Monday, June 11, 2012

Residents of Charles River at Home in Spite of Corrupt destruction of environment and heartless animal abuse

I have had several reports on both sides of the situation on the Charles River.

It is an easier report to gripe at the outrages especially since Cambridge’s very belligerent corruption is so major a part of an outrageous situation.

Nevertheless, these beautiful beings continue to live as best they can in spite of a tiny minority of corruption entities who have a greatly disproportionate and bad impact on them.

The tradition of corrupt behavior is a very major part of the problem in Cambridge, MA, USA, and it would appear to be key in keeping corrupt behavior controlling the Charles River.

But there is beauty on the Charles in spite of really destructive people.

Here are a number of photos. Most are photos taken a month ago, on May 13, 2012.

12 05-13-12 Charles S of DNA, Geese

This is the view most people now see of the Charles River White Geese since they are barred from direct contact through a decade of outrages.

This is the Charles River south of the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.

Three geese, two near shore, one further out, are enjoying the beautiful water.

When you talk to the destructive people destroying the Charles, their idea of creating a swimmable Charles River altogether too often turns out to be a wall on introduced vegetation preventing access between the Charles River and Magazine Beach, a wall which the key state manager has bragged starves the Charles River White Geese.

14 05-13-12, Charles near BU Bridge S of Constr, Wh Ducks

These are two Charles River White Geese and two Charles River White Ducks.

The photo is of an area near the BU Bridge just south of the construction zone by the BU Bridge.

The Charles River White Ducks were dumped at Magazine Beach on July 22, 2006, the day before Friends of the White Geese conducted a five year memorial for Bumpy, the long time leader of the Charles White Geese who was assassinated by a repeat animal killer. The animal killer apparently progressed to rape and murder of a young woman at the location where he had been beating nesting Mother Geese to death.

These two beauties were so innocent when they were dropped off that they thought dogs were their friends, and they did not know what all that blue stuff was all about.

During our memorial for Bumpy, I saved the White Ducks from an attack by a dog sicced on them by a man passing by. I kicked the dog when he had the neck of one of the ducks in his mouth.

The leader of the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative, the feeders of the Charles River White Geese, taught the Charles River White Ducks what all that blue stuff was for by backing into the Charles River while feeding them. They loved the water once they got into it. CRUWI has been feeding waterfowl residents since Cambridge and the DCR starting their deliberate starvation attacks.

The first year they resided on the Charles, they lived in a native wild on the south side of the Charles in Boston. That native wild was apparently destroyed as part of the repeated environmental destruction by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”

The Charles River Conservancy twice a year starting in 2003 has destroyed native vegetation lining the Charles needed for protection by migratory waterfowl. They destroy everything on the Charles River Basin except for the bizarre wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River.

They are consistent. They destroy as part of environmental destruction. They refrain from destroying the introduced thicket whose primary purposes is heartless animal abuse.

The Boston Conservation Commission has expressed shock at the destructiveness of this falsely named group.


Courtesy of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority who did photos of the event, here is a photo of the dog on attack.


And a more pleasant MWRA photo from the same day, before the attack. They were apparently dropped at the foot of this tree at the opening to the Magazine Beach parking lot. They stayed there waiting for their owner to return.

Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation are aberrations but very destructive aberrations with a massive, corrupt, group in Cambridge running around signing their false praises.

15 05-13-12 Charles S of const, barrier, geese

This is another view of the pretty much the same location as the third above, although a little to the east.

18 05-13-12 3 babies and parents in wasteland.

Here are three goslings and their parents and babysitter (one of the threesome is to the left). They are in an area which was lush with ground vegetation until the Charles River “Conservancy” started destroying the environment for the DCR.

Needless to say, the Charles River “Conservancy” is not friendly to the animal population of the Charles River.

I reported a few reports ago of the incursion of a large group of Charles River White Geese into the area where the DCR is growing yet another impenetrable thicket. At the lead of the group were three adolescent goslings with their parents and baby sitter in tow. This threesome could be the same guys a few weeks earlier.

Cambridge, MA, USA, City Council to consider Monteiro case again

1. Introduction.
2. City Manager Initiative.
3. City Council’s Hearing Schedule
4. Letter from Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley.
5. Evaluation of Councilor Kelley.
6. Evaluation of City Manager’s Monteiro plaintiffs proposal.

1. Introduction.

I am informed by a supporter of Councilor Kelley that the Cambridge City Council sitting at its Finance Committee will be meeting this morning, June 11, 2012 at 9 am. They will be discussing the payments in the case of Malvina Monteiro and others v. City of Cambridge.

This is the case in which jury, judge and appeals court found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of department head (Cape Verdean, black, woman) Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.

The Kelley supporter has provided a number of documents which I appreciate and will pass on to you.

I will comment at the end.

2. City Manager Initiative.

The following was included in the City Manager’s communications to the Cambridge City Council, the “City Manager Agenda” for Monday, April 23, 2012:

15. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account.

The action at that time was :


The City Manager’s Letter of explanation read:

April 23, 2012

To the Honorable, the City Council:

As I have informed the City Council previously, the disbursement of funds for the legal matters resulting from the 1998 Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination claim was paid from the Statutory Budget Category of "Travel and Training" (Judgment and Damages), and, that the City's Free Cash balance of over $102 million dollars would be the source of these funds. In order for that Statutory Budget Category to conclude Fiscal Year 2012 "in balance" it is necessary to appropriate the funds from Free Cash to Judgment and Damages.

Thus, I am hereby recommending the appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account.

Very truly yours,

Robert W. Healy
City Manager

3. City Council’s Hearing Schedule


Monday, June 11, 2012, 9:00 am

The Finance Committee will conduct a public meeting to discuss an appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account and to discuss changing the Traffic Regulations in Appendix D, Schedule 13 by striking out the penalty fee of $30.00 and substitute in place the fee of $5.00 as it relates to Section 16.7 entitled "Street Cleaning".

(Ackermann Room)

Ed: The Ackerman Room is much smaller than the Cambridge City Council’s chambers. The meeting is scheduled during the day. Both strongly discourage public participation.

4. Letter from Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley.

From: Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley []
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 12:30 AM
To: Interim City Clerk Donna Lopez;
Subject: Monday's Finance meeting


I cannot make Monday’s meeting of the finance committee and would appreciate this letter being read and entered into the record.

Many thanks.


Dear Committee Members:

Because of Cooper’s ‘moving on’ ceremony today at 9 AM, I cannot make this meeting. I continue to be amazed that the City can spend millions and millions and millions of dollars on what started as a discrimination complaint and wound up as a wrongful termination complaint and no one ever has to say he, or she, is sorry, no one has to explain what processes and procedures have been put in place to keep the sort of behavior that resulted in this judgement from happening again and no one has been censured. I am not surprised that the Manager has not expressed regret for his actions as I think that he truly believes he did nothing wrong and that the case was decided incorrectly. I disagree, but at least I can follow his logic and if he feels he did nothing wrong I see no sense in expecting him to apologize for it. That the Council, as a body, feels no need to apologize to everybody involved, though, troubles me. At the end of the day, the Manager is an employee of the Council and we are responsible for his actions, both the ones with happy outcomes and the ones that are problematic.

I also still wonder how much the various aspects of these cases cost us. I would like to know how much:

1. We paid for outside legal counsel before our appeal of Ms. Montiero’s judgement

2. We paid for such counsel on the appeal of Ms. Montiero’s case

3. We paid for such counsel to handle the Wong and Stamper cases [ed: final two plaintiffs].

4. How much in extra costs- opponents legal fees, interest and so forth- as a result of our appeal of the Montiero verdict.

5. How much, in total (not counting City staff time) these cases cost us

6. If there were similar cases that the City also settled in any department

7. If there are similar cases pending in any department

I propose the following Order:

Whereas: A combination of discrimination and wrongful termination complaints have resulted in many millions of dollars of costs and damages for the City of Cambridge; and

Whereas: The actions that led to these complaints, plus the filing of the complaints and subsequent law suits, caused much anguish for the City employees involved; and

Whereas: It is not clear the that City Manager has ever apologized to the City of Cambridge or anyone else involved for any role he may have played in creating this situation; and

Whereas: It is not clear what practices and policies the City has instituted to help ensure that similar situations do not arise in the future; now be it therefore

Ordered: That the Council extend its apologies to both the City employees who filed the complaints and to the taxpayers and residents of the City of Cambridge for both the angst created by its employee, the City Manager, and the cost to the City as a result of these cases; and be it further

Ordered: That the Council hereby lets the City Manager know of its disapproval of his judgement and actions regarding this situation; and be it further

Ordered: That the City Manager be, and hereby is, requested to report back to the City Council with an explanation of what processes and procedures have been instituted to help ensure that such a situation does not arise in the future.

5. Evaluation of Councilor Kelley.

Councilor Kelley is a firm member of the Cambridge Machine with regard to environmental destruction and zoning machinations commonly written by the Cambridge City Manager’s people. Their zoning initiatives very frequently achieve the opposite of what they claim to be doing.

Kelley practices, and brags of, environmentalism, Cambridge style: Save the world, but how dare you discuss Cambridge destroying Cambridge.

6. Evaluation of City Manager’s Monteiro plaintiffs proposal.

Kelley has frequently been a minority of one on the Cambridge City Council concerning Monteiro. Interestingly, however, he was the swing vote on keeping records on the matter secret.

In Cambridge, swing votes can be much more important than being a minority of one on the “right side”. Nevertheless, Kelley’s “extreme” position for Cambridge is, nevertheless, way out of touch, far less than would be called for with regard to reality in the real world.

The jury in the Monteiro case said $1.1 million real damages, $3.5 million penal damages.

The trial judge described the City Manager’s behavior as “reprehensible.”

The appeals court panel refused to dignify Cambridge’s appeal with a formal opinion. The panel referred to “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.”

The Cambridge City Council is very clearly being told something.

The Monteiro decision is ample grounds for the Cambridge City Council to very safely fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office. Firing could, without question, be done without his golden parachute. Firing could possibly be done without pension. Except for the pension issue any court action by the Cambridge City Manager would be a clear waste of time.