lived almost in view of the project when it was constructed.

The meeting was in the middle of the replacement housing area, the destroyed shopping center, in a large meeting room.

I have driven past the facility many times but have never had an opportunity to use it.

The worst thing I can say about this created neighborhood is that it gives the impression of being distressingly successful except it seems to be short of parking, and it is easily twice the density of Charlesview.  The comparison is between

(1) a 70's brutalistic project surrounded by parking and not overly dense, and
(2) Boston’s Beacon Hill or Boston’s South End newly created, although perhaps denser than the South End.

It looks great, but it is dense.

And it overwhelms its area.

b. Meeting report.

The presentation team gave its first package ideas for rebuilding the Mass. Pike viaduct.

This rearrangement seems to be the key behind perhaps all the destruction on the Charles River itself and on the Cambridge side.  Since we are dealing with secretive, dishonest people, it is impossible to fully state the situation.

Dealing with MassDOT is strikingly different from dealing with the rotters with whom I am constantly exposed in Cambridge and its state friends.

MassDOT seems to be decent human beings who are not perfect, a striking improvement over the stench coming from Cambridge and its accomplices.

The Mass. Pike viaduct currently holds the Mass. Pike and has room for very little else.  The rotters seem to be trying to overload the Mass. Pike viaduct to prevent responsible use of the area, and to maximize the benefits to them of environmental destruction.

The proposal did not please a lot of people who spoke.

To understand the proposal, I am inserting a copy of my proposal from a Green Line A spur between the current viaduct and Boston University.



The Mass. Pike in this area is eight lanes, four lanes in either direction.  The team proposed to tear down and rebuild the facility in place plus new construction to the north of the existing highway.  It is the opinion of MassDOT that the Mass. Pike needs to be widened to bring it up to something vaguely approaching current standards.

The team proposed to build two lanes to the north of the existing highway in an elevated structure, then tear down the two lanes next to the new lanes, then rebuild in that place, repeating the process until completed.

That would allow Green Line A.  That strikes me as a very major positive.

A number of folks objected to the harm to property owned by the reprehensible Department of Conservation and Recreation supposedly for open space.  I am not positive about the nature of the area impacted.  The area I am aware of is the area fronting on the Charles River, which is very tight between the Soldiers Field Road parkway and the Charles River.  This area clearly has been used by waterfowl which have been harmed by maneuverings of the bureaucrats and their environmental destroyers, destruction which always seems to be of no importance to the types who were doing the objecting.

A lot of neighborhood people asked to concentrate on the plans for the new street network to be built near Allston’s Cambridge Street in place of the existing Mass. Pike exits there.

I think that will be discussed at the next meeting, on the 25th.  At the same time, the planners promised to work further on options.

3. Boston Sierra Club.

I have objected to the endorsements of environmentally destructive Cambridge pols as environmental saints, with the assistance of the Cambridge Machine.  I have commented that this situation has turned the Boston Sierra Club into just another of the Cambridge Machine’s fake groups.

The following is an exchange from facebook, presented to give a new approach to the Sierra Club.  I am deficient in my understanding of things because my world is a truly rotten situation in Cambridge, MA, and the truly rotten situation constantly praises the Sierra Club.

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

Robert J. La Trémouille shared The Rainforest Site's photo.
June 7 at 11:45am

Where I come from, the killers of our Earth are endorsed by the local Sierra Club as environmental saints.


Bruce Stegiel 
Where I come from the Sierra Club is paid to do so.

Robert J. La Trémouille
That is interesting. It sounds like you are saying this problem is endemic.

Bruce Stegiel 
Yes. Follow the money. Ego plus money equals public policy stands.

Robert J. La Trémouille
 I have just finished a very extended post on the Charles River White Geese Blog for today.

I do not know if this exchange is usable, but I presume it is ok with you to use it.

Bruce Stegiel 
Sure.

The final comment is dated June 8 at 3:32 pm


Saturday, June 14, 2014

H4009, destruction of hundreds of trees and animal habitat on Charles River, Complaint to Cambridge, MA, City Council


1. Report.
[a. Opposition.]
[b. Documents.]
[c. Response to claims city council has no business defending the Charles River from attack.]
2. Cambridge Machine position.
3. Links to latest reports of outrages.
4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
5. Tip.


