Emergency at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, assistance needed

The Charles River White Geese have lived on the Charles River for 32 years. They have created a community which is loved by decent human beings.

In recent years, they have been heartlessly abused by Cambridge, MA, and by its friends in state government.

The explanation for the abuse offered by the front organization representing the interests of Cambridge, MA in the community is that the last 13 years do not exist. But the front organization, The Cambridge Machine, runs around lying that it is concerned about the Charles River and its environment.

For most of the last 32 years, they have lived in a one mile long habitat on the Charles River centered on the BU Bridge in Cambridge, MA, USA. They fed at and lived at the Magazine Beach playing fields. Once a year during nesting and also during extreme weather conditions, they lived in their nesting area bounded by the BU Bridge, by an on ramp to Memorial Drive and by the Grand Junction Railroad.

For several years now, Cambridge and its friends in the state have been deliberately starving them by walling off their food at Magazine Beach and by dumping poisons on that food. The worst accomplice at the state level, the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) has created a secret goal for the Charles River Basin hidden in their definition of Parkland. The goal is to kill off all animals on the Charles River basin, and they implement this goal by dirty tricks sneaked into otherwise innocuous projects.

Half the tiny area to which the Charles River White Geese have been confined was destroyed in repairs to the BU Bridge. This is the almost all of the western portion of the area running along the BU Bridge. About half of that destruction was totally unnecessary. The destroyed area has been filled in with introduced bushes which look likely to recreate the bizarre wall which is walling off Magazine Beach.

The Charles River White Geese, until this week, were confined in the eastern half of their Nesting Area.

During the period commencing with the appointment of the Charles River “Conservancy” to destroy the environment for the DCR, almost all ground vegetation running about half a mile east from the BU Bridge has been destroyed.

We had blamed the CRC for this destruction but the outrage which initiated this last week indicates that significant parts of the destruction has also been done by irresponsible maintenance workers with DCR consent, outright or tacit.

This photo from the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese demonstrates the rottenness of the people with whom we are dealing.

2012 / 06-08 / 19 05-13-12, DNA dirt regrowing, natives, highway, geese.

The green spots are nature reclaiming land destroyed by human destroyers. This week, this area has had large amounts of crushed stone dumped on it. All the now brown areas were previously native and healthy until the destroyers went to work on them. Pretty much all of the brown areas have been used since the weekend for parking or access to parking. My prior report showed where responsible people would park.

The Charles River White Geese need your help.

Contacting the DCR or Cambridge is a waste of time. These people are beneath consideration.

The governor and the Department of Transportation are other matters.

The governor may have stepped in to keep the DCR from getting Obama moneys for the destruction of more than 100 healthy, excellent trees near the Charles River in the area between here and the second bridge to the east. The DCR lied that all the trees were diseased. The lie was proven in the DCR’s submittal to Cambridge which the governor received.

The Department of Transportation has been a breath of fresh air after dealing with Cambridge, the DCR, and the Cambridge Machine. The commuter rail workers committing this outrage are under the aegis of the Department of Transportation.

Contacts are:

Governor Patrick, 617-725-4005; http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/, and

The Department of Transportation, http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/ContactUs.aspx.

Additionally, assistance to the Friends of the White Geese is very much crucial.

We need money to help with our efforts, and we need workers. We may be contacted by email at charlesriverwhitegeese@yahoo.com. We take paypal which in turn takes any major credit card. We have a link at the top of our Blog at charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com.

Checks and other snail mail communications may be mailed to Friends of the White Geese c/o Robert J. La Trémouille, PO Box 391412, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.

Friends of the White Geese is a non profit organization registered with the Attorney General of Massachusetts. Contributions are NOT TAX EXEMPT because of our necessary political activities.

Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.

Bureaucrats turn last refuge of Charles River White Geese into a parking lot.

My thanks to Nick Lopen who sent us an email that he had seen vehicles in the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese and he did not see any of the geese.

I was at this cherished area at about 11 am on December 3, 2012.

The Department of Conservation and Recreation is allowing commuter rail people to use the last refuge of the Charles River White Geese as a parking lot for work on the railroad.

Here are some photos of the area before the latest destruction.

I will follow with the actual photos in a few days.

Actually, this outrage could explain how this delicate area has been destroyed and destroyed and destroyed and not allowed to grow back.

One excellent example of the outrage is an area where gravel / crushed stone was casually dumped.

2012 / 06-08 / 19 05-13-12, DNA dirt regrowing, natives, highway, geese.

This is a prior photo. See the green spots. Nature is starting to regain itself. So an irresponsible government just casually destroys.

Further away from the camera is significant parking.

2012 / 07-06 / 14 06-24 DNA E intro, native, dirt

The Charles River White Geese were huddled in fear in the artificially created wasteland next to the BU Bridge.

This area has turned into the only part of their 30 year nesting area the Charles River White Geese dare to use.

This is the northern end of the area to which they are confined. They were in this area when I left. When I got there, they were closer to the river. There is a narrow band of introduced bushes between this area and the few undestroyed native bushes and then the area that has been destroyed since the Charles River “Conservancy” started environmental destruction for the DCR. Vehicles are parked in the open area just beyond the native bushes.

2012 / 06-15, DVD 06-26-12 / 09 05-29-12 DNA dirt, geese, E natives, E introd

This is a pretty good view of the area where they were when I first saw them this afternoon. This area is about halfway down the BU Bridge side of the Destroyed Nesting Area. The gray blocks to the right are probably part of the BU Bridge’s eastern extreme.

2012 / 06-08 / 07 05-13-12 DNA Terrace, east, grass and thicket.

This is a good view of the area from near the northern end of the BU Bridge. The bushes on the wood chips are part of a group of bushes creating a terrace at the entrance which was illegally created by Boston University where the BU Bridge meets the on ramp to Memorial Drive. The large tree to the right, showing in this and prior photos, is on the Charles River. There was significant tree destruction in the area which is now undeveloped and holding the frightened, abused Charles River White Geese. The area to the left rear held parking on December 3.

2012 / 07-06 / 26 06-27 dirt, geese, natives, W intro, terrace W highway and parking lot.

There were approximately 12 vehicles parked in the area which was not touched by the outrageous aspects of the BU Bridge repairs. Gravel had been dumped on top of the western of the of two new highways started to “repair” the inexcusable destruction in the BU Bridge repairs. Gravel had been dumped in a wide part of the area which had been previously destroyed after the Charles River “Conservancy” started destroying the environment for the Department of Conservation and Recreation in 2003.

Vehicles were parked everywhere there could be rudimentary, growing vegetation, destroying any chance of it growing now.

The near end of this photo is the western end of the new west highway. It was occupied by parking today.

2012 / 07-07 to 15, 07-26 DVD / 017_16

This is the eastern end of that new eastern highway. The crushed stone on the left has gone from nearly innocuous to very truly intrusive. The area to the right is the hillside under the on ramp to Memorial Drive.

2012 / 06-15, DVD 06-26-12 / 21 06-03-12 DNA E Hwy, Gaggle on Dirt, w native, intro to L, E to R

This the opposite view of that new eastern highway. The dirt on the other side of the undestroyed native bushes now sees significant amounts of crushed stone / gravel. The new highway is now much more significant.

2012 / 03-07 to 15, 07-26 DVD / 016_14A

Gravel had been dumped in a wide part of the area which had been previously destroyed after the Charles River “Conservancy” started destroying the environment for the Department of Conservation and Recreation in 2003.

A very significant area nearest the camera is now heavily crushed stone / gravel. The geese have been driven from their favorite spot under this large tree.

2012 / 06-08 / 13 05-13-12 BU Bridge view, both natives, thicket.

This is a view from the BU Bridge. The black line snaking from middle to left and back to middle is a plastic wall built between the area which was destroyed in the BU Bridge repairs and the area which is now being further destroyed by the Commuter Rail people working with the DCR. The two thick green areas to the right of the black wall are remnants of native vegetation which was everywhere before the BU Bridge destruction and the destruction which started when the Charles River Conservancy started destroying the environment for the DCR. This photo was taken in May 2012 and the native bushes were significantly smaller than in other photos.

The figures in the middle of the brown would be Charles River White Geese and other free animals, probably a lot of Canadas.

The eastern highway is a bare sliver going from left to middle about a third of the way from the top of the photo, and ending at the upper of the two native groupings. Immediately to the right of the upper grouping is now gravel / crushed stone. Vehicles are now parked all over this area. The very top of this photo is the hillside under the on ramp to Memorial Drive. The sharp demarcation between brown and green is the demarcation between the introduced, soon to be massive, bushes and the native bushes which fill that hillside.

This photo is very soon after the planting of the introduced bushes.

This is the core, most cherished part of the last undestroyed home of the Charles River White Geese. There are a lot of vehicles parked her.

2012 / 06-08 / 19 05-13-12, DNA dirt regrowing, natives, highway, geese

This is an excellent view of the area where most of the gravel / crushed stone has been dumped. The smidgens of green are no longer there. It is all crushed stone. The vegetation to the right is the farther of the undestroyed native vegetation in the preceding photo.

Some white geese can be seen in the rear left. This area included quite a few vehicles on December 3.

2012 / 07-06 / 26 06-27 dirt, geese, natives, W intro, terrace W highway and parking lot.

Vehicles were parked everywhere there could be rudimentary, growing vegetation, destroying any chance of it growing now.

The near end of this photo is the western end of the new west highway. It was occupied by parking today.

This is the opposite view of the photo above of the northern end of the artificial wasteland in which the frightened geese are huddling.]

2011 / 09-13 / 18 09-04-11 DNA

MBCR signs were on a number of the vehicles. The main action was on the Grand Junction Railroad. MBCR is the managing agent for the Department of Transportation to run the Commuter Rail.

They were clearly working on the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge, and they were doing it in a manner as destructive as could be for resident animals.

This is the standard routine for work on DCR property. DCR goal is to kill off all animals living on the Charles River Basin. Their euphemism is parkland.

So whatever work is done is warped to destroy life as much as possible.

This is a photo from last year. This entire area was used for parking. You can see the geese huddled under the trees.

2011 / 04-04B Clark / 06 03-29 DNA east of Grand Junction.

Also from last year, notice all the geese under the trees. But also notice the green vegetation just sprouting in April.

Used for parking.

2011 / 04-04B Clark / 17 03-29 Grand Junction, geese, Charles, BU Bridge

This is the current construction zone, April 2011 photo. They are working on the Grand Junction Bridge, straight ahead. There is no need whatsoever to park on and destroy the hillside. The area in the immediately prior photo is bottom right.

Please yell at the governor and the secretary of transportation. The staging area for this work, if the DCR were a responsible entity, would be either:

a. Under the Memorial Drive over pass where there is plenty of room, or

2011 / 03-16 Clark / 01 02-13-11 Rotary from west.

In the photo, the area to the left has been used for parking during the responsible parts of the BU Bridge work. It is under Memorial Drive in a location where grass simply will not work.

The nesting area is straight ahead. The car viewed to the left of the snow on the island is preparing to go up the on ramp which is the northern neighbor of the destroyed nesting area.

2010 / 02-01 Clark / 14, 01-05-10, DNA Kathy and Son

This is a photo from February 2010 taken in the area to which the Charles River White Geese have been forced yet again. Straight ahead is the Memorial Drive overpass. Those cars could readily park under that overpass.

b. north on the railroad where the railroad meets Waverly Street. There is a lot of wide street there. Additionally, there is a large, underutilized parking lot there which could readily and harmlessly be borrowed from MIT with permission,



But the DCR destroys as many animals as they can get away with, in consonance with the equally reprehensible City of Cambridge.

The Governor may be contacted at his on line form at http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

MassDOT may be contacted at their on line form at http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/ContactUs.aspx.


What is Cambridge’s position on the destruction? Well the DCR does nothing without being certain they are in line with Cambridge wishes.

The lying by The Machine about environmental sainthood at the priceless Alewife reservation says exactly where The Machine is coming from, plus the nonstop nonsense spouted by The Machine that the last 13 years do not exist on the Charles River says everything about The Cambridge Machine.

The Cambridge City Council has failed to fire the current City Manager, Robert Healy in spite of very clear court authorization / encouragement to do so. The check to the victim was $8.3 million. They are apparently replacing him with his long time assistant who has been in the middle of the environmental destruction.

Why? Well, Cambridge has the massive, lying Cambridge Machine to cover their backs.
? Well, Cambridge has the massive, lying Cambridge Machine to cover their backs.

Cambridge MA City Manager Regency to be Extended?

The Cambridge Chronicle is reporting that six members of the Cambridge City Council are seeking to appoint Deputy City Manager Richard Rossi to replace the retiring Robert Healy, http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1107416418/Cambridges-new-City-Manager#axzz2DogVL9Yb.

Five favorable votes will be needed on Monday night, December 3, 2012. With six incumbents endorsing the order, the Rossi promotion approaches being a sure thing.

This would be a repeat of the passing of the baton from James Leo Sullivan to Robert Healy which brought Robert Healy to office.

Rossi has been in the middle of some bad environmental destruction.

The guilty members of the City Council are Mayor Davis and Councilors Maher, Cheung, Reeves, Toomey, and Decker.

The actual order may be reviewed at http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?item_id=36634.

It is silly to think that this appointment will improve things.

Cambridge Chronicle: Good Handling of Cambridge, MA, USA Corruption

1. General.
2. VanBeuzekom, the chair, and reality.
3. Analysis of issues.
4. Practical handling by the Chronicle.


1. General.

The editorial page of yesterday’s (11/29/12) Cambridge Chronicle was nicely laid out.

The main editorial page, page A10 had three letters to the editor with a fourth on the continuation page.

The first letter was given the heading, “Bercaw hurls ‘generalities without specificity’”.

The letter responded to Roy Bercaw’s attack on corruption in Cambridge government as his farewell to the departing last Chronicle editor. Roy thought he did some good work standing up to corruption in Cambridge government. The writer called Bercaw’s letter an attack on the municipal-paid employees of the City of Cambridge. He said:

“Hurling generalities without specificity, as Bercaw did, is the hallmark of a ‘gutless wonder’”.

The third letter was mine, headlined “‘Dishonesty in environmentalism is the norm’”.

I led with “Roy Bercaw’s analysis of Cambridge as a corrupt community was astute.” I followed with the ongoing con game of the Cambridge Machine fighting for destruction of the Alewife Reservation and featured my analysis of the destruction in light of a supposed environmental meeting by The Machine.

I previously posted my letter at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/environmental-response-to-objection-to.html. It was my second posting concerning this typically bizarre Cambridge, MA “environmental” meeting.

2. VanBeuzekom, the chair, and reality.

First of all, by this posting, I am presenting my third report on this meeting. There is, however, one point I have not hit on with regard to this meeting yet.

Possibly key in the last election was a letter that was distributed quoting a flippant comment by an incumbent city councilor about Malvina Monteiro. Monteiro is the female Cape Verdean who had her life destroyed by the Cambridge City Manager in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.

That letter could have been a key factor in that councilor being fired and Councilor vanBeuzekom replacing him. Identified in my first post but not identified in the letter was the councilor I was responding to, Councilor vanBeuzekom.

The meeting’s chair, who shut me up when I tried to get Councilor vanBeuzekom back on the issue, was the woman who distributed the letter which could have resulted in vanBeuzekom replacing the incumbent.

Particularly striking about that letter was the fact that the chair is a long time and very visible member of The Machine, and The Machine simply does not publicly make such statements. The chair did and the woman she protected at that meeting is the one who possibly got elected because of her letter.

3. Analysis of issues.

These letters are limited to 400 words. My reading of Roy’s letter was that he did an excellent job of presenting the problem within the constraints of 400 words.

Realizing the constraints Roy was working on and reading the rest of the lead letter, the lead letter yesterday is difficult to evaluate except as a bunch of cheap shots.

I have had a lot of letters published in the Cambridge Chronicle recently. Because of this, I did not expect to see this particular letter printed.

The editor, however, had my letter in hand. Roy did an excellent job in his letter given the word limit, and my letter exactly provided at least one specific example destroying the gutless wonder attack.

4. Practical handling by the Chronicle.

Neither of these two letters were published on line, nor was Roy’s original letter. The other two letters printed were published on line.

The Chronicle has printed a lot from me in the hard copy, but it has been many months since I was published on line.

The Chronicle has a record of publishing an excellent letters column. Many politically active Cantabridgians could be thought to read it primarily for the letters column.

You will see this sort of thing a lot in papers publishing on line versions. The really juicy stuff only appears in the hard copy.

I think that is what the Chronicle is doing with its choice of on line printing.

Cambridge Day: Cambridge, MA, USA Common tree destruction already approved.

A report dated November 20, 2012 in Cambridge Day states that the environmental destruction and mass tree destruction I reported on a week or so ago has already been approved. This is in the second paragraph of a follow on report.

That existing approval makes the pious noises in Councilor Kelley’s motion about tree destruction of 100 trees as part of the project that much more typical Cambridge nonsense.

The Cambridge Day report may be read at: http://www.cambridgeday.com/2012/11/20/council-wants-permanent-public-restroom-on-cambridge-common-a-look-at-more/.

My most recent prior report may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/environmental-destruction-at-cambridge.html.

Kelley’s motion mentioned in my report was approved at the November 19, 2012, city council meeting. This sort of nonsense is how an environmentally reprehensible city government stays in power.

I do not know, but can guess, how Kelley voted on the vote for the destruction. Very clearly the Cambridge City Council voted for it. Following up a vote to destroy with saccharine of concern for the destruction they have approved is typical Cambridge hypocrisy.

This fits Roy Bercaw's analysis of Cambridge as a corrupt government. Dishonesty in fact.

It can be certain that The Cambridge Machine will brag about the expression of concern and suppress the reality.

Environmental response to objection to Cambridge, MA, USA corruption

In the November 15, 2012 Cambridge Chronicle, they printed a letter from Roy Bercaw praising the outgoing editor for standing up to the corruption in Cambridge. It is not published on line and I have not been able to get a URL if Roy put it on his Blog.

I have submitted the following suggested response.

*************

Roy Bercaw’s analysis of Cambridge as a corrupt community was astute.

An excellent example of corruption on the environment is the public meeting conducted by The Machine on 11/17/12.

The Machine claims that Cambridge is “Pro Environment.” It yells about matters in which Cambridge is not being destructive. The Machine suppresses Cambridge’s inexcusable environmental destruction.

On 11/17/2012, a city councilor bragged about Cambridge’s holiness at Alewife. The Machine has been fighting for destruction of the Alewife reservation for more than 14 years. It cried about this irreplaceable virgin woodland. It yelled at private developers. It told people not to look at public destructiveness.

Last October - November, Cambridge destroyed acres of irreplaceable woodlands and killed hundreds of resident animals. The Machine bragged about the destruction in the pages of the Chronicle. So now, The Machine yells about protecting air quality and forgets its inexcusable woodland destruction and the massive increase in destruction it works for.

At the meeting, the councilor mentioned two pending developments on opposite sides of CambridgePark Drive. The parcel on the north side directly abuts the area where Cambridge ruthlessly destroyed acres of irreplaceable woodland and killed its animals. The southern development is in the middle of a massive parking lot which should be used for the flood storage which Cambridge claims it is providing.

Cambridge is protecting against the worst storm in an average two year period. Alewife has seen two fifty year storms in the last twenty years. Protection should be provided against 100 year storms.

The building on the south side of CambridgePark Drive is providing flood protection underground for its building.

All Cambridge has to do to expand that buildings protections deeper and put the protection under the two developments and under the parking lot.

But the Machine tells responsible people to yell at the developers and tells folks to keep away from telling the City Council that Cambridge should be doing its job. Then, when it is “too late”, Cambridge will perhaps destroy all of Alewife.

The councilor responded to my question about her destructiveness by bragging about another part of town. When I tried to get her back to her claims of “environmentalism” at Alewife, I was shut up by the chair.

This is one example of endemic corruption in Cambridge. Dishonesty in environmentalism is the norm. Pious mouthings and misleading directions are the tactic to hide reality.

Thank you, Roy.

Cambridge City Councilor vanBeuzekom shows she supports further massive destruction of Alewife Reservation

1. Brief summary.
2. Meeting Saturday night.
3. Analysis.
A. General.
B. The Machine’s goals.
C. VanBeuzekom’s goals.
D. Summary.
4. Prior reports.



1. Brief summary.

I have repeatedly condemned eight members of the Cambridge City Council for their irresponsible and soon to accelerate destruction at the Alewife reservation.

I have exempted from my condemnation Councilor vanBeuzekom because she just joined. She just lost my new member presumption of innocence.

2. Meeting Saturday night.

Saturday, November 17, 2012, The Cambridge Machine conducted an environmental meeting with emphasis on transportation. It was conducted at the city building across from City Hall. They had a good attendance.

These “environmental protection” meetings are part of the nonstop lies that an environmental destructive city government is holier than thou on the environment.

I popped in at exactly the right moment. Councilor vanBeuzekom was bragging about protecting the environment at Alewife. She even mentioned the two imminent projects on both sides of CambridgePark Drive.

So I asked her one question in the question period following her presentation.

She very clearly is aware of the two key coming projects. One directly abuts the destroyed virgin woodlands with its acres of destruction and massive animal kill. The other is across the street and is part of a massive parking lot stretching to the Alewife Brook Parkway.

I pointed out the fact that North Cambridge and Alewife have severe flooding problems, two 50 year storms in the past 20 years. I pointed out that Cambridge has destroyed acres of Alewife reservation for flood protection against the worst possible storm in TWO YEARS. The two year “protection” is kept as secret as possible. The Machine just claimed to be providing flood protection. Protection against a two year storm is not flood protection. I pointed out the uselessness of the accomplished destruction for flood protection.

I pointed out that the massive parking lot on the opposite side of CambridgePark Drive and those two projects could provide the needed protection. Without that protection, greater, perhaps total, destruction of the Alewife reservation would almost certainly follow. The victims in North Cambridge would learn they have been lied to after the first big storm.

Councilor vanBeuzekom responded by talking about other protective projects she has been working on. When I tried to get her to discuss the ongoing destruction of the environment at Alewife since she had given the idea she was protecting Alewife, the chair told me to sit down.

The immediately following speaker was Stephen Kaiser. He got a great introduction from the speaker. Kaiser is a key part of The Machine and has been for many years. Kaiser has been involved in a lot of destruction. He sounds great. He is just on the wrong side.

I walked out.

3. Analysis.

A. General.

Last year vanBeuzekom posed for a “protective” photo which was used by The Machine in its fight for the environmental outrage achieved at Alewife in October - November 2011.

The Machine ran around lying of their “concern” for Alewife for 14 years, telling people to look at everything except for what its friends are doing. After the acres of destruction and mass animal kill occurred in October - November 2011, the leader of the fake group which was The Machine’s front organization bragged about the destruction. At minimum, the 14 year leader of the fake group printed a letter in the Cambridge Chronicle. She then gave her pitch to The Machine’s fake environmental group in Cambridgeport.

Currently, The Machine has been yelling at the developers of the two projects. This is a standard pitch. ALWAYS do exactly the wrong thing and keep people doing the wrong thing as long as possible, until the outrage is accomplished.

The Machine will not talk with the Cambridge City Council, the people responsible for the accomplished environmental outrage at Alewife, the people who will be responsible for the future destruction. These are the people who should be IMMEDIATELY talking bout the taking of easements needed on the two properties and under that massive parking lot.

A responsible city government would be building flood protection underground, under those buildings and under the parking lot. The building proposed for the far side is doing exactly what is needed in all these locations, just at a size only useful for its project alone. A much larger version of the flood protection under this building can and should be used under the parking lot and under the two proposed buildings. This is essential for the needed flood storage in order. The obvious alternative is the future destruction at Alewife.

Existing buildings proposed could go forward with meaningful flood protection underneath, IF CAMBRIDGE HAD A RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT AND DID NOT HAVE THE MACHINE RUNNING ABOUT LYING ABOUT THE CAMBRIDGE GOVERNMENT AND ABOUT WHAT IS NEEDED AT ALEWIFE.

One of the key lies is nonstop nonsense in which The Machine is bragging falsely about the environmental sainthood of these environmental destroyers.

The Machine, as is usual with The Machine, tells people to look at everything except what counts.

B. The Machine’s goals.

The Machine is stalling until those two projects are too far along to take easements. Then the choice will be between

(1). building under a much smaller area, the remnants of that very large parking lot; this would clearly be a lot more difficult and expensive, or

(2). accomplishing further massive destruction and killing of resident animals in the irreplaceable Alewife reservation to do what The Machine is lying is being done by the accomplished and totally wasteful destruction.

The technique is ALWAYS to discuss everything except what counts, AND PREVENT DISCUSSION OF REALITY.

C. VanBeuzekom’s goals.

VanBeuzekom, by her detailed publicly stated knowledge of the two key projects has shown that she knows what is going on at Alewife.

VanBeuzekom, in her response to my question, tried to switch to areas where Cambridge and she do not have filthy hands and filthy coming destruction. VanBeuzekom showed:

(1). she knows exactly what she is doing and

(2). that she does not want to know herself what she is doing and,

(3). more importantly, that she does not want the voters to know how environmentally destructive she is.

D. Summary.

The count is now NINE BAD CITY COUNCILORS out of nine on the Cambridge, MA, City Council, if you are pro environment.

4. Prior reports.

My most recent report on Alewife was on August 30, 2012, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/08/new-alewife-project-cambridge-machine.html.

This report is extensive. It includes photographs and links to prior reports.

Before that, I included an appendix on Alewife in my detailed letter to the Cambridge City Council reported on August 8, 2012 at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/08/cambridge-city-council-committee-defers.html. This appendix is much less detailed that the August 30, 2012 report. It was the least reported part by me on this Blog. My emphasis was on the Charles River.

The Machine non stop brags that it is holier than thou on environmental issues.

The Machine non stop lies on the important stuff and tells people to look at everything except what counts.

You can bet The Machine will continue to yell about everything except what Cambridge is destroying.

Environmental Destruction at Cambridge Common to be worse than stated in Environmental Notification Form?

On October 4, 2012, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/22-trees-proposed-to-be-destroyed-on.html, I reported major environmental destruction slated for the Cambridge Common. The Environmental Notification form, at http://www.env.state.ma.us/mepa/mepadocs/2012/090512em/nps/enf/14947.pdf. announced Cambridge’s intention to destroy 22 trees because they are blocking the view.

Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley announced in a motion in front of the Cambridge City Council last Monday, that

1. the project includes “plans to remove close to one hundred significantly sized trees; and”

2. “There has been no tree hearing for these trees nor is there any clear indication on the Cambridge Common or readily available online to help people determine which trees will be removed”.

Cambridge being Cambridge and Kelley being Kelley, Kelley does not object in his motion to this massive destruction of trees, he just wants to know if the public objects. He wants the slated trees to be marked so that the public can tell him if he objects to the destruction.

Kelley delayed action on his motion to November 19.

Kelley fits the lack of environmental conscience of all long term Cambridge city councilors except possibly for the Councilor who was added in the last election. He has no problems with the outrages on the Charles River. He voted for the outrages at Alewife. He has no problems with the outrages at Fresh Pond.

His people are treating the very clear plans to massively increase destruction at Alewife in the usual Cambridge Machine fashion. They are loudly proclaiming their concern and telling those who respect them to look at everything other than the outrages Cambridge is accomplishing.

Destruction at Alewife is for “flood storage” the project cannot provide and which can be provided next door and across the street. All Cambridge has to do is take easements under a massive parking lot and under two condo projects which WILL GO FORWARD WITHOUT THE PROTECTION because the “protectors” as usual are telling people to look at everything else. Trouble with the one possible “protector” is that she posed for a publicity shot telling people to look at everything else.

I have gone in great detail lately as to the outrages on the Charles River and to the fake “protective” group fighting for the outrages in the manner of the Cambridge Machine.

And the City Councilors constantly yell about everything except for the destruction they support. As I said, Kelley does not object to the destruction of 100 trees on the Cambridge Common (or to the many other outrages), he just wants to find out if people will persuade him to be outraged.

I certainly do hope people MEANINGFULLY concerned about the many environmental outrages including the Cambridge Common will communicate to this very bad city council their outrage.

Boston University, the Charles River, and our world

1. Boston University’s Photo of Boston University.
2. Analysis.

1. Boston University’s Photo of Boston University.

This photo is taken from the cover on the on line version of Boston University’s Boston University Charles River Campus Master Plan. It is dated August 10, 2012, submitted by Trustees of Boston University, submitted to Boston Redevelopment Authority, prepared by FortPoint Associates, Inc., in association with CBT Architects, Greenburg Consultants, Inc., Tetra Tech.

[Editor's comment: I am trying to insert the key photo. It is on the front page of the report found through the second link immediately below. I get confused every so often. I push the envelope and it pushes back. So far, I have saved the photo in PDF but am bewildered as how to upload it from there. Help from somebody who knows what he / she is doing will be appreciated.]

The plan was last updated with the BRA on September 20, 2012. The BRA’s on line page is http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/DevelopmentProjects/devprojects.asp?action=ViewProject&ProjectID=1489.

You may get a copy of the complete document at http://www.bu.edu/community/institutional-master-plan/.

2. Analysis.

This photo shows, from Boston University’s point of view, the problems on the Charles River.

The river is to the right.

Crossing the river is the BU Bridge. Under the BU Bridge is the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge.

The treed area between the two on the right is the destroyed nesting area of the Charles River White Geese. This is the area to which they have been confined since Cambridge, MA and the state’s Department of Conservation and Recreation started massive destruction of the environment and animal habitat on the Cambridge, right, side of the Charles River.

The building on the right below the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge is the BU Boathouse.

Since 2003, when the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” started destroying the environment for the DCR almost all ground vegetation between the BU Boathouse and the BU Bridge has been destroyed.

Above the BU Bridge is Magazine Beach. The bizarre wall of introduced vegetation which has been created blocking off Magazine Beach from the Charles River is so massive it can seen from this aerial / satellite view.

At the top right of the photo is the railroad yard / turnpike exit now owned by Harvard University where Harvard plans to move the Harvard Medical School.

The Massachusetts Turnpike itself (I-90) is below the Harvard holdings and raised above the Charles River.

The smaller highway between the Turnpike (I-90) and the Charles River is Soldiers Field Road / Storrow Drive.

If you look carefully at Soldiers Field Road / Storrow Drive as it extends toward the camera (east), you will see, first the Grand Junction Railroad crossing Soldiers Field Road / Storrow Drive and then the BU Bridge crossing it.

The Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority did a study which determined that an off ramp could be built from the Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) to the Grand Junction Railroad at this point or to the left of this point.

Within months, Harvard owned the highway exit.

That portion of Boston which can be seen abutting the Charles River is approximately equal in size to the habitat of the Charles River White Geese on the Cambridge side before Cambridge and friends starting their heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese.

The first entity to attack the Charles River White Geese was Boston University. BU accomplished destruction at the destroyed nesting area in Fall of 1999 and lied for six months that they did not do it. After the Cambridge Conservation Commission condemned BU for the destruction, BU started bragging about it. BU blamed its president’s secretary for the false denials, but there is no record of any sanctions being applied to her.

Monteiro wins again. Appeals Court awards $300K in lawyers fees and costs from Cambridge, MA, USA, in this Women’s Rights Decision.

1. The Decision.
2. Summary of the case.
3. This decision.
4. Application.


1. The Decision.

The Massachusetts Appeals Court, on October 10, 2012, awarded $298,349.33 in lawyers fees and Court Costs to Malvina Monteiro as perhaps the final decision in a court case in which Courts and Jury have strongly condemned Cambridge’s destruction of a Black female department head in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complain.

The Appeals Court docket number is 2010-P-1240. My source is Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, October 22, 2012, page 20, Lawyers Weekly No. 11-152-12.

2. Summary of the case.

For the Superior Court judge’s key opinion, please see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/judge-issues-decision-denying.html.

For the Appeals Court panel’s key communication, please see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/appeals-court-decision-in-monteiro.html.

Malvina Monteiro was head of Cambridge’s Police Review Board until the consequences of her filing a civil rights action alleging disparate treatment because of her sex.

According to judge, jury and appeals court panel, she was fired in retaliation for the women’s right complaint.

She lost on the merits of the actual complaint.

The jury awarded $1,062,040.00 in actual damages and $3,500.000 penal damages.

The judge supported the jury decision. Her opinion goes into great detail analyzing the testimony of the Cambridge City Manager and using his testimony to condemn his behavior. The key word she used was “reprehensible” with regard to his behavior.

The appeals court panel refused to dignify Cambridge’s appeal with a formal opinion.

“Ample evidence” of “outrageous conduct.”

The check to Monteiro ran $8,300,000.

The Cambridge City Manager, on June 12, 2012, reported to the Cambridge City Council payments to outside counsel of $2,144,000 from the 1998 complaint to the 2008 trial, and $288,409.00 for the appeal.

Cambridge Day, on June 21, 2012, calculated payments on this and four related cases to come to $14,469,558.00

3. This decision.

The court stated, quoting the most relevant part of the MLW entry:

“. . .(i) We agree with the petitioning counsel that an extremely aggressive appellate campaign by the City demanded proportionate response work. (ii) The extensive supporting materials for the petition show that Monteiro’s appellate counsel responded with disproportionately less expenditure of time than exercised by counsel for the City. In particular, the materials show that counsel for the City employed nine attorneys upon the appeal and accumulated 1,368.8 hours of work, so as to generate a cumulative bill of fees and costs of $693,623.55.. . . .

“By contrast, counsel for Monteiro employed four attorneys, accrued 650.8 hours of work and generated the itemized fees of $284,420, and costs of $13,929.33, for a total of $298,349.33.

“Beyond the comparison of hourly volumes, several features of petitioning counsel’s itemization of time and services support our impression of their work. . . .

“Lead counsel at trial performed 84% of the hourly work invested in the appeal. That allocation employed the knowledge of the attorney most experienced with the litigation. In particular, it eliminated the dangers of excess and duplication most commonly generated by the assignment of multiple attorneys ato an appeal, especially attorneys who are unfamiliar with the earlier phases of a case.”

4. Application.

Jury, judge and appeals court panel are in agreement that the Cambridge City Manager committed malfeasance in office in his destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro.

The Cambridge City Council and the Cambridge Machine see no problems. There has been exactly zero attempts to implement the Court decisions by firing him even though the decisions would justify firing him without golden parachute and possibly without pension.

But The Cambridge Machine and the Cambridge City Council love to claim they are pro Civil Rights, pro Women’s Rights and much, much, much holier than thou.

Environmental Destroyers Pushing Governor for Charles River Destruction

1. Introduction.
2. Background.
3. The CRC’s highways.
4. This week’s approach.


1. Introduction.

The Charles River “Conservancy” is conducting a campaign against the governor to implement their latest destruction plans for the Charles River.

2. Background.

There are a lot of very destructive people fighting for environmental and animal harm in and near the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.

A very major part of the problem is The Machine which formed around the two consecutive City Managers which has been of such great value to them in their destructive ways. Entities of this nature organized to this extent and so dominant in city government are highly unusual.

The latest attack comes from the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy”. Machine groups do a lot of lying and lying as part of the name is not at all unusual. This entity for a number of years was the only visible group attacking the Charles River.

The attack more visibly from more traditional parts of the Cambridge Machine was the usual company union approach. They claimed to be concerned about the Cambridgeport neighborhood. They did not want to know about the destruction on the Charles River. Therefore, by definition, there was no destruction on the Charles River.

The Charles River “Conservancy” is the second name for this group. They first called themselves Friends of Magazine Beach. This fake friends group did nothing but fight for the destruction which has been achieved and for an annual cleanup the week before Boston University conducted part of its graduation there. Naturally, the CRC did not mention the BU use. One of the first achievements of Friends of the White Geese was to discredit that incarnation of the CRC. Dah, dah, maybe six months later a group with many familiar faces announced a “new” group.

The CRC has been in the middle of massive amounts of environmental destruction lying that they are “improving” the environment.

3. The CRC’s highways.

The CRC loves highways and they mouth so good about them. Naturally, they do not mention the environmental destruction. They do not mention massive destruction of trees. They do not mention heartless animal abuse. But they sound so good.

The latest outrage is a small vehicle highway the CRC wants to put everywhere abutting the Charles River, no matter how irresponsible.

The latest euphemism is “underpasses.” They do not mention the damage, but how could anybody be against underpasses?

The key state agencies could. A joint committee of the Department of Transportation and Department of Conservation and Recreation condemned CRC’s highway proposal on the Cambridge side as environmentally destructive.

So the CRC sobbed about being mistreated and decided to fight for destruction in Boston instead.

I have published several reports on this outrage. The one with the photos may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/07/techniques-in-lying-charles-river.html.

4. This week’s approach.

The CRC in its monthly newsletter brags that it has conned people into supporting this outrage, naturally without mentioning the destruction. They brag of the number of people who have emailed the governor. And they non stop lie about which side they are on by using their name and sounding like other than what they are.

This is all part of a pattern of deception which is very broad and very consistent.

If you get a chance, the Governor’s contact page is now http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

Charles River White Geese are safe after Superstorm Sandy

On Monday and Tuesday, October 29 and 30, a very major storm wracked the northeast including the destroyed nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.

I have visited their home since the storm.

I was immediately struck by the cleanliness and the emptiness.

I walked in through the newly planted bushes over the new small highway. I was amazed to see absolutely nothing on the ground other than what has been installed in the last six months. All the trash which the irresponsible managers from the state have not cleaned up was gone.

Equally clean was the deliberately destroyed core area to which the Charles River White Geese have been confined through the heartless abuse of Cambridge and its friends.

Once I got past the large remaining native vegetation, I reached the deliberately destroyed ground where they are confined. I could see under the large trees which line the eastern and southern end of their home. Then I could see the geese, in rapid motion. Looking closer, it was clear that they were being fed by the folks from the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative.

Without these devoted folks, Cambridge and its friends would have starved the Charles River White Geese long ago.

The nesting area is that part of their habitat to which the Charles River White Geese traditionally turned in all forms of bad weather. It is well protected with the BU Bridge to the west, the raised on ramp to their north, those major trees to the east and south, plus the raised Grand Junction Railroad and Bridge to the east and, above the Charles River, to the South.

Even before the heartless abuse from Cambridge, MA, USA and its friends started, this was where they would go to get protection from the storms.

Now it is all they have and half is being taken away with the coming massive thicket of introduced bushes and Cambridge is planning a major small highway to dominate the area.

Lovely photos of Charles River White Geese and their area in report on Charles River Regatta.

The Cambridge Chronicle led its photo report on last weekend’s Charles River Regatta rowing race with an excellent photo of the Charles River White Geese. The photo report occupies page B1 of the hard copy edition on October 25, 2012.

The photo shows two boats with a flotilla of Charles River White Geese in the Charles River prominently featured above them, and with a nice notation in the caption. Above the Charles River White Geese is a brief view of the tiny area to which they have been heartlessly confined.

Also part of the photo report is a photo from the Cambridge side of rowers going under the Grand Junction railroad bridge, and, above it, the BU Bridge.

In the same edition, on pages 10 and 11, is the letter to the editor which I reported at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/response-to-cambridge-chronicles-praise.html. This responds to the Chronicle's puff piece on The Cambridge, MA, USA Machine's fight for environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse in the area.

On the front page is the Chronicle's report on Ms. Yanow’s attempt to withdraw the Cambridge Central Square zoning petition bearing her name. My reports on this nonsense from The Cambridge Machine are at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/central-square-cambridge-ma-usa-machine.html, and at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/relationship-to-charles-river-of.html.

Relationship to the Charles River of Cambridge, MA, USA Machine’s Attack on Central Square, Cambridge

A few days ago, I posted an analysis of The Cambridge Machine shafting its “friends” in a zoning petition affecting the neighborhood north and east of Central Square, Cambridge, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/central-square-cambridge-ma-usa-machine.html.

My letter to the Cambridge Chronicle places this nonsense with regard to Machine attacks on the Charles River in Cambridge in a more concise package.

***********

Editor
Cambridge Chronicle

Ms. Yanow’s attempt to withdraw the Yanow petition could be the worst thing she could do for her cause. Her stated reason, respect for the process being imposed on Central and Kendall Squares makes things that much worse.

I have written more successful zoning petitions than anybody else not employed by the City of Cambridge.

The difference between my results and that of processes supported by The Machine can be seen in two relatively new buildings, each with the same relative size (FAR) on its lot.

The City Council, in passing my Natalie Ward petition forced the Inn at Harvard on Harvard in place of construction 72% larger wished by Harvard.. We followed the process dictated by state law.

The new Harvard building on Memorial Drive near Western Avenue was the result of a “process” created by friends of The Machine. The City’s related zoning petition was so irresponsible that not even Harvard could accept it. Harvard’s less irresponsible petition created the final result.

The Inn at Harvard, forced on Harvard by the Natalie Ward petition, is the most popular new building in Harvard Square. Harvard’s new building on Memorial Drive has same relative density on its lot (FAR). The Memorial Drive building has been generally panned.

This is the difference between The Machine and responsible behavior.

Withdrawing her petition is exactly the worst thing Ms. Yanow could do. The proper procedure is to allow it to die out of inaction.

The difference? Ms. Yanow’s withdrawal prohibits discussing the topics of her petition for two years. Dying from inaction allows further work to be done on the Yanow petition.

Withdrawal would protect city councilors who oppose the petition from going on record opposing the petition and what it stands for. The Machine tends to do a lot of protecting of city councilors.

Ms. Yanow’s praise for the process is distressingly similar to the con game done in Riverside which resulted in that inferior Harvard building.

We are told a process is the thing. The Machine’s process has no mandatory basis in law. We also saw a lot of process on the Harvard building on Memorial Drive. The Memorial Drive process was made up on the fly, as is the current nonsense.

But The Machine goes on, and another neighborhood certainly looks like it has had inflicted totally unnecessary harm. And The Machine and these silly processes keep praising themselves.

Harvard University Contracting Its Empire in Cambridge, selling massive elderly housing at 2 Mt. Auburn Street.

1. Announcement of Plans.
2. My history.
3. Analysis of effect on the Empire.
4. What should be done?


1. Announcement of Plans.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012, City Councilor / soon to be State Representative Decker conducted a hearing in Cambridge City Hall concerning the just announced plans of Harvard University to sell a grossly out of scale elderly housing building at 2 Mt. Auburn Street in Cambridge, at the outer limits of Harvard Square.

Harvard has a map at http://map.harvard.edu/ from which a lot of the details can be translated. Google Maps, satellite view, http://maps.google.com, is also excellent. I tried to download Harvard’s map and edit it without success.

There was considerable discussion at the hearing of supposed legal protections on the sale of the 2 Mt. Auburn building.

Apparently a state agency has designated Homeowner’s Rehab, Inc. as its preferred purchaser for 2 Mt. Auburn Street under the legislation.

HRI previously bought an older but much more neighborhood sensitive apartment complex not far from 2 Mount Auburn, on Ware Street, at the corner of Ware and Broadway. HRI has managed that property for 10 or 20 years with subsidized tenants in place.

2 Mt. Auburn dominates the square created by Mt. Auburn Street, Putnam Avenue, Massachusetts Avenue and Trowbridge Street. Ware Street is one block long. It is one block west of Trowbridge Street, running from Harvard Street to Broadway, the two major streets north of Massachusetts Avenue in this part of Cambridge.

As the crow flies 2 Mt. Auburn is less distant from the Charles River than it is from the Ware Street properties.

The area between 2 Mt. Auburn and the Charles has seen major expansion of the Harvard empire in the last decade.

The next street off Mt. Auburn street to the west, toward Harvard Square, is Banks Street. In the last ten years, Harvard has constructed quite a few “neighborhood scale” buildings south of Mt. Auburn Street and west of Banks between Mt. Auburn and Grant Street. Between the next street to the west, Athens Street and DeWolfe Street, and facing DeWolfe Street, Harvard built a very large, nearly block long residential / dorm structure in the 90s. Further down Banks between Grant and Cowperthwaite Street facing Cowperthwaite is another massive structure built in the last ten years in the manner of a large dormitory.

This area is the Kerry Corner neighborhood.

2. My history.

I have had major impact on the area.

I wrote three zoning change proposals which downzoned about 85% of Massachusetts Avenue from the Inn at Harvard at the east end of the obvious Harvard Square to Cambridge City Hall, plus major portions of Mt. Auburn Street, Green Street and side streets between Mt. Auburn and Mass. Ave.

We emphasized housing, ground floor open space and large but not unreasonable density of construction.

Harvard wanted the Inn at Harvard to be 72% larger than it is. We forced the Inn at Harvard on Harvard in the Natalie Ward petition.

The Natalie Ward petition rezoned the block of Mt. Auburn Street from Putnam Avenue to Banks Street for neighborhood type of construction rather than the same type of construction that was legal in the core Harvard Square. This block includes 2 Mt. Auburn and 10 Mt. Auburn.

We made similar changes to Harvard fraternities (called “Houses”) on Mt. Auburn Street near the rear of Holyoke Center whose opposite side dominates Harvard Square. This is neighborhood zoning one block from the heart of Harvard Square.

We rezoned the side streets between Banks Street and the Inn at Harvard and the area around the Inn at Harvard to fit the neighborhood to the north and south rather than Harvard Square to the west.

I saved the historical building at 10 Mt. Auburn Street, the opposite end of the 2 Mt. Auburn block using fine print in the Rent Control ordinance.

Saving that building could have been crucial in the development of the last ten years because