I. Introduction.
II. Letter responding to the Cambridge City Council’s Specification of an Absolute Dictator on Charles River Matters.
III. Republication of my abridged summary of my record as an activist in the City of Cambridge, MA.
I. Introduction.
At its most recent meeting, on July 25, 2018, the Cambridge City Council took the second SECRET vote on development on Magazine Beach in recent weeks.
Published below is our letter to Cambridge City Council which places on record the record of the woman the Cambridge City Council is praising like mad in the process of passing the blame for Magazine Beach on to her.
They are, very clearly, claiming that they are only obeying her orders, in their efforts for destruction on Magazine Beach. The City Council is running away from responsibility. In the process, they are massively praising this woman in place of explaining their vote. The votes have always been unanimous.
Very much standard. The electorate in Cambridge demands a responsible government. The electorate gets a bunch of lies and an environmentally destructive city government on things most relevant to the City Council’s responsibilities to the City of Cambridge.
The City Council has one meeting during the summer. That will be next Monday, July 25, 2018. The letter in Section II was filed with the City Manager on July 23, 2018, and with the City Clerk for the City Council’s next meeting on the same day. This will be the third communication from us at that meeting.
Acronyms deliberately dominate the letter. The acronyms used are sarcastic. Additionally, however, it does get monotonous to use nasty terms all the time. So we have sarcastic acronyms in their place.
Part of the con by which Cambridge retains an environmentally destructive City Council in a city which demands a responsible government are lovely people running around claiming to protect. We are referring to as the SAD the currently most visible person in this outrage. She is the subject of the Cambridge City Council’s imminent “SHE MADE ME DO IT” con.
The game is that they Specified her as their Absolute Dictator on Charles River matters during the June 25, 2018 vote, thus SAD.
The longer acronym, DDDPG, emphasizes the con of too many fake groups running around sounding so good, all designated as “credible” by the Cambridge Development Department. Fake DDDPGs have significant inbreeding. They are controlled by a tiny number of people who are very friendly with each other and mutually supportive in whatever the latest con is.
Rather than constantly saying this fake but lovely sounding “protective” group and that fake but lovely sounding “protective” group, Development Department Designated “Protective” Group / DDDPG sounds cleaner and faster.
The most important difference between the bad DDDPG’s and entities directly appointed by the Cambridge Development Department is that it can be possible to win in one of the DDDPG’s because there can be people able to vote who are not controlled. That makes the tiny number of people who control the bad DDDPG very unhappy, and, as stated below, there is a definite reality of corrupt behavior to get around responsible votes. Note that there are references to such corrupt behavior in very major parts of my minimized presentation of my record.
I reference one of the other communications at the coming meeting repeatedly.
The other communication is a direct copy of the document at the very end of the following post: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/charles-river-i90-rebuild-response-to.html.
I have not separately reposted this filing. The key part of the document is being refiled with the city council. The refiling with the City Council is because a key page was lost in printing by the City Clerk, The key page is clearly presented in the post on the blog of the document, as part of the final attachment.
This refiled document is a partial presentation of my extremely impressive record as an activist in the City of Cambridge. I offer it as comparison to the, until this post, secret record of the SAD whom the City Council is setting up for “SHE MADE ME DO IT.” I include mention of relevant activities of her less secret DDDPG and of other bad DDDPG’s.
To simplify things for the reader, the refiled document follows below after the City Council letter.
The records of the SAD, and of her DDDPG are quite sad.
But City Councilors have been praising her like mad.
Our analysis of the record the SAD and the record of her DDDPG are spelled out in detail in the letter, below. The differences between her record and mine are striking. That is the reason the Cambridge City Council is praising her and not me.
II. Letter responding to the Cambridge City Council’s Specification of an Absolute Dictator on Charles River Matters.
RE: City Council’s Specification of an Absolute Dictator on Charles River Matters
1. City Council Vote for Destruction, Affirmation of a Specified Absolute Dictator.
2. General Aspects of the record of the SAD.
3. Key outrages which discredit the supposed sainthood of the SAD and her Development Department Designated Protective Groups.
