In my last post, I gave my analysis of the Cambridge City Council’s fake vote for “tree protections” in light of the very great destructiveness of trees by the Cambridge City Council. They lie to the voters about “concern” by yelling at the other guy, hundreds of little guys living in Cambridge, while the Cambridge City Council exempted from their supposed protections the biggest tree destroyers in the City of Cambridge. Those are the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation and the City of Cambridge.
In the same meeting, as secretly as possible, the Cambridge City Council voted for more work at Magazine Beach.
The Cambridge City Council loudly brags about stuff they are proud of, and are DEAFENINGLY SILENT ABOUT SHAMEFUL ACTIONS.
Here is my response to that latest destructive probable outrage. It, as usual is addressed to the Cambridge City Council and to the Cambridge City Manager.
References to the “City Council’s ‘Kind of Leader’” quote City Councilor Devereux’ explanation of a past outrage, for which no member of the City Council provided an explanation. The only meaningful explanation provided by any City Councilor from Devereux, that this woman, the only visible meaningful support was that this woman was Devereux’ “kind of activist.”
The Cambridge City Council's "kind of activist" showed up this time too, she spoke and filed written comments. The written comments included supposed plans which have been kept secret for more than a year. Once again, the Cambridge City Council had no meaningful plans in front of them, and they voted for this secret work without looking at her plan submission.
* * * *
RE: Part of the Destructive Reality behind the latest Riverfront Vote.
1. General Analysis.
2. Differences between the Two.
3. Relevant Portion of the FILED Plans the Cambridge City Council Does Not Want to Know About.
4. Summary.
Gentlemen / Ladies:
1. General Analysis.
Some realities hidden in your latest vote to authorize destructive work at Magazine Beach became visible in a document filed by the woman who has been running around bragging about the project and keeping the tree destructlyion and HER poisoning of the Charles River as secret as possible ‒ The Cambridge City Council’s “kind of activist.”
Looking at reality, the City Council would appear in this secret funding to be physically and directly paying for major tree destruction and ramping up heartless animal abuse.
Further on in this report, we print the relevant DCR destruction plans filed with the Cambridge Conservation Commission. Those plans certainly seem to destroy both of the trees on this page in the areas where both versions of what is being done call for “pruning” of trees.
* * * * *
Doomed Willow
Doomed Ornamental
* * * *
Equally important, since most of the playing fields seem to be excluded from all parts of this segmented partnered project, the Cambridge City Council and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation are continuing the inexcusable use of poisons on Magazine Beach. The DCR’s beloved poisons were originally introduced into Magazine Beach as part of the outrages of the 2000's by Cambridge and the DCR.
An excellent example of the DCR’s love of poisons is in the annual algae blight on the Charles River. That started THE DAY AFTER THE DCR introduced poisons at Ebersol Fields next to the Massachusetts General Hospital, marked against use near water. This outrage was done because the DCR was not happy with the performance of the poisons already there.
Nevertheless, the Cambridge City Council and the DCR are continuing the inexcusable use of poisons on Magazine Beach. The two are making the outrage worse routing poisons into the Charles River by use of “volunteers.” This is supposedly to get rid of beautiful vegetation WHICH FEEDS ON THE POISONS.
Both reports (by the City Manager for the Cambridge Development Department and by the City Council’s “kind of activist”) on the City Council funds appear to agree that the City Council is attacking this beautiful vegetation, and DOING NOTHING ABOUT THE POISONS THESE BEAUTIFUL, FREE PLANTS FEED ON.
Both versions call for cleaning up of “invasives.” However the DCR and Cambridge, instead of removing the destructive starvation wall which is clearly massive invasive, vegetation irresponsibly introduced by Cambridge and the DCR with great and knowing harm to the resident animal population
a. Cambridge and the DCR fixate on beautiful vegetation which feeds on the poisons introduced by Cambridge and the DCR, and
b. The Cambridge City Council has the gall to cry about bees dying out, as its poisons on Magazine Beach poison bees.
* * * * *
Photo: Phil Barber
At Alewife, Somerville shows off beautiful vegetation that
Cambridge and the DCR destroy with great nuttiness. But
then, Cambridge and the DCR destroyed 3.4 acres of the
"irreplaceable" (Cambridge City Council quote) Silver
Maple Forest while the Cambridge City Counci yelled at
private developers destroying the Silver Maple Forest IN
COMPLIANCE WITH MUNICIPALLY CONTROLLED
ZONING.
* * * * *
Outrageous.
Here is the analysis WITHOUT PLANS from the Cambridge Development Department through the City Manager:
* * * *
To the Honorable, the City Council:
I am hereby requesting the appropriation of $600,000 from Free Cash to the Public Investment Executive Department Extraordinary Expenditures, to be used for shoreline and landscape improvements at Magazine Beach.
Magazine Beach is a regional open space and ecological resource, and functions as an important neighborhood connection to the river. This project is a key component of Phase II-1 improvements to the park, encompassing the shoreline area between the new kayak launch and the Powder Magazine. The project will include planting new trees; pruning of existing trees and shrubs and other plant care; new naturalized bank treatments (river bank and wetland area); a new accessible path connecting the new kayak launch to the Powder Magazine; new site furnishings, including 10 new benches; new electrical connections and pole inserts for canopy lighting or outdoor art; and a new storm water infiltration system that will manage run off from the paved surfaces into the river.
The City’s contribution to the project will be matched dollar for dollar by the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) in order to create a new accessible patio and terrace and newly paved walkways.
Since 2012, the City has provided over $500,000 in funding for improvements at Magazine Beach ($341,050 since 2017), which has leveraged hundreds of thousands of additional dollars in matching funds from DCR, neighborhood organizations, and nonprofits.
This project further exemplifies the City’s commitment to Magazine Beach, by working closely with neighborhood residents, Magazine Beach Partners, DCR, and elected officials to support strategic, incremental, improvements to Magazine Beach. Work on the improvements is anticipated to begin in spring 2019.
* * * * *
To the right [Ed: below] are the relevant three parts of the analysis by the City Council’s “kind of activist.”
To the best of my knowledge, this information has previously been kept secret.
As mentioned above,“installation of oak logs” is distressingly similar to the outrage which the City Council’s “kind of activist” and her friends assisted east of the BU Bridge by telling people not to look at the coming destruction. After they achieved destruction, they discussed seeking a part in choosing trees to replace the excellent trees which should not have been destroyed. Looks to me like seeking a payoff for helping the outrage.
* * * * *
The day Cambridge and the DCR started to starve the 38
year resident Charles River White Geese - being fed by
decent human beings, OVER YET ANOTHER
BARRIER.
* * * * *
Below is the bizarre barrier created there as a part of the January 2016 destruction of hundreds of mostly excellent trees by Cambridge, the DCR, and the “protectors.”
A decidedly beautiful video is posted online by Ernie Sarno showing the Charles River White Geese getting up in the middle of the night to feed at the Hyatt Regency shore BEFORE the installation of this particular outrage. It is posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2-xSIYrB5o. “White Geese of Cambridge,” November 2009.
Is there any difference between this heartless starvation barrier of rocks, and the promised lovely logs in the City Council’s phase 1 project, or the corresponding plaza to be built by the DCR. Almost certainly NO.
Here is the plaza which was created out of the secret plans for the work funded by the Cambridge City Council at the destroyed boat dock of the 20th Century.
Phil Barber
No new dock, just more starvation techniques targeted at the Charles River White Geese.
The heartlessness of the CDD, DCR and the City Council’s “kind of activist” who has been in the middle of this series of massive destruction on the Charles was bragged about in this part of their propaganda show on the CDD’s turf, City Hall Annex.
At the top of the next page {Ed: below] is the reality of the “fight” against vegetation feeding on the POISONS introduced onto Magazine Beach by Cambridge and the DCR in the outrages of the 2000's.
