Charles River, Magazine Beach: SECRET Destruction Plan Discovered.

Charles River, Magazine Beach: SECRET Destruction Plan Discovered.

I was in the process of preparing a formal letter to the new Cambridge City Manager and the Cambridge City Council, describing that portion of the proposed outrage on Magazine Beach which surrounds the Magazine Beach Swimming Pool.

I have been working from the formal plans submitted to the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  I knew, however, from the walk through that the Department of Conservation and Recreation had increased, allowing for fraud, the planned destruction to 54 from the previously announced 42.

At the walk through which the DCR conducted of its project, the DCR announced new and fancier plans.  I asked for a copy.  They did not want to provide me the new plans in hard copy, but the CCC prevailed.

It turns out that, WITHOUT MEANINGFULLY COMMUNICATING IT, the new plans include destruction of trees OUTSIDE THE ANNOUNCED DESTRUCTION AREA.  I call that Lying Through Omission.  Lying Through Omission was a standard tactic of the three past Cambridge City Managers when keeping secret environmental destruction.  The DCR does not, in my experience, live up to the level of the Cambridge City Manager Machine.

The new destruction is of trees which do not even show on the original plans as in the destruction area.

Here is the relevant part of the ORIGINALLY announced plan of the Swimming Pool area destruction.

Here is the relevant part of the new destruction announcement.

The secret destruction is ACROSS MEMORIAL DRIVE from the Swimming Pool.  You will note that on the original plan, you see a large, almost rectangle in the middle of the slide.  That is the support building for the swimming pool.  Above it, you will see a broken line.  That line is defined at the bottom of the plan as “LIMIT OF WORK.”  The upper portion of the line is the southern boundary of Memorial Drive. .

Here is a closer view of that part of the new plan:

Across from the Magazine Beach Reservation at this point is a small shopping center which does have a good Memorial Drive frontage.  Part of the good frontage was a recent improvement by a new owner.  A very important important part of the frontage is the Memorial Drive Reservation, owned by the DCR.

The building next to the added destruction area houses a MicroCenter store.  In the new plans, the LIMIT OF WORK line continues to be the south side of Memorial Drive.  But the newer plan shows TWO of FIVE trees next to MicroCenter being destroyed.  They are shown in the upper right corner of this last map.

Destruction outside the LIMIT OF WORK area has been kept totally secret, but it was added in this fancy map very casually dropped at the Walk Around, and, of course, the expansion of the work zone was kept secret, unless you check out what amounts to fine print.  They most definitely did not divulge that the lovely new map included work outside the LIMIT OF WORK line.

Here is a photo showing the trees in front of MicroCenter.  It is a crop from a photo of the destruction not being kept secret.  I made the mistake of assuming a minimal level of honesty.  So, this is a crop of a side view of the Swimming Pool building.  I had the nerve to only do photographs of the area within the LIMIT OF WORK.

The red line around the doomed trees is yet another lie, this time a Lie of Fake Definition.

They use a very official sounding word which sounds so good, but which escapes me.  This lovely, official sounding word gives the DCR’s sales pitch the  LIE of apparent credibility.

As near as I understand the fancy word, according to the DCR, using this lovely official sounding word, the DCR has a right to destroy any tree which has passed its peak beauty, NO MATTER HOW EXCELLENT THE TREE IS..

For a tree that would live 100 years, that means that the DCR claims a right to destroy it if it has “ONLY” 50 years left to live.  NO MATTER HOW EXCELLENT THE TREE IS.

As a DCR example of this outrageous claim of right, the DCR shows trees which are clearly dead which were among the trees planted in the irresponsible work in the 2000s.  Trees possibly died because the DCR is so irresponsible, so the DCR brags that this gives the DCR the right to destroy trees which have “ONLY” fifty years left to live, no matter how magnificent.

Oh year, the name of the fake protective group appears on the amended plan.

The DCR should be replaced on the Charles River with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.  MassDOT has been the adult in the room when faced with outrages on the Charles River from Cambridge and / or from the DCR.  Both MassDOT and the DCR were given their current responsibilities on the Charles River when the legislature destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission, in part because the MDC was so irresponsible.