A. Abuse of Agenda - Key Designation Vote in Particular.
B. Abuse of Agenda - Destruction in BU - Longfellow Bridge area “not in jurisdiction” to discuss protecting, but it was “in jurisdiction” to seek payoff for helping destruction.
4. The City Council has designated this person as SAD on the Charles River for no other apparent reason than that because the City Council “think[s] she's great.”
5. Similar outrages, similar DDDPG’s.
A. My Record.
B. Alewife.
(1) Government Destruction / “Protection.”
(2) Privately initiated protection.
C. Destruction of the Cambridge Common.
D. More Examples of my Record.
6. Summary.
Gentlemen / Ladies:
1. City Council Vote for Destruction, Affirmation of a Specified Absolute Dictator.
At the City Council’s last meeting, on June 25, 2018, in Order 13, the City Council passed its second straight SECRET vote on Magazine Beach.
The big difference from the prior one was that this time the City Council asked the City Manager to create a committee controlled by entities who dominated the fight for Charles River destruction achieved by Cambridge and the state’s Department of Conservation and Recreation in January 2016. The City Council used the same code words that the less secret of these entities used when they were, successfully, fighting for the needless and outrageous destruction of hundreds of excellent trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges on Memorial Drive.
It would be silly to consider this vote other than a directive for more outrageous destruction, carefully worded to keep that destruction secret from responsible members of the electorate. Thus the City Council voted to lie to its voters as to the destructiveness of the Cambridge City Council at the same time as directing yet more outrageous destruction.
Key in the debate was the specification of an Absolute Dictator to the Cambridge City Council on Charles River matters. Mayor McGovern has recently repeated this designation as: “I am not distancing myself from her. I think she's great.” He came pretty close to the position espoused by Councilor Devereux as she communicated why the City Council was CLAIMING TO ACT as the unthinking implementor of this person, recognizing her as their Specified Absolute Dictator (hereafter “SAD”).
The City Council has made the record of the SAD an appropriate matter for public discussion. In what should be one of the first communications received by the City Council on July 30, 2018, I have given an impressive, but PARTIAL summary of my record as an activist.
2. General Aspects of the record of the SAD.
The SAD has fought for this massive destruction for many years. While bragging about the excellence of her plans, she has uniformly kept secret:
● The destruction of 56 mostly excellent trees; part already done, the rest perhaps imminent.
● The rerouting into the Charles River of poisons dumped on Magazine Beach by the DCR and Cambridge.
● Continuation and exacerbating of heartless animal abuse.
The SAD has never publicly acknowledged any of these outrages in the plans she and nine members of the City Council are fighting for at Magazine Beach.
She loudly brags of minor items and keeps secret very terrible goals which vastly outweigh in importance the items she brags about. This most definitely looks like fraud. The appearance of fraud is particularly persuasive since she has so favorably and so constantly portrayed herself and her lovely named groups as “protective” entities, protecting in particular Magazine Beach, Memorial Drive and the Charles River.
By the non stop claims of protection, she very clearly has fooled people to think that she and her organizations are doing the protecting she claims to be doing, and that it is unthinkable that she / her lovely named organizations could possibly be practicing and working for:
● The destruction of 56 mostly excellent trees; part already done, the rest perhaps imminent.
● The rerouting into the Charles River of poisons dumped on Magazine Beach by the DCR and Cambridge.
● Continuation and exacerbating of heartless animal abuse.
People have the distressing tendency to think that people and entities which present themselves as protectors are actually protecting.
That very much sounds like fraud.
3. Key outrages which discredit the supposed sainthood of the SAD and her Development
Department Designated Protective Groups.
A. Abuse of Agenda - Key Designation Vote in Particular.
The SAD is currently the head of a Development Department Designated Protective Group (hereafter DDDPG) which falsely claims to be protecting the Cambridgeport neighborhood and the Charles River. Two leaders rapidly resigned their posts, leaving her as the leader.