1. Report.

On Wednesday, June 11, 2014, I filed a complaint with the Cambridge City Council seeking their objections to the H4009, bill in the Massachusetts legislature which will destroy hundreds of excellent trees on the Cambridge side of the Charles River if passed.  The key part is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The letter is structured to present the objections, the plans for destruction, and then my response to the standard con that the Cambridge City Council has no business objecting to destruction in Cambridge on the Charles River.  It has already been posted on line and will be formally transmitted to the Cambridge City Council Monday night.  There are only two “communications” on the agenda, this one and my letter posted yesterday, objecting to the destructive aspects of the Grand Junction proposal.

The City Clerk has posted the letter at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140616%20latremouille%20memorial%20dr_1.PDF

Here is my reprint of the letter.

It read as follows, and I will insert the relevant graphics.

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

To the Honorable, the Cambridge City Council:

[a. Opposition.]

I am writing individually and as chair of Friends of the White Geese, an Attorney General registered non profit since 2001.

I request you oppose destruction associated with House Bill H4009.

I very strongly think that the Cambridge City Council should go on record opposing moneys included in House Bill H4009, Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.  This is the much more specific spinoff of H3332 which included $24 million for destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge on Memorial Drive and $4 million for “underpasses” under the next three highway bridges destruction which has been condemned by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation as a waste of money and a waste of natural resources.

This is not a minor situation.  As is demonstrated by the below plans, this proposal would destroy hundreds of excellent trees.  It would devastate Cambridge’s treasure of Memorial Drive.

This destruction was coordinated between the Department of Conservation and Recreation and Cambridge city staff.  It has been rejected when Obama moneys were sought in 2009.  The lie to the public then was that the trees were diseased.  The below plans clearly show no diseased trees.

The closest any entity fighting for destruction of these trees comes to supporting destruction is the local Company Union whose position translates as: It is anti Charles River to defend the Charles River.  But have they got a deal for you.  A comparable Company Union used similar arguments to achieve first stage governmental destruction of the irreplaceable Alewife woodlands.

On pages 3 through 10 are the destruction plans including a photo of the most visible single victim, the excellent now mature grove at the Memorial Drive split.

This grove would be devastated and these trees are the smaller of the victims.  This destruction is even viler than the currently impending destruction of the Cambridge Common.

The Cambridge City Council proudly proclaims it is pro environment.

THIS IS THE ENVIRONMENT.  These hundreds of trees should not be wasted.  The world needs these trees a lot more than the contractors paid to destroy them need the money they get paid to destroy.

I will follow the plans with multiple arguments rebutting the nonsensical Cambridge position that the Cambridge City Council should be bothered with destruction on the Charles River by its ongoing accomplice the Department of Conservation and Recreation.  These responses to this nonsensical position start on page 11.

The euphemisms used for the destruction in House Bill H4009, section 2C, read as follows:

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

2890-7020 . . .  $32,000,000 shall be expended to complete the planning, design and construction of Phase II of the Historic Parkways Initiative along the section of the Memorial Drive between the Longfellow Bridge and the Boston University Bridge, also known as the BU Bridge, in the city of Cambridge, to construct and make improvements to pedestrian pathways,bike and paths, . . .................................

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

As usual, the environment destruction is “omitted” but authorized.

Here are the plans and that key photograph.  I will follow the plans and photograph with  a devastating reponse to yet another piece of silliness offered in place of responsible behavior.  The silly contention that the Cambridge City Council has no business on Memorial Drive.


The outrage on Memorial Drive, H4009.

The following are the tree destruction plans submitted by the DCR in 2009 when they were seeking Obama moneys to destroy these same hundreds of trees.  At that time, they lied to the press that all the trees were diseased.  There is no indication of diseased trees in these plans, nor when inspecting the doomed trees.  Just more lies from an entity which does a lot of destroying and a lot of lying.

It would be silly to think that there are or will be significant changes, although teasing suggestions are commonly used to further destruction in Cambridge, MA.

The plans start at the BU Bridge, where you are in the process, it would appear of adding to the destruction in your Grand Junction bicycle highway plans.

