Saturday, June 27, 2015

Cambridge City Council Tables Expediting of Dog Killing

Cambridge City Council Tables Expediting of Dog Killing

I reported on June 20, 2015, that the Cambridge City Council was considering speeding up the killing of dogs held as strays.

Monday night, June 22, 2015, the City Council, on motion of Councilor Kelley, tabled the entire package which included the speeding up of killing.

Matters tabled can be considered by the Cambridge City Council at any subsequent regular meeting, and they frequently are.

My report was posted at

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

Further Environmental Destruction by the City of Cambridge. This time in Kendall Square

Further Environmental Destruction by the City of Cambridge.  This time in Kendall Square

The following trees have been destroyed in Kendall Square.  I understand they are almost all on the inbound side of Main Street.

This destruction occurred, as near as I can gather, before the outrage on the Cambridge Common and, of course, before the latest charm offensive by fake groups and city employees, lying about their sainthood and omitting their vileness.

Thank God for MassDOT which seems to be the only barrier responsible people have as protection against a very destructive city government and TEN destructive city councilors.

* * *

238 Main St – Removal of 3 pear trees (9.6”, 11.6”, and 13.6”) due to . . . streetscape improvement project. . . .

Cambridge Center (on Main St) – Removal of 5 pear trees (13”, 13.2”, 12.9”, 7.7”, and 6.3”) due to . . .streetscape improvement project. . . .

Cambridge Center (on Main St) – Removal of 6 pear trees (6.3”, 5.7”, 8.7”, 15.6”, 13.8”, and 15.3”) due to . . . streetscape improvement project. . . .

326 Main St – Removal of 2 pear trees (15.8” and 17.1”) due to . . .streetscape improvement project. . . .

336 Main St – Removal of 2 pear trees (13” and 15.8”) due to . . . streetscape improvement projects. . . .

355 Main St – Removal of 7 pear trees (15.5”, 11.6”, 8.8”, 7.7”, 8”, 9”, and 8.1”) due to . . .streetscape improvement project. . . .

400 Main St – Removal of 2 pear trees (16.8” and 17.9”) due to . . . streetscape improvement project. . . .

* * *

The source of this list is the destruction posting by the city employee supposedly protecting trees.  I have omitted nonsensical crap from the list as posted.  Omitted crap includes the usual bragging about saplings.

Contractors get paid to destroy.  Contractors get paid for saplings.  “Everybody” is happy.

This report is based on two independent observations by people well familiar with the area.  The second person provided this list after checking to see that they were gone.

I am not providing names.  In the City of Cambridge, it can be dangerous to expect responsible behavior out of the City of Cambridge.  And if anybody challenges this statement, I have one word for them: Monteiro, Monteiro, Monteiro, Monteiro.

And, oh yeah, the guy who was condemned by three levels of court for destroying Monteiro’s life had the Police Station named after him.

Monteiro, of course, is the black Cape Verdian department head who was fired by the then City Manager (and police station namesake) in retaliation for filing a women’s rights complaint.

It is dangerous to expect self-proclaimed saints in the City of Cambridge to be saints in reality.

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Cambridge, MA, City Council considers killing stray dogs sooner.

Cambridge, MA, City Council considers killing stray dogs sooner.

1. The vile animal / environmental situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.
2. Yet another proposal to make things worse.
3. Attendance procedures.
1. The vile animal / environmental situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.

Cambridge, MA, USA has draconian limits on the public behavior of dogs.

They, of course, are deliberately starving the 34 year resident gaggle of the Charles River White Geese by the bizarre and massive wall they built between Magazine Beach and the Charles River. They are considering worse attacks on them and are "neutral" toward outrages included in Ch. 286, of the Massachusetts Acts of 2014, "Historic Parkways". They paid for a mass pogrom of animals resident in 3.4 acres of the Alewife Reservation.
We have reported multiple animal abuse and environmental outrages at

2. Yet another proposal to make things worse.

Cambridge’s abuse of animals could be ramped up by a proposal in front of the City Council Monday night, June 22, 2015, at 5:30 pm.

This evening will see a proposal to cut back the kill day for strays held by the City of Cambridge from 10 days to 7 days.

This is in "Policy Order #10" concerning "Animal Control Regulations.

