1. Introduction.
2. Contact Information to prevent this outrage.
3. Letter to Cambridge City Council, November 12, 2015.
4. Supplement, November 13, 2015.
1. Introduction.
I have not done many posts in the last few days. That is a result of all the work I have been doing on this issue.
I am a professional movie actor. Tomorrow I will be commuting 75 miles each way for background work to a movie shoot which, itself, could run 10 to 12 hours. It will be very difficult to get something out tomorrow.
During the past week, I have added a lot of photos of imminent carnage, and I have hoped to post them. Maybe I can get out another report today.
But this update is necessary.
It looks like major games are being played in the Massachusetts legislature. It is highly likely that all members of the Cambridge delegation have filthy hands.
Tuesday, November 10, 2015, I filed a complaint in hand with Governor Charles Baker.
It runs 15 pages and does an excellent photo job of the imminent outrage. It includes one copy each of all of the 2009 destruction plans which, increasingly are the basis for the outrage. It attempts to match targets to plan pages.
The graphics of the plans are reduced in size to keep the Internet happy. Attached to the governor’s letter is a DVD with much larger files. I have posted these plans, reduced, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html. This was in my transmittal to the Cambridge City Council about a year and a half ago.
The second attachment to the Governor’s letter is my letter in September to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation communicating the real record of the Department of Conservation and Recreation on the Charles River. This letter ran 20 pages. That letter is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/charles-river-massdot-plan-for-mass.html.
The third attachment to the Governor’s letter is my letter in response to the fraud of “public input.” The DCR is giving public input on irresponsible plans at Magazine Beach, and will then ignore the really important stuff. This public input is the usual fraud. They started their tree destruction project days before the supposed public input session and are giving no public input on the real horror.
Today, I have transmitted the Governor’s letter to the Cambridge City Council, with the two letter attachments the DVD is a copy of a document in the files of the Cambridge Conservation Commission. It seemed rather duplicative to include it.
This transmittal is mostly ceremonial because they will not meet to November 23, 2015.
The letter will be posted next Friday by the City Clerk. That will very probably be too late. I will put up a link to that posting as soon as I can. The Governor’s letter, in particular, is excellent.
2. Contact Information to prevent this outrage.
Governor Baker: 617-725-4005, 888-870-7770 (888 free in state)
Email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituent-services/contact-governor-office/
Cambridge City Council: 617-349-4280, council@cambridgema.gov
Letters can be sent c/o City Clerk, City of Cambridge, 795 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139. They should include a cover letter asking that that the letter be made part of the communications to the Cambridge City Council. Because of the timing, letters could be a waste of time.
Formal Email Communications to the Cambridge City Council can be done in a similar manner. The City Clerk’s email address is dlopez@cambridgema.gov. These become part of the formal record. The above address is recorded but not part of the formal package. The above address, however, is immediate, as opposed to the next Monday night when they have a meeting. Because of the timing, formal emails could be a waste of time.
Legislators: 617-722-2000, http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/201304/emails-for-all massachusetts.html
But remember, destruction is imminent. The Governor appears to be the best bet. This is a democratic boondoggle. The governor is republican, and he should have capabilities to stall his people at minimum while fighting for responsible government. That letter to him by me is a beauty.
3. Letter to Cambridge City Council, November 12, 2015.
City Council, City of Cambridge
c/o City Clerk
795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
TO THE HONORABLE, THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL:
This letter is written individually and as chair of Friends of the White Geese, a non profit recognized by the Attorney General since 2002. Our mission is to protect the Charles River, its water, its animals, its land, its trees and related from destructive environmental behavior, especially by government entities.
This will formalize my emails and provide much more detail than possible therein.
Enclosed is my letter of November 10, 2015, hand delivered to Governor Baker.
It is incorporated herein by reference including its attachments 2 and 3. Attachment 1 is my electronic copy of the files of the Cambridge Conservation Commission. I think the CCC files are adequate. They are incorporated by reference as well, and are available to you should you so wish.
Please immediately stop the outrage in process on Memorial Drive.
Memorial Drive is certainly much closer than much of the national and international matters which have concerned you. At a the public meeting to the DCR letter refers, the DCR stated its intent to transfer to you total control of Magazine Beach in accordance with the agreements concerning the outrages there. The DCR statement was that the only delay in transfer is the will of the City of Cambridge.
In addition to your control of Magazine Beach, you have taken a number of actions with regard to Memorial Drive in the recent past and have various actions pending.
In particular, it would appear that the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” in its lobbying for this destruction falsely communicated concerning the petitions it provided to the General Court concerning underpasses under the River Street, Western Avenue and Anderson Bridges. My understanding from the CRC’s first communication about pending legislative funding was that support for underpasses under the River Street, Western Avenue and Anderson Bridges included support for this outrage between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.
In addition to obtaining an immediate stop to the outrage between the BU and Longfellow Bridges, I think you should correct the record and inform all entities that you do not support the destruction which is imminent on Memorial Drive between the BU and Longfellow Bridge, that you never have, and that your public support for the underpasses under the next three bridges does not include the massive destruction which is imminent between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.
In the current matter, as well, please note in particular, the fraudulent omission of hundreds of trees located between the Grand Junction railroad tracks and the BU Boathouse, as well as noting the retaining wall, which has consistently been kept secret in public discussions.
Please note the changes which have occurred that render outdated the 2009 plans. These changes are spelled out in the governor’s letter and occur in the woods between the BU Boathouse and the Hyatt Regency Hotel, and in the magnificent but condemned cherry grove at the Memorial Drive split.
Please also note the latest outrageous con game being inflicted on Memorial Drive by the DCR as stated in more detail in the DCR letter.
Please also note my comments in the MassDOT letter praising the Cambridge Conservation Commission for two past actions.
The attached package with a different cover letter is being delivered pretty much simultaneously to the Cambridge Conservation Commission.
Thank you in advance for your immediate actions.
4. Supplement, November 13, 2015.
Even when you are dealing with an entity as belligerently destructive as the Cambridge City Council, it is tempting to give in to being nice.
I gave in to the temptation for niceness in the letter in section 3.
When dealing with an entity such as the Cambridge City Council, silence in circumstances which call for outrage is support.
Nevertheless, based on the subsequent comments by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy,” it is silly to consider its statements to the legislature as stated above anything other than fraud.
Based on common sense, it is silly to consider the name under which the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” presents itself in its ongoing fight for destruction on the Charles River anything other than flat out fraud.
They have no business representing themselves to anybody as fighting to CONSERVE the Charles River.