In January 2013, her DDDPG conducted a public discussion on the SAD’s plans for Magazine Beach.
At no time during that public presentation did the SAD, the DDDPG, or anybody else announce:
● The destruction of 56 mostly excellent trees; part already done, the rest perhaps imminent.
● The rerouting of poisons dumped on Magazine Beach by the DCR and Cambridge into the Charles River.
● Continuation and exacerbating of heartless animal abuse.
There were people present who objected to the watered down version that was presented.
So the DDDPG core group and friends resorted to belligerently unethical practices to steal the “support” of the DDDPG in support of an outrageously general list of destructive actions, with delegation to another DDDPG which the SAD claims actual leadership of.
The opposition to the SAD’s WATERED DOWN plans were so major that the discussion took up the entire meeting. Toward the end of the meeting there was some sort of motion to continue discussion at the next monthly meeting, in February 2013.
UNTIL THIS TIME, all meetings of that DDDPG were monthly except during the summer.
The February 2013 meeting was not conducted in February 2013. The February 2013 meeting was not conducted in March 2013. The February 2013 meeting was finally conducted in April 2013 without the sort of general publicity of actions to be taken concerning plans for Magazine Beach which had been very visibly announced for the January 2013 meeting, and with much less publicity in general.
The opponents were driven away by the two month delay in the conducting of the February 2013 meeting which was supposedly to occur one month after the public meeting about the WATERED DOWN plans.
At the February 2013 meeting conducted in April 2013, the Agenda was set to limit Charles River discussion to the last 10 minutes of the meeting.
At the beginning of the final 10 minutes, the SAD distributed a horribly complicated motion which could not possibly be understood by the people present in the 10 minutes given by the DDDPG. The DDDPG then took a vote on this horribly complicated motion in a meeting containing very few people except for core supporters of the DDDPG and the SAD.
After the January 2013 meeting was conducted in April 2013, the DDDPG went from monthly meetings to bimonthly meetings with Charles River discussions almost always restricted by the agenda to the last ten minutes, leading with self praise from the SAD and her friends.
Comments disagreeing with the nonsense from the SAD or attempting to communicate the pending destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges were routinely shouted down: NO TIME, NO TIME.
Discussion was always prevented on both the plans for destruction on Magazine Beach, and discussion was always prevented of plans for destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.
B. Abuse of Agenda - Destruction in BU - Longfellow Bridge area “not in jurisdiction” to discuss protecting, but it was “in jurisdiction” to seek payoff for helping destruction.
At the last meeting before the January 2016 outrage, I was shouted by the chair who prevented discussion of the then imminent destruction on grounds that the area between the BU and Longfellow Bridges was outside the jurisdiction of the DDDPG.
At the very next meeting, the one following the destruction, the agenda setters had no problem scheduling a discussion of whether the DDDPG should seek a reward from the DCR in the form of helping identify trees to be selected to replace the trees the DDDPG had helped destroy.
4. The City Council has designated this person as SAD on the Charles River for no other apparent reason than that because the City Council “think[s] she's great.”
Once again, the SAD has repeatedly fought for the destruction supported by the City Council while bragging about the small stuff and keeping secret:
● The destruction of 56 mostly excellent trees; part already done, the rest perhaps imminent.
● The rerouting into the Charles River of poisons dumped on Magazine Beach by the DCR and Cambridge.
● Continuation and exacerbating of heartless animal abuse.
The City Council is clearly lying with regard to its responsibilities on the Charles River.
The City Council by those last two SECRET votes in particular has stated it does not want to know what it is doing but has voted for potentially very terrible things.
The City Council is running away from its duties.
The City Council is passing the buck. The City Council claims it has a duty to rubber stamp the SAD because it “think[s] she's great.” The City Council looks like rats deserting a sinking ship.
SHE MADE ME DO IT is the explanation. SHE MADE ME DO IT is unacceptable.