The planners from the MDC went to the DCR with their plans and, so far have destroyed hundreds of trees east of the BU Bridge based on those irresponsible plans.  Now they and their friendswant to destroy 54 trees west of the BU Bridge.

The DCR’s most important friends, the contractors, want money.  The DCR is feeding them with Make Work for Contractors.

That is the name of the game, and that is what the legislature tried to kill when it killed the MDC.

As far as Cambridge goes, first of all, the Cambridge Development Department is fully consulted by the DCR. Secondly, a bit over a year ago the last City Manager of the City Manager Machine conducted a public meeting at which the last Machine City Manager bragged about the great things the CITY OF CAMBRIDGE is providing on the Charles River.  Not by coincidence, that City Manager managed the destruction which was inflicted on Magazine Beach in the 2000s.

Cambridge now has a City Manager who may be a new beginning after the three interrelated City Manager who were so outrageously destructive.  The Cambridge City Manager Machine thrived in the spirit of the destructive bureaucrats now with the DCR.

Hopefully, the new City Manager will have the spirit of a normal human being.  He seems impressive, and normal.

And, for the record, my video of the destruction already achieved is posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

Charles River: Contractors Make more Make Work Money Near Cambridge City Hall or new City Manager stepped in?

Charles River:  Contractors Make more Make Work Money Near Cambridge City Hall or new City Manager stepped in?

1. The Record.
2. The Update.
3. Explanation.
A. Bad.
B. Good.


1. The Record.

On September 15, 2016, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/charles-river-cambridge-extends-tree.html, I reported the City of Cambridge extending the destruction of trees to within sight of Cambridge City Hall.

Here are a couple of the photos.  The second was taken next to the undestroyed tree after the row of destruction in the first photo.

I find this outrage just a further step of a very destructive mentality which, in much larger scale, destroyed hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive next to the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.  That situation was analyzed in my video posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

2. The Update.

Now we have saplings where were destroyed trees which were planted about 20 years ago.

The first photo shows the only tree in the block not destroyed, with City Hall the white tower with the clock and the building to its right.  The building to the left is the Central Square Post Office.  This photo shows one of the new saplings.  The second photo pretty much corresponds to the wasteland in the photo above.

3. Explanation.

A. Bad.

There are two ready explanations, one typically bad, the other perhaps good.

The bad explanation comes from the fact that a copy of the condensed version of the report, with two photos, was sent to every City Councilor.

To the best of my knowledge, although all of the city councilors were given notice with photographs, no action was taken.  And that is for an entire row of trees which extends almost within vision of Cambridge City Hall.  The following photo shows only undestroyed tree in that block with City Hall rising behind it.  This photo was included in my blog report and was in the condensed report which was emailed to all eight of the current city councilors who were in office then.
They simply cannot claim lack of knowledge.

There are markings on the sidewalk which give the impression of planned work, or, more likely, of some sort of construction under the sidewalk between the trees and the edge of the Post Office property.

It looks like, given that reality, that we are seeing just another aspect of the outrage on the Charles River: Contractors are given Make Work destroying perfectly good trees, and contractors are being given Make Work planting “replacements” for trees which should not have been destroyed in the first place.

PLUS the City of Cambridge benefits from another lie that Cambridge is environmentally saintly.  The replacements are that many trees they can claim in a lie that Cambridge deserves to be called a Tree City because the criterion for Tree City USA only counts trees planted.  It does not count which should not have been destroyed in the first place.

In addition, I am aware of at least one incident in which an entire residential block of perfectly good trees was destroyed to “improve” the neighborhood with saplings, and I have the definite impression that this was not the only such outrage..

The sales pitch is perfectly predictable: “How dare you object to our destroying that block full of healthy trees.  We put in saplings.”

English translation:  To Hell with the environment.  We have pleased our happy contractors, and we have a very active machine in place lying to the voters.

The situation on Cambridge streets and the outrage achieved and coming on the Charles River fits, demonstrating a decidedly reprehensible record.

And, oh yeah, this block adjoins an area where major work has just been completed.  Need I say more?