The darkened, numbered circles designate healthy trees slated for destruction.  Inserted after the 5th plan is a photo of the excellent grove of  trees being destroyed in plans 6 and 7 presented on the following page.  Should you or others wish the electronic version of these plans, the electronic version  totals 481 MB.

I will go into the animal habitat part of the outrage in the opposition to this part of the Grand Junction proposal.

The short of it is that H4009 includes in the very first plan furthers the heartless abuse of the long term resident, beautiful and valuable Charles River White Geese, following up on the outrage this city council paid for at Magazine Beach.  More environment outrage from a city council which loudly calls itself pro environment.

Further casual destruction of animal habitat will proceed throughout the destruction area.

This, most importantly, furthers the outrageous relevant goal of the DCR’s “Charles River Master Plan”, that of killing off or driving away all resident animals, a goal which is also striking contradictory to the City Council’s claim of being pro environment.

Text follows on page 11. [ed: section [c]., below.]

[b. Documents.]








Grove at Memorial Drive Split before
Destruction, Winter Photo

Destruction plans for this excellent
grove on next page.  [ed:  two plan pages per page.  Next two below are of the photo.]












[c. Response to claims city council has no business defending the Charles River from attack.]

City Council has no business on Memorial Drive?

I have been hearing some strange comments that the Cambridge City Council has no business getting involved in Memorial Drive.

Save the world but don’t talk to us about Cambridge.

Last I heard, the Cambridge City Council has routinely spoken out on matters in South America, Africa, and wherever.  Memorial Drive, by contrast, is in Cambridge, MA, and this destruction was run past the Cambridge Development Department.

The contrast between saving the world and being “neutral” on irresponsible destruction in Cambridge, MA is striking to someone looking for the truth.

“Underpasses”

Additionally, the Cambridge City Council has blessed the “underpasses” outrage which has been condemned by MassDOT.  This destruction is targeted at the Western Avenue, River Street and Anderson (Harvard Square) Bridges and their environs.

Last I heard, the destructive “underpasses” you have gone on record supporting were located on Memorial Drive.

The most visible proponent has called the $24 million (H3332, predecessor to H4009) for massive tree destruction incidental to $4 million for the destructive “underpasses.”  So it would appear that the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” claims that your irresponsible support of $4 million destruction included even more irresponsible support of $24 million destruction.

Magazine Beach

Additionally, the Cambridge City Council spent between one and two million on the project at Magazine Beach which included destructive work which was either kept secret and which was a flat out lie directly in conflict with public contrary positions.  Portions of your achievement there include a bizarre wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River.

The supposedly sacred “Charles River Master Plan” called for a lawn to the river.  It was modified to undo the blatant lie.

You were promised better playing fields.  But you installed sickly grass to replace the healthy responsible grasses there for more than half a century.  You then fed it poisons to keep it alive, and then put in a complicated drainage system to drain off the poisons keeping alive the sickly introduced grasses.  The drainage system decreased the size of playing fields in contrast to the improvements which you were promised.

Your manager of the project repeatedly lied of “no intent” to harm the Charles River White Geese.  You have blocked them from their food of most of the last 33 years at Magazine Beach and have proceeded to starve them.  This does not sound like “no intent” to harm, but I speak English.  Additionally your agent has publicly bragged of starving them.

The fine print of the “Charles River Master Plan” calls for killing off or driving away all resident animals, an achievement you and the DCR did in many acres when you destroyed irreplaceable woods at the Alewife reservation with the assistance of Company Union groups.

My letter of September 19, 2012 to the City Council is attached to my letter on the Grand Junction highway proposal being filed at the same time as this letter.

It includes persuasive photos of the outrage at Magazine Beach in its appendix 3.

Last I heard, Magazine Beach is on Memorial Drive.

Grand Junction bike highway to be extended beyond common sense.

You recently authorized preparation for funding of a bike highway along the Grand Junction.

The responsible ending for this bike highway would come where the Grand Junction approached the bend in Vassar Street.  There is a tiny distance which would need to be taken through a parking lot there to connect to Vassar Street the distance of one building on either side of Vassar Street to Memorial Drive.

Instead of the responsible ending, the plans you are organizing funding for go beyond this point and cause major destruction in the formerly lush area to which you have confined the Charles River White Geese.  Plus you would install a fence dividing the animal habitat at the railroad tracks, preventing direct access between two areas to which major destruction has been done by your accomplice.