5. Similar outrages, similar DDDPG’s.
A. My record.
Pretty close to the top of this list of July 28, 2013, communications is an abridged communication of my record in the City of Cambridge, with a lot of very major victories.
The big problem which I have faced has been people who look like the SAD, but who have different faces.
And behavior from controllers of DDDPG’s whose groups, as with the January 2013 meeting of this DDDPG, look like they are deviating from orders.
Corrupt practices are normal. And the reality is that the DDDPG’s too often look like rubber stamps of the CCD.
B. Alewife.
(1) Government Destruction / “Protection.”
The Cambridge City Council passed many orders objecting to behavior of developers destroying portions of the “irreplaceable” Silver Maple Forest at Alewife (quote from repeated City Council orders). The City Council, consistently FAILED TO NOTICE that the developers were obeying zoning. The City Council consistently FAILED TO NOTICE that the Cambridge City Council controls the zoning that the developers were obeying by the actions the City Council was objecting to.
Clearly more hypocrisy.
This DDDPG at Alewife, like many DDDPG actionss, was kept in line with the wishes of the CDD by its controller. The controller told well intended volunteers to yell at developers obeying municipally controlled zoning, and to ignore threats in areas the Silver Maple Forest controlled by the City of Cambridge and the DCR.
The City of Cambridge and the DCR destroyed 3.4 acres of the Silver Maple Forest with the DDDPG SILENT on the destruction.
The creator of the DDDPG publicly praised the destruction in the Cambridge Chronicle and in at least one meeting of a group connected to the Cambridgeport DDDPG. The Creator of that DDDPG is still a member of that DDDPG.
It is very clear that the members of that DDDPG can not imagine throwing out this woman who bragged about government destruction of 3.4 acres plus of the Silver Maple Forest which they claim to be defending.
(2) Privately initiated protection.
In, I believe, 2000, the Sheila Cook Zoning Petition for Alewife was initiated by Sheila Cook. I did the legal drafting on the petition.
This initiative caused the parking lot located between Alewife Station and Route 2 to be returned to nature.
The DDDPG treated Sheila Cook like crap.
The DDDPG conducted a party to celebrate return of the parking lot to the environment.
The developer, Richard MacKinnon, clearly agrees that he returned the parking lot to nature because of the zoning created by the Cook Petition. The DDDPG did a lot of praising of DDDPG core members in the celebration. The DDDPG, however, but made exactly zero comment about the very crucial Sheila Cook Zoning Petition and the two key people in it.
C. Cambridge Common.
The City Council destroyed the excellent grove next to Harvard Square because the CDD thought it blocked the view of a monument.
The CDD worked for this destruction for years and very clearly got the support / non comment of every DDDPG activist I was aware of.
I repeatedly objected to the Cambridge City Council.
The City of Cambridge has quietly “replaced” with saplings the excellent trees that should not have been destroyed.
The CDD got the support / non comment about the Cambridge Common destruction by DDDPG activists who are friends of the CDD.
The City Council listened to the CDD and the DDDPG types.
AFTER this inexcusable outrage, obviously A LOT OF RESPONSIBLE people rarther claearly objected.. So the City of Cambridge did what it could do to undo WHAT IT SHOULD NOT HAVE DONE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
D. More examples of my Record.
You have a table in my partial communication of my record going into greater and still limited details of my record.
It is possible to beat the DDDPG’s / their string pullers. But corrupt tactics get pulled.
I have had far more victories than I have had losses because I am working for what responsible people want. I am working for what the voters THINK THEY ARE VOTING FOR.
The CDD has destructive employees who are very happy to find fellow destroyers / persuadable people and recognize them as DDDPG’s.
There are also decent people at work. I have worked with decent people and kept them as far away as possible from the DDDPG’s. At key points, I have defeated the string pullers in their own DDDPG’s. But corrupt practices keep coming, INCLUDING THE OUTRAGEOUS APRIL 2013 “vote” and the non stop praise for the imminent outrages on Magazine Beach, while keeping secret:
● The destruction of 56 mostly excellent trees; part already done, the rest perhaps imminent.