B. Good.

The other possible explanation could be that Cambridge has a new City Manager, and that the new City Manager noticed the outrage across the street from City Hall and ordered responsible behavior, to the extent anything related to the situation could be considered responsible.  I.e., City Manager DePasquale could have ordered the destruction be repaired, fast.

If this is the case, City Manage DePasquale is to be complimented.

Now how about firing the people who should not have done the destruction in the first place?  Particularly considering the fact that this outrage is not isolated.

Charles River:  Contractors Make more Money Near Cambridge City Hall or new City Manager earned praise

1. The Record.
2. The Update.
3. Explanation.
A. Bad.
B. Good.


1. The Record.

On September 15, 2016, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/charles-river-cambridge-extends-tree.html, I reported the City of Cambridge extending the destruction of trees to within sight of Cambridge City Hall.

Here are a couple of the photos.  The second was taken next to the undestroyed tree after the row of destruction in the first photo.

I find this outrage just a further step of a very destructive mentality which, in much larger scale, destroyed hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive next to the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.  That situation was analyzed in my video posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

2. The Update.

Now we have saplings where were destroyed trees which were planted about 20 years ago.

The first photo shows the only tree in the block not destroyed, with City Hall the white tower with the clock and the building to its right.  The building to the left is the Central Square Post Office.  This photo shows one of the new saplings.  The second photo pretty much corresponds to the wasteland in the photo above.

3. Explanation.

A. Bad.

There are two ready explanations, one typically bad, the other perhaps good.

The bad explanation comes from the fact that a copy of the condensed version of the report, with two photos, was sent to every City Councilor.

To the best of my knowledge, although all of the city councilors were given notice with photographs, no action was taken.  And that is for an entire row of trees which extends almost within vision of Cambridge City Hall.  The following photo shows only undestroyed tree in that block with City Hall rising behind it.  This photo was included in my blog report and was in the condensed report which was emailed to all eight of the current city councilors who were in office then.
They simply cannot claim lack of knowledge.

There are markings on the sidewalk which give the impression of planned work, or, more likely, of some sort of construction under the sidewalk between the trees and the edge of the Post Office property.

It looks like, given that reality, that we are seeing just another aspect of the outrage on the Charles River: Contractors are given Make Work destroying perfectly good trees, and contractors are being given Make Work planting “replacements” for trees which should not have been destroyed in the first place.

PLUS the City of Cambridge benefits from another lie that Cambridge is environmentally saintly.  The replacements are that many trees they can claim in a lie that Cambridge deserves to be called a Tree City because the criterion for Tree City USA only counts trees planted.  It does not count which should not have been destroyed in the first place.

In addition, I am aware of at least one incident in which an entire residential block of perfectly good trees was destroyed to “improve” the neighborhood with saplings, and I have the definite impression that this was not the only such outrage..

The sales pitch is perfectly predictable: “How dare you object to our destroying that block full of healthy trees.  We put in saplings.”

English translation:  To Hell with the environment.  We have pleased our happy contractors, and we have a very active machine in place lying to the voters.

The situation on Cambridge streets and the outrage achieved and coming on the Charles River fits, demonstrating a decidedly reprehensible record.

And, oh yeah, this block adjoins an area where major work has just been completed.  Need I say more?

B. Good.

The other possible explanation could be that Cambridge has a new City Manager, and that the new City Manager noticed the outrage across the street from City Hall and ordered responsible behavior, to the extent anything related to the situation could be considered responsible.  I.e., City Manager DePasquale could have ordered the destruction be repaired, fast.

If this is the case, City Manage DePasquale is to be complimented.

Now how about firing the people who should not have done the destruction in the first place?  Particularly considering the fact that this outrage is not isolated.

Cambridge, MA, USA City Manager DePasquale to Take Office on November 14, 2016? Proposed Contract.

Cambridge, MA, USA City Manager DePasquale to Take Office on November 14, 2016? Proposed Contract.

The Agenda for the Cambridge City Council meeting on November 7, 2016, includes a proposed contract of employment for Louis A. DePasquale, following up on the selection by the Cambridge City Council several weeks ago.