The supposed plans show photographs all over the place but lie through omission by not showing the goose habitat.  Your friends have helped you in the heartless abuse of these beautiful animals by doing very terrible things to the environment in that location already.

Photos of the destruction areas are below and in the appendix.

False description to you of state plans for the Grand Junction area.

An excellent example of the quality of the staff with which you are working is further information which was suppressed in the 2000s when the City of Cambridge upzoned the area near Putnam Avenue and the railroad tracks.

The staff clearly communicated that, if the Urban Ring subway went forward, a train stop would go there.  Your staff lied by telling you there was only one Urban Ring option.  At the end of this report, I will provide the MBTA plans for both the alternative options in Cambridge.  The one your staff has lied does not exist was adopted as an option in 1991, five years after I first suggested it.  The one which “does not exist” is the likely winner of the two options.

Appendix 1 to the attachment, pages 2, 5, 6 and 7 provide the MBTA’s maps.  The Kenmore Crossing is the one that the Development Department has lied for more than 20 years that it does not exist, and which is now most likely to be the winner.

Summary on argument which should not exist.

I have no respect for claims that the Cambridge City Council has no business on Memorial Drive.

The claim translates as a claim that the Cambridge City Council has a right to destroy but not to defend the environment.  The claim has the same value as the Development Department Staff’s 20 year insistence that the Urban Ring option which is likely to be the winner does not exist.

Unexercised rights of the Cambridge City Council on Memorial Drive.

The deal by which you inflicted destruction on Magazine Beach included a provision that the City of Cambridge would take over management.

That has not happened.

I would anticipate it has not happened because the Cambridge City Council does not want to “know” of the outrages achieved there by Cambridge and the DCR.

Exercise your rights.  Insist first, however, that the bizarre wall be treated the same way as bordering vegetation everywhere else on the Charles River Basin, and be chopped down.

Insist that the poisons be stopped and the responsible grasses returned.

Insist that the playing fields delivered to you be the same or better than they were before the destruction commenced.

Insist that the expansion of this outrage blessed through corrupt action of the local Company Union not take place.

The outrage on Memorial Drive, the secret part of the Grand Junction proposal.

The supposed plans do not show what you are destroying.  This is part of the usual packages of omissions.  Keep it secret.  I will go into this outrage in a separate communication concerning this deliberately secret destruction.

Conclusion.

I beg of you.

You claim to be pro environment.

This outrage is most definitely not pro environment.  It is highly destructive of the environment and exactly the opposite of your claims of being pro environment.

Please oppose House Bill H4009, Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.


2. Cambridge Machine position.

This is one of the many things which the Cambridge Machine’s fake group is fighting for as a company union.  Loudly claim to be on the side of the good guys and prevent and all meaningful action while slapping in destructive stuff even if corrupt tactics are necessary.

We are the be all and end all.  How dare anybody discuss anything except what we dictate!

The same tactic used to fight for acres of irreplaceable woodlands at Alewife.

Standard company union corrupt tactics .


3. Links to latest reports of outrages.

The plans for destruction under House Bill H4009 are at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html.

These are the official plans posted when they sought Obama moneys, lying of disease to the public.  They have been fighting to destroy these trees for 10 years.  Do not be conned.  Any deviation from these plans will be minor.

The exact citation is House Bill H4009 is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

a. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
b. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

On June 3, 2014, I posted on YouTube my presentation of that letter, at http://youtu.be/FgQ9ojVuMxM.

4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.





I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4009 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

5. Tip.

The key with the Cambridge City Council is that their weakness is a very distressing and continued lie that they are pro-environment.

It is a very major weakness, but the lack of response to complaint concerning their destruction on the Cambridge Common is not encouraging.

There are four out of nine newcomers.  One might be subject to persuasion.  The balance could be possibly be embarrassed into decency.  I have major zoning victories as an environmental technique in Cambridge.  It was common to get approvals from the “conservatives.”  The “liberals” were then embarrassed into compliance with their claimed positions.

Of major importance with legislators is a widespread contempt for the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its destructiveness.  Cambridge, MA, is a distinctive entity which is in sync with the problems that the DCR embodies.