● The rerouting into the Charles River of poisons dumped on Magazine Beach by the DCR and Cambridge.
● Continuation and exacerbating of heartless animal abuse.
6. Summary.
The outrages supported on the Charles River by nine members of the City Council because their SAD told them to do it stinks, both by the terrible nature of the outrages and by the very terrible nonsense given by the City Council to “justify” those very terrible actions.
SHE MADE ME DO IT is nonsense. The actions are reprehensible.
Sincerely,
Robert J. La Trémouille
Chair, Friends of the White Geese
III. Republication of my abridged summary of my record as an activist in the City of Cambridge, MA.
[It is not possible to exactly reproduce this two sided presentation which was back to back. The typewritten portion was a table in two columns. ]
[Ed. This is a two sided résumé in the original. One side is a marked up zoning map of the Central Park of Cambridge. The other side is a table which explains the markings. I will start with the table, then follow with the map. After the map, I will provide a bit of an explanation to, hopefully, bring things into focus.]
Robert J. La Trémouille
Selected Activist Experience, Central Cambridge
I, Maple Avenue Downzoning, C-1 to B
II, Marie Avenue Park. First neighborhood Open Space zoning.
III, Cambridge St, N Side C-2 districts btwn Hospitals changed to C-1. C2B buffer created around Youville.
IV, Mellen Street Downzoning. The C-2A area and the C-1 which it surrounds were previously zoned C-3.
V, Cambridge Common. Opposed the destruction of the excellent thick park in Harvard Square corner .
VI, I90 study I proposed Green Line A spur from Comm. Avenue / BU Bridge to Harvard Medical to Harvard Station.
Originated idea of connection of Harvard Medical Area to Soldiers Field Road east of BU Bridge.
VII, JFK Park was laid out so that cut and cover construction of a subway tunnel.
VIII, Harvard Houses district. C-3 Ward changed to C-1.
IX, Area in Harvard Square deleted by Ward petitioners from Ward petition as result of flat out lie.
X, Ward Petition. C-2B and O-2 areas, previously C3 / O3, plus the Harvard Houses area, south side of Mt. Auburn Street.
XI, Saved the historical building at 10 Mt. Auburn at the Rent Control Board.
Block changed from Business B to Res C-1 by Ward
XII, Personally saved Guffey Park at Arrow Street and Mass. Ave., in front of 2 Arrow Street..
XIII, Kerry Corner. Zoning created here, the balance of the C-1, and the SD14 district were probably GREATLY influenced by my saving historical 10 Mt. Auburn.
XIV, Corporal Burns Playground. Helped save from Harvard expansion.
XV, La Trémouille Petition as warped by rogue steering committee. Business B became BB-1, BB-2.,
La Trémouille petition downzoned most of Green Street between Hancock and Sellers from Mass. Ave. zoning to neighborhood zoning. There were a number of related clean ups on the boundaries on Green Street.
XVI, Anderson Petition. O-3 to C-2B. Clean ups of Green Street as noted in XV.
XVII, Office to Office 1. Created less dense Office Districts than Office 3.
XVIII, Palmer Street. Objected to destruction of every tree on the street because the trees “blocked the sunlight.”
[Residence C-3 is one of the most generous zoning districts in the City of Cambridge. The orange areas marked C-3 are for the most part Harvard University. Harvard Square proper is the location of the VI marking. Harvard Yard is above it and to the right. The rest of the red marked streets under and to the left of Harvard Square proper are streets in the Harvard Square business district.
[At the right middle marked O-3 is Cambridge City Hall, which is at the western end of the Central Square business district.
[I have previously reported on Inman Square. It is above the right top corner of the map.
[In section 4 of my letter, I mention a park for which I obtained a Preliminary Injunction ON APPEAL to temporarily prevent destruction. Toward the top middle, you will see two “OS” districts with “C-3" above them and to the left. That is where the formerly best park in the central part of Cambridge was located.]