Congratulations and thanks are due to the City Manager Designate.

I assume that the contract would not be being offered to the Cambridge City Council if there were doubt that the Cambridge City Council would accept it.

Termination date is January 8, 2021.  The City Council must give Mr. DePaquale notice by September 14, 2021 should it wish to extend the period of employment.

The proposed contract is copied below from the City of Cambridge on line record.  It is in jpeg format and is readily readable by double clicking on each page.

I have delivered three letters to the Cambridge City Council as part of a series on the existing and pending outrages on the Charles River, as reported on this blog at

1. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-magazine-beach.html
2. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/to-cambridge-ma-usa-government.html
3. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/to-cambridge-ma-usa-do-not-destroy.html.

Report 1 includes a DVD of our video on the Destruction of the Charles River to each the City Council and City Manager.  Report 3 gives the City Council individual copies.

That video may be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

More letters are anticipated.  The current proposed outrage is massive by any normal standard.  I wish to ensure that the Cambridge City Council is clearly on record as having been made aware of the real situation.

The situation is outrageously irresponsible, with plans to make things much worse.

I have been awaiting the entry into service as City Manager of Mr. DePasquale, corecipient of these letters, so that he may receive these comments on the situation on the Charles River, with hopes that he can straighten things out.

To Cambridge, MA, USA: Do not destroy Magazine Beach or its Hill

To Cambridge, MA, USA: Do not destroy Magazine Beach or its Hill.

I. Introduction:
II. Letter.
1. Introduction.
2. Photos of the part of the outrage on the Magazine Beach hill facing Memorial Drive and the residential neighborhood.
a. Photos.
b. Defective Destruction Plan.
c. More detailed analysis.
3. Phil Barber tells the truth, magnificent grove overhanging playing fields, destruction of Little Guys Parking lot.
4. Proposed Solution.
5. Transmittal of DVD documenting the destruction of hundreds of trees east of this site by Cambridge and the DCR.
6. Conclusion.


I. Introduction:

I. Introduction:

We are doing a series of letters to the key figures in the Cambridge government on the latest attempts to increase destruction on the Charles River.  Cambridge has had a destructive, misleading three person City Manager Machine for the last 42 years.  A new City Manager has been selected but has yet to take office.  To put it nicely, there has been a lot of lying through omission on environmentally destructive initiatives under the Cambridge City Manager machine.   Environmentally, the city government created by that City Manager Machine is standing on a House of Cards.  False claims of environmentalism faced with reality could topple the House of Cards.

We would much rather communicate and give the City Council a chance to resemble its non stop claims of environmental sainthood.  The issue is the ongoing environmental destruction on the Charles River and elsewhere where this destructive city government has impact.  The pending, and surprisingly delayed, appointment  as City Manager of a person who not been in the middle of the outrage is a positive sign.

A major part reason for this series is to put on record that the Government of the City of Cambridge has been made aware of the next impending outrage on the Charles River.  It stems out of years of work with the City Manager Machine in the middle.  The 42 year record is one which an not be ignored.  It is a lot more difficult to lie about your record when your record is clearly documented, and hopefully, there will not be more things to lie about.

Our latest letter was hand delivered to the Cambridge City Clerk on November 1, 2016 so that it could be made part of the City Council Agenda on November 7, 2016.

This letter has been reformatted to fit this forum, and sectioning has been added to comport with the Internet norm.  There is limited wording change, but only, once again to comport with the change in forum.  One typo was corrected by hand in the submittal and corrected in this presentation electronically.

The DVD attachment to the letter is referenced in the original text by including the URL with identical content in the text.  That will ease the tasks of the readers of this blog, but also the task of the readers of the publicly available record of communications to the Cambridge City Council.  Delivering ten DVDs to the Cambridge City Clerk for the Cambridge City Council was probably a first, but the delivery, one for each member of the Cambridge City Council, one for public record, makes claims of lack of knowledge that much less credible.

II. Letter.

1. Introduction.

November 1, 2016

City Manager Louis A DePasquale
City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA   02139

City Council, City of Cambridge, c/o City Clerk
City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA   02139

RE: Charles River Destruction 3, the Magazine Beach hill, DVDs of destruction accomplished so far.