The motion by Councilor Carlone and Vice Mayor Benzan would move forward "proposed amendments to Chapter 6.04 [of the Municipal Code] entitled ‘Animal Control Regulations’".

The descriptive document is posted at

The next to the last paragraph on the first page is the description. Some bureaucrat considers it "unnecessary" to refrain from killing for 10 days and wants it reduced to 7 days. See the above link for so many other items of destruction of "unnecessary" parts of our world.

The key provision with changes is further in the document on page 7 (unnumbered pages). It is section 6.04.030.C.  I tried to copy it here, but was able to. 

3. Attendance procedures.

The Cambridge City Council meets on the second floor of Cambridge City Hall which is located at 795 Massachusetts Avenue across from the Central Square Post Office on the Harvard Square end of Central Square Cambridge.

The meeting starts at 5:30 pm.

All interested people may speak.

People who want to speak must sign up to speak not later than 6 pm.
Email comments may be sent to, but these do not become part of the record.

Emails received by the city clerk with request to transmit to the City Council which are received by her by Thursdays before meetings are passed on to them in the next meeting. Her email is

Friday, June 19, 2015

Charles River: Major victory on the Grand Junction, plus

RE: Charles River: Major victory on the Grand Junction, plus

1. Apology to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT).
2. MassDOT, Mass. Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), Cambridge, MA.
3. Worcester Line Commuter Rail out of Consideration for Grand Junction.
4. The announcements.
5. Conclusion.
7. Cambridge’s Record.
1. Apology to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT).

The scope of your decision on the Grand Junction will be analyzed in detail below.

First and foremost, however, I regret not publicly praising you during my comment on Tuesday, June 16, at the Mass. Pike (I90) public meeting in Allston.

First of all, it took awhile to fully evaluate the major importance of those words on one slide. Only when I raised the issue at the Capital Investment Plan presentation in Taunton did the scope of what you have done fully sink in. There was no ambiguity and there was very great clarity in the response.

It seems very clear now that all commuter rail service on the Framingham - Worcester line will continue to terminate in South Station and none will be rerouted to North Station via the Grand Junction railroad or any other way.

Additionally, I did my best on Tuesday to keep my comments to the instructed two minutes.

I hope that, in addition to your continued excellence in Grand Junction planning, you will aggressively and successfully follow up with Olympics planners and achieve for the Olympics, for North Allston, and for Cambridge, the Back Bay, and for rapid transit planning in general, the very major advantages which can be achieved through the construction of the Green Line A spur I have proposed.

The value of the Green Line A spur increases the more I think of it, and the timing works excellently between the Mass. Pike work and the Olympics needs, plus this major and valuable regional transportation improvement will be an additional sweetener on a national scale to a Boston Olympics 2024.

In any case, thank you. At absolute minimum, I could not possibly have said everything that needed to be said in that 2 minutes, plus the full scope and importance of your decision did not come to my mind until my exchange in Taunton.

Thank you very much and my commendations.

2.   MassDOT, Mass. Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), Cambridge, MA.

The impact of the DCR dates back to a reorganization of a very vile state department which comports well with the government of the City of Cambridge, MA.

Dealing with the DCR, the City of Cambridge, and MassDOT is like sitting in a room with two destructive children and one adult. The adult, MassDOT, is not perfect, but the adult is normal and responsible.

The legislature meaningfully communicated pretty much the same in the reorganization which stripped the former Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) of a lot of its power and folded the rest into the DCR. Power over bridges on the Charles River went to MassDOT, which already had the Grand Junction railroad. The rest of the MDC went into the DCR.

The reason was simple: flat out contempt in the legislature for the destructiveness and incompetence of the DCR. The City of Cambridge is very much in sync with the destructiveness. Regrettably, the planning department of the MDC is the destructive part, and that destructive planning department wound up in the DCR pretty much intact.

But on the Charles River, the adult is standing up to the irresponsible children.

This report, except as directly relevant, does not go into MassDOT excellent record in comparison to that of the
destructive children.

3. Worcester Line Commuter Rail out of Consideration for Grand Junction.

Dirty tricks are the norm in Cambridge Planning. The pols commonly fight "for" the wishes of their constituents and then "regretfully" and "after great thought" and after cynical maneuvering of their constituents, achieve what they wanted to achieve in the first place.