Here is an accumulation of algae observed next to the blocked drainage. This blocking redirected drainage of poisons which should not even be used on the banks of the Charles River.
Phil Barber
Here are the true invasives, the Starvation Wall introduced by Cambridge and the DCR during the 2000's outrage, turning the Magazine Beach playing fields into a recreation facility which might as well be ten miles from the Charles River. No wonder the DCR now admits it is hated by the public.
Here is a photo of this outrage from the Boston Side five or so years ago.
This understates the situation since the Starvation Wall continues quite a bit further to the left / west, and there have been years of outrageous growth.
The brown opening to the right is the area which, until rendered unusable in the 2000's outrages, was the boat dock. Now, it is yet another technique in the heartless starvation of the 38 year resident tourist attraction, the Charles River White Geese.
Views of the playing fields from my June 6, 2017 letter are printed on page 11 below (page 13 of the June 6, 2017 letter), page 12 (page 14 of the June 6, 2017 letter) and page 13 (page 15 of the June 6, 2017 letter).
On page 14 below (page 32 of the June 6, 2017 letter) and page 15 (page 33 of the June 6, 2017 letter) are the tree destruction plans for the two important trees now being destroyed by the Cambridge City Council with plenty of wiggle room in the fine print.
Destruction of trees like this by private citizens on their own property is now illegal under the “tree protections” just passed by the Cambridge City Council. Naturally, the Cambridge City Council exempted itself and the DCR from the “tree protections,” but will run around yelling that they are protecting Cambridge from THE OTHER GUY.
2. Differences between the two.
The package filed by the City Council’s “kind of activist” provides plans and specifies where the work will be done. It is on page 3, above.
The information filed by the City Manager has to be assumed to originate in the Cambridge Development Department. It is on pages 2 and 3, above.
The filed plans by the City Council’s “kind of activist” show an area 1 which she says is City Council work, but the CDD says that area the City Council is paying for will be split dollar for dollar with the DCR.
The two agree on “new naturalized bank treatments (river bank and wetland area).” The CDD version calls for an equal amount to be spent by the DCR in the area for a “new accessible patio and terrace.”
Both call for “pruning of existing trees and shrubs,” while the CDD adds “other plant care.”
“Installation of oak logs” is included by the City Council’s “kind of activist.”
The combination does not seem to include (and since it is not said, almost certainly does not include), removal of the publicly hated starvation wall and replacement of it with the “lawn to the river” which was promised there. This bizarre blockade was built instead. It makes the playing fields for all practical purposes ten miles from the Charles River.
The promise upon which the Starvation Wall was achieved very clearly was compatible with and encouraged the continued habit of the major tourist attraction, the 38 year resident Charles River White Geese, to include the Magazine Beach playing fields, which have been the main food and residence for the last 38 years. The Charles River White Geese, instead are being heartlessly starved.
On page 4 is a photo of responsible humans feeding the Charles River White Geese on the first day of their heartless starvation to protect them from this reprehensible act by Cambridge and the DCR.
I have repeatedly offered my half hour video of the January 2016 outrage achieved by Cambridge, the DCR, and the City Council’s “kind of activist” and her friends. Hundreds of mostly excellent trees were destroyed between the BU and Longfellow Bridges. My trailer for that video runs less than five minutes. It is telling on its own. It is posted at https://youtu.be.com/x0iEFypDt8k.
As part of this outrage, the threesome destroyed every tree across from the Hyatt Regency and installed the outrage shown on page 4 under the first day starvation photo.
A video posted on YouTube by Ernie Sarno, “White Geese of Cambridge,” shows the Charles River White Geese getting up in the middle of the night and going to this area across from the Hyatt Regency to feed. This video is posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2-xSIYrB5o. When I last checked a year and a half ago, it had had had more than three thousand hits.
But Cambridge, the DCR, the City Council’s kind of activist and her friends have taken care of that. Those stones might as well be a Starvation Wall.
Instead of obvious starvation targeted stones, the City Council’s “ kind of activist” talks about lovely logs BEING PAID FOR BY THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL on the banks of the Charles River. There is no meaningful difference between the Starvation Stones and the Starvation Wall.
The CDD, through the City Manager talks about a lovely plaza.
On page 5, I show the secret “improvement” paid for by the Cambridge City Council at the location of the boat dock of the Twentieth Century which was rendered useless in the 2000's, and, dah dah, is now called a canoe dock. The secret work by the Cambridge City Council kept the destroyed boat dock still destroyed while creating more heartless blocking for the 38 years tourist attraction Charles River White Geese.
Dah, dah, the plaza the CDD talks about!!!! Ramping up the heartless starvation.
They work the same as the stones and the logs and the Starvation Wall.
Golly gee, a lovely plaza with beloved starvation obstacles for the major tourist attraction.
The City Council’s “kind of activist” talks about “pruning” trees and removing “invasives.” There is no mention whatsoever of removing the outrageous starvation wall.
On the page 6 is the record of the City Council’s “kind of activist” concerning “invasives” in this area.
What happened is that Cambridge and the DCR introduced poisons for the first time into Magazine Beach during the outrages of the 2000's.
To keep the poisons out of the Charles River, Cambridge and the DCR created a drainage system.
The City Council’s “kind of activist, in December 2017, blocked the drainage system, and has been rerouting poisons onto the banks and into the Charles River ever since. Matched with the photo of the blocked drainage system is a photo of a pond of algae created next to the blocked drainage system.
Blocking the drainage system was apparently obtained by funds obtained through the DCR.
Here is a photo of CITY OF CAMBRIDGE PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES PICKING UP THE TRASH CREATED in association with the blocking of the drainage system.
And to wrap it all up, here once again is the photo of an exhibit in a propaganda show in the CDD’s home turf, the City Hall Annex. The propaganda show appeared to be curated by the City Council’s “kind of activist” and her friends.
3. Relevant Portion of the FILED Plans the Cambridge City Council Does Not Want to Know About.
Here are the plans for that portion of area 1 under area 4, taken from our June 6, 2017, letter which is posted at http://focrwg.com/agenda1.html, and has been physically presented to the Cambridge City Council twice.
Once again, these are copies of plans filed with the Cambridge Conservation Commission matched to photos of the area.
These are pages 13, 14, 15, 32, and 33 of our June 6, 2017 letter.
On page 12 of this document (page 14 of the June 6, 2017 letter) and page 13 of this document (page 15 of the June 6, 2017 letter) are photos of the Starvation Wall from the playing field side and of the bizarre second wall between the parking lot and the blocking bridge.
This introduced vegetation is designed to prevent the Charles River White Geese from getting their food of most of the last 38 years (albeit with the DCR and City Council added poisons) should they get through the blocking bridge / destroyed boat dock / replaced introduced pond.
Our video on that outrage is posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.
I see plenty of reason to keep why the city council is keeping secret what it is funding from the voters.
4. Summary.
First of all, our June 6, 2017 letter was done in the face of extreme secrecy and frequently confusing plans. That secrecy and enforced confusion continue as a result of governmental wishes very clearly communicated by the great secrecies and misstatements in official actions.
To the extent our analysis may have problems in details, those problems were created by government outrages. We are doing our best in spite of government maneuvers. There is obvious fear in the Cambridge City Council that the voters will realize the terrible things the Cambridge City Council is doing.
The voters expect responsible behavior from the Cambridge City Council. Keeping destruction as secret as possible gives the voters the false impression of a responsible government. When the outrage is achieved, the usual “explanation” is:
Why did you not keep us from doing these terrible things?
This part of the project would appear to include destruction of excellent trees, plus AT MINIMUM heartless animal abuse in the use of logs as yet another wall to prevent feeding by the 38 year resident Charles River White Geese.
How long ago was the secret “rebuilding” of the NOT EVEN REBUILT boat dock with its secret amping up on heartless animal abuse?
Months.
Sincerely,
Robert J. La Trémouille
Chair