Gentlemen / Ladies:

On October 4, and 26, 2016, I hand delivered my previous letters on this topic to the Cambridge City Council, care of the City Clerk.  I hope that, by the time I deliver this follow up, City Manager DePasquale will be in office, so I can deliver the October 4 and 26, 2016 letters with this one. [ed: He apparently was not yet in office.]

2. Photos of the part of the outrage on the Magazine Beach hill facing Memorial Drive and the residential neighborhood.

a. Photos.

Here is another very major view proposed to for all practical purposes be destroyed on Memorial Drive, the view opposite Magazine Street.  Photos move from west to east.

b. Defective Destruction Plan.

Here is the relevant part of the destruction plans submitted by the Department of Conservation and Recreation.  I realize the plans are deficient in that they UNDERSTATE destruction, including clearly fraudulent understatements.  

c. More detailed analysis.

The magnificent tree in the first photo shows for destruction in this plan exerpt under the word “clearly” in the text.  The tree to its left in the photo, right in the plan is being destroyed in the plan.  EVERY TREE BUT THREE IS DESTROYED FROM THE STREET TREE TO THE BACK OF THE proposed to be destroyed LITTLE GUY’S PARKING LOT (the semi-circular road).  Note as well, on the right on this plan, two more trees south of the pedestrian over pass being destroyed, JUST IN THIS PARTIAL PLAN.  

Total tree destruction on the hill / bathhouse area is THIRTY, which has been admitted by the Cheerleaders.  This FRAUDULENT PLAN, as presented in my last letter, without the cropping, SAYS TWENTY-THREE.

A FAKE SHOW WAS PRESENTED IN THE CITY HALL ANNEX TOTALLY LYING THROUGH OMISSION ABOUT ALL THIS DESTRUCTION, ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE LACK OF FITNESS OF THE 42 YEAR MANAGER MACHINE, which, hopefully is dead.  This presentation with its lies of omission was compatible with others in the 42 year period.

Those Machine presentations look so good as long as the presentations lie through omission about the terrible things being done and kept secret.

3. Phil Barber tells the truth, magnificent grove overhanging playing fields, destruction of Little Guys Parking lot.

By contrast, here is an email from the top expert on Magazine Beach that I am aware of.  Phil Barber.

* * * *

Hi Bob, thanks for the updates. I am horrified (though not surprised) that they propose to destroy that beautiful grove of cottonwoods. I've been observing and photographing them for decades. Magazine Beach's resident red tailed hawk calls those trees home. A few of them have died and could be taken down for safety but the rest are solid strong trees with many years of life left. There is another stand of cottonwoods in the old SImplex area, which follows the curve of the former railroad spur that ran behind Sidney and Albany Streets (near Emily), and they are much larger and older and are flourishing.

It also interests me that the small parking loop near the pool opposite the gas station is to be removed. In the summer I see mostly black families from Riverside enjoying the picnic tables there by this parking place and I wonder if, that in true "liberal" hypocrisy, restricting their access is also part of "improving" our park for the gentrifiers.

* * * *

Here again, is the photo from the my October 4 letter, and the clearly fraudulent part of the plan which says THREE rather than TEN trees are being destroyed.  

A major difference between HONEST, RESPONSIBLE people such as Phil and the irresponsible DCR / Cambridge City Manager machine is that Phil clearly states that some of the trees in the grove are dead.  THE RESPONSIBLE TREATMENT, as proposed by Phil, IS TO CHOP DOWN THE DEAD TREES.  THE DCR / CITY MANAGER TREATMENT IS TO DESTROY EVERYTHING, AND THEN DESTROY, DESTROY, DESTROY SOME MORE, AND LIE ABOUT THEIR OUTRAGE through that fake show in the Annex.

Direction of view is opposite between the plan and the photo.  In the plan, the playing fields are on the right.  In the photo, they are on the left.  The pathway shows on both.

Myself, I am not an expert.  I am simply trying to compare deliberate false statements with other documentation I can get.

An excellent example of Phil Barber’s more than thirty year experience is the photo essay he has posted about the Charles River White Geese dating back to the 1980s at http://www.historicpages.com/geese/wg.htm.

4. Proposed Solution.

There are a few reasonable ways to end this outrage.  

One is through requests.  This makes sense, but has next to no value particularly since the Metropolitan District Commission graduates in the DCR can and have gone forward with almost no warning.  Plus they have played games with the legislature.  The legislature allowed them to destroy between the BU and Longfellow Bridge years after their approvals expired, almost certainly being lied to by omission about the true impact of what they were doing.  

Claims of “lack of jurisdiction” in Cambridge government are silly.  Very clearly, the DCR is closer than the many governments of the world the Cambridge City Council frequently addresses; the destruction is occurring in the City of Cambridge;  Cambridge has funded destruction on the Charles River; Cambridge’s Development Department is consulted AND HAS BEEN CONSULTED on these outrages, and Cambridge has Home Rule rights over actions within the community.  Any claim of lack of jurisdiction is nonsense.

The option of most meaningful value is to get rid of the DCR legislatively, initiating the legislative process at the same time as initiating discussions.

Implement the wishes of the legislature when it destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission.  The legislature tried to protect the Charles from the destructiveness of the MDC bureaucrats.  Obtain legislation to get rid of the DCR on the Charles River in Cambridge, transferring funds and jurisdiction to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.  MassDOT has been the adult in the room in Charles River matters in which the DCR and the Cambridge City Manager Machine have been very destructive children.  Home rule legislation is Cambridge’s right.

The smart legislative option would be initiate transfer action through vote of the Cambridge City Council and action of Cambridge’s legislative team with proper rearrangement of funding from the DCR to MassDOT.  FURTHER TRANSFER OF MANAGERS AND / OR PLANNERS, this time to MassDOT should be FORBIDDEN.  The existing outrages are by Metropolitan District Commission functionaries who took their outrages with them to the DCR when the legislature properly destroyed the MDC.  The MDC alumni, have since destroyed, destroyed, destroyed in the name of the DCR.

Unfortunately, the irresponsible MDC bureaucrats survived in the DCR and, with the support and approval of the Cambridge City Manager Machine, are aggressively destroying Cambridge’s part of the Charles River.  Legislative action takes time, and the DCR has demonstrated the ability to destroy rapidly and with vigor.

In the interim, Cambridge should exercise the right OF CONTROL OF MAGAZINE BEACH transferred to Cambridge in the agreement for destruction of the 2000s.  The Chief MDC / DCR destructive bureaucrat has publicly admitted the willingness of the DCR to respect the transfer agreement by which the MDC got money for the 2000s destruction.  That destruction was managed by Rossi as top assistant to then City Manager Healy.

With control, it is essential that the City of Cambridge, in addition to finally ending these outrageous plans, destroy the bizarre introduced wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles, and end the use of poisons on all parts of the Charles River.  

This starvation wall is targeted at the Charles River White Geese.  It was promised to be a “lawn to the river.”  

Poison use on the Charles River is a love of the DCR/MDC bureaucrats.  It is always kept secret in the “planning” process.  The annual algae infestation of the Charles dates back to the MDC dumping poisons on Ebersol Field next to the Massachusetts General Hospital marked “Do not use near water.”  Less destructive poisons were not working.  The next day, the Charles River was dead from Boston Harbor to the Mass. Ave. Bridge.  It comes back every year.

5. Transmittal of DVD documenting the destruction of hundreds of trees east of this site by Cambridge and the DCR.

With my October 4 letter I transmitted a copy to the City Manager and a copy to the City Council of my video on the destruction already accomplished on the Charles River by the City Manager Machine and by the DCR.

I should have provided the City Council with individual copies.  Ten copies are attached to the City Council copy of this communication, one for each City Councilor, one for file.  Should members of the Cambridge City Council prefer, the identical video is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

6. Conclusion.

End this outrage.  End it now.  Thank you in advance for your responsible behavior.

Sincerely,

Robert J. La Trémouille, individually and as

Chair, Friends of the White Geese

Enclosures: As stated