Here is MassDOT’s map showing the Grand Junction railroad in Cambridge.

The purpose of this railroad, historically, has been to provide connection for freight between train yards:
a. associated with Boston’s North Station (above the map) and
b. associated with Boston’s South Station (below the map). This is the yard which was mostly emptied a year or so ago and whose use is now under consideration in the Mass. Turnpike (I90) planning.

The Mass. Pike has a major exit to Cambridge and to Boston’s Brighton / Allston neighborhoods in the same area are the former rail yard. Cambridge’s Harvard University bought both about ten years ago subject to transportation uses.

Additionally, the Grand Junction has been used to transfer passenger cars between the two yards for use on the respective parts of the passenger system, plus I think there are maintenance facilities in the Mass. Pike area.

I have marked on the map the streets of the City of Cambridge whose traffic would be disrupted by each and every passenger train rerouted to the Grand Junction. This would constitute severe impact to traffic on those roads.

Here is the most recent MassDOT map showing their intentions in the key rebuilding area.

West Station is near the bottom slightly right of middle. Above it is the Mass. Pike. going around it.

MassDOT previously studied Cambridge’s gambit for commuter service on the Grand Junction. MassDOT found commuter passenger service on the Grand Junction had no value except for Cambridge’s Kendall Square which, in turn, is dominated by Cambridge’s Massachusetts Institute of Technology. MIT has major speculative development existing and planned near the Grand Junction Railroad.

MassDOT stated that MassDOT saw no value for commuter rail service on the Grand Junction as long as the commuter rail could go to South Station.

This week’s announcements strongly reaffirm that position.

4. The announcements.

In the Tuesday meeting concerning Mass. Pike rebuilding, there was one slide which stated that all commuter rail service from the commuter rail West Station (proposed as part of the planning) and a nearby proposed station would go to South Station. This is contrary to what had been previously discussed for West Station.

I hope I got this straight.

On Thursday, I went to MassDOT’s public presentation in Taunton, MA, to the south of Boston, concerning MassDOT’s capital plans for the next year.

I questioned the presenters and got a highly non ambiguous response that ALL commuter rail on the Framingham - Worcester line (which includes West Station and the Mass. Pike reorganization are) would go to South Station. No ambiguity whatsoever.
5. Conclusion.

Crossing the Charles River on the Grand Junction railroad with commuter rail service would have severe impact on the free animals on the Cambridge side and on the environment in which they live. That seems to be clearly off the table.

Once again, thank you Mass DOT.

6. Green Line A proposal.

Excellent idea and well but briefly presented by me at the Tuesday meeting.

Green Line A would readily be fit in with the MassDOT Mass. Pike plans. I have been carful in my plans to exactly specify the location of nothing in the main Mass. Pike rebuilding area.

The plan:

My most recent report on this concept has been posted at

That report includes links to all posts in the very detailed analysis I have provided.

7. Cambridge’s Record.


Recent summary at

A lot of photos.

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Charles River: Green Line A, Olympics - Changes in Harvard Station.

RE: Charles River: Green Line A, Olympics - Changes in Harvard Station.
1. Mass. Department of Transportation Planning Capital Expenditures.
a. Green Line A on point for merit and for payment for honorable behavior.
b. Changes in Harvard Station?
c. Other?
2. Letter to the Secretary of Transportation.
3. The map.
4. Prior reports on Green Line A.
1. Mass. Department of Transportation Planning Capital Expenditures.
[above format mandated by the computer]

Yesterday afternoon, June 16, I attended a briefing from MassDOT on its plans for capital expenditures. I usually avoid it because the numbers they give tend to be extremely large and impossible for a non expert to evaluate.

Nevertheless, immediately after the meeting, I stopped off in a favorite Starbucks and posted the comment in section 2, below.

a. Green Line A on point for merit and for payment for honorable behavior.

First and foremost, the Green Line A proposal I have spent a lot of time on exactly fits their interests. So I passed on encouragement to go forward with this excellent concept.

I support it, first, because it is an excellent idea, and secondly, I think the actions of Olympics 2024 well deserve the commendation and support of decent human beings.

These folks are standing up to the belligerent heartless animal abuse of the City of Cambridge, the Department of Conservation and Recreation and their fake groups. These are good people.

b. Changes in Harvard Station?

They had lovely maps posted. Next to Harvard Square, Cambridge was a comment concerning an emergency elevator, and concerning the busway.

These are exactly on point with regard to Green Line A and could be appropriate for modifications in the Green Line A proposal. So I asked them what they are doing.

c. Other?

I am going to try to find the fine print behind those big numbers, but comments are due very quickly.

If I find fine print which interests me as much as the Harvard comment, I will let them know, and pass it on to you.
2.   Letter to the Secretary of Transportation.


Stephanie Pollack, Secretary and CEO
10 Park Plaza, 4160
Boston, MA 02116


Madame Secretary:

Enclosed is a map presentation of a Green Line A spur which I suggest would be extremely helpful to the Olympics 2024 proposal and to rapid transit needs in Cambridge, North Allston and Back Bay plus points beyond.

The idea is to insert switches on the Green Line B west of the BU Bridge and run a line between the rebuilt Mass. Pike viaduct, through the Harvard Medical School area, and North Allston to Harvard Station, connecting to Harvard Station via the still existing Red Line tunnel from the current Harvard Station plaza, next to the lower busway, and ending between the JFK School and the Charles Hotel.

The attachment includes a number of links. My most recent analysis is posted at It includes a full list of links concerning parts of the possible line.

I am writing to you to support this idea.

I am also trying to get information on a project which could possibly impact this concept which I saw on your projects map at the Transportation Building meeting just now.

I understand money is being expended on "replacement elevator" and "busway repairs."

I would strongly appreciate getting adequate information on these projects to determine if they impact a Green Line A running out of Harvard Station.

In particular:

a. "Busway Repairs." The Green Line A spur would be operating in the former Red Line tunnel next to the lower busway. Does this work impact use of that tunnel?

b. "Replacement elevator." The biggest hangup in a Green Line A terminating at Harvard Station is the interrelationship with the two existing elevators.

(1) First of all, the Brattle Square elevator to the upper busway does not, apparently, impact the Red Line tunnel. However, its foundation could possibly impact or even block use of the Red Line tunnel next to the lower busway. Does that current elevator impact the Red Line tunnel use. Do your changes impact Red Line tunnel use?

(2) Secondly, a very major impediment to putting a terminus at the station plaza (option S1) is the existing elevator from street level to the plaza. My understanding is that the elevator would have to be moved to the northeast side of the headhouse to put a terminus at plaza level. This would allow a new elevator with a middle stop at the mezzanine. Do your changes alter the situation with regard to the impact of this existing elevator?

Thank you very much for your interest and consideration. I have major environmental experience on the Charles River and in Cambridge. I have major transportation experience starting with two years labor experience including about six months on the ground, for the then Penn Central Transportation Company.

I proposed the Kenmore Crossing for the Urban Ring concept in 1986, before the MBTA’s adoption of it as a formal alternative in 1991. It is now apparently the successful alternative, looking at the money spent on upgrading Yawkey Station, which is part of the Kenmore Crossing but would have to be moved if the other crossing were ultimately selected.

I am chair of Friends of the White Geese, an Attorney General recognized charitable organization. We appreciate our understanding that the Olympics would destroy a bizarre starvation wall at the Magazine Beach playing fields which seems to have no functional value except for heartless animal abuse in accord with the DCR’s plan to kill off or drive away all resident animals on the Charles River Basin.

The DCR’s Starvation Wall at Magazine Beach directly and knowingly starves the 34 year resident gaggle of the Charles River White Geese, blocking access to their food of most of the last 34 years.

In coordination with our appreciation for Olympics 2024's responsible behavior at Magazine Beach, and the excellence of our proposal, we are hoping that Green Line A spur can be adopted. At minimum, I would appreciate further information of the Harvard Station work as described above.

Thank you for your consideration and assistance.

Robert J. La Trémouille

Individually and as chair, Friends of the White Geese

PS: Yahoo tells me there is a problem with the attachment. If it does not come through, the above link will bring you straight to it.

3. The map.

Yahoo would not let me attach the map of the Green Line A concept. I hope they check it out from the link. The link did include a small rendition.

I have more control over this blog.

Here is the map.

4.          Prior reports on Green Line A.

 [more unwanted computer help]

Saturday, June 13, 2015

Charles River: Update to Government Created Filth on the Charles.

Charles River: Update to Government Created Filth on the Charles.

Here is a map of the place of the origin of the ANNUAL Algae infestation created by the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

Its name is Ebersol Field.

The Charles River is to the left. Boston’s Massachusetts General Hospital and Beacon Hill neighborhood are to the right. Boston Harbor is above the map area, not really that far. The Massachusetts Avenue Bridge is below the area. The area is very close to the Longfellow Bridge. Then comes the Massachusetts Avenue Bridge, perhaps a mile to the south.

The source is Google Maps.

This supplements my report of June 6.


Saturday, June 06, 2015

Charles River: Government Created Filth Closes Down Swimming.

1. Caveat.
2. Charles River closed down for swimming.
3. Reality.
4. Relevance to ongoing outrages.

1. Caveat.

First of all, apologies.

I have been forced to "upgrade" to Windows 8, and there are a lot of pain in the neck problems. So web administrative details are a nightmare. I am working from multiple sources. The current information is clear. My crediting is a nightmare.

2. Charles River closed down for swimming.

I picked up the following somewhere. It is confirmed in a bunch of places.

* * * *
Charles River Swim Postponed due to Elevated Cyanobacteria Levels

Water samples collected at the Charles River Swim Dock on Tuesday, June 2 exceeded Massachusetts Department of Public Health guidelines for cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) in recreational waters. Due to the elevated cyanobacteria levels, the
Charles River Swim, scheduled for June 6, has been postponed to June 19. During a cyanobacteria bloom people and pets should avoid contact with water with cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) and rinse thoroughly after contact. If subsequent water quality samples do not show evidence of a bloom, the advisory will be lifted.


A group which claims to be a Charles River Watershed Association has done a beautiful analysis, while, of course, ignoring reality. I call groups like this fake groups because they all fit the same pattern. They claim love for their supposed loved things, but they cannot, somehow, recognize the obvious, when the obvious damns the bureaucrats pulling their strings..

I think real groups will recognize the obvious, even if the obvious is that their friends in government are the problem. Thus a group which "loves" the Charles River, but does not want to know the very great destructiveness inflicted on the Charles River comes from their friends in government strikes me as a fake group. A very real cheerleader for an irresponsible government, but a fake group as far as supposed concerns for the Charles River go.

This, after all is the Charles River, and is part of the stench which owns the government in the City of Cambridge.

3. Reality.

Reality, as is altogether too common, is based on government destructiveness.

The environmental outrage at the Magazine Beach playing fields was an expansion of irresponsibility by the Department of Conservation and Recreation at Ebersol Fields. Ebersol Fields is on the banks of the Charles River on the opposite, Boston side, perhaps two miles to the east, toward the harbor, near Massachusetts General Hospital.

The poisons being dumped on Magazine Beach’s playing fields to keep alive sickly introduced grass were first used at Ebersol Fields.

A few years ago, the DCR noticed that their beloved poisons were not working as well as they wanted at Ebersol Fields, so the DCR "upgraded" their beloved poisons. The poison upgrade was marked with a prohibition against using near water.

The next day, the Charles River was infested with algae from Boston Harvard to the Mass. Ave. Bridge. That infestation never previously occurred. That infestation has reoccurred annually or more often ever since.

So the fake groups bemoan reality and protect their friends.

To the fake groups, the reality that this recurring outrage comes from their friends in government is not acceptable. So reality to everybody else is not real in their world.

4. Relevance to ongoing outrages.

After all all, another fake group, at Magazine Beach is fighting to expand the use of poisons.

The DCR destroyed perfectly good grass at Magazine Beach and replaced that grass which had grown responsibly for most of a Century. They replaced the good grass with the introduction of sickly stuff which needs the DCR’s beloved poisons. So the DCR and Cambridge put in an expensive drainage system to drain off the poisons which should not be there in the first place.

The DCR and that fake group are fighting to expand this outrage.

The perfectly good grass which was replaced with sickly stuff is still alive on the hill west of the playing fields.

To the DCR and the fake group, good, environmentally responsible, grasses are unacceptable.

They want the sickly stuff and its poisons.

The fact that the DCR with its love for poisons has caused this annual or more infestation can’t be true. After all the DCR insists it is sainthood reincarnated, and the purpose of fake groups is to support ongoing lies of this sort from government.