Saturday, August 13, 2011

Cambridge City Council opposes Grand Junction “plans” not Grand Junction passenger service

It is very distressing to be faced with the pretty much non stop con games in Cambridge, MA, on environmental issues.

Whenever I see the Cambridge Machine “opposing” something, I get very scared if I oppose what the Machine claims to oppose. The very much non stop game is “I am your friend, I am your friend. You cannot win. Have I got a deal for you.”

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation is studying passenger use of the Grand Junction railroad through Cambridge for passenger service from Worcester to Boston, going to North Station rather than to South Station.

The North Station route is far inferior to the South Station route and it would be of particular benefit to at most a tiny percentage of commuters. To the extent Worcester needs an expansion of service, plans to expand South Station into the adjacent South Postal Annex property are fully capable of covering Worcester.

The North Station route, with its passage under the BU Bridge and through the irresponsibly destroyed goose habitat would add to the devastation in the Charles River and on its banks. This is exactly comporting with the wishes of Cambridge and certain state bureaucrats to destroy all animal life on the Charles River basin.

Further, by adding passenger at a number grade crossings on major Cambridge streets, passenger service will generate pollution from a very large number of idling cars.

The game of the Cambridge Pols has an artificially created villain in MassDOT. Cambridge city councilors have been spouting the usual game. Since MassDOT is not their accomplice in environmental destruction, MassDOT is ripe for attacks. By contrast, the environmentally destructive bureaucrats are uniformly declared “environmentalists” by the Cambridge pols.

The press recently headlined a vote by the Cambridge City Council on Grand Junction railroad passenger railroad service. The headlines said the Cambridge City Council opposes passenger service. The fine print says the Cambridge City Council opposes the MassDOT PLANS for passenger service.

I have seen the official report of the vote. It opposes the PLANS, not passenger service.

The difference: my impression when I saw the Cambridge City Council discussing this matter in an earlier meeting was that too many Cambridge City Councillors were standing up to MassDOT because MassDOT was behaving in an responsible manner.

Since MassDOT was not supporting an irresponsible passenger service plan, and, in fact, does not support any plan, the City Councilors were unhappy with MassDOT’s “plans”. Cambridge City Councilors wanted non existent plans changed to a destructive alternative which the Cambridge Pols are trying to sell as a “compromise.” Not mentioned is the fact that the “compromise” has the same Cambridge City Councillors on both sides of the “compromise.”

The latest “vote” does not change things.

Con game, con game, con game. This is the City of Cambridge, MA.

The vote may be reviewed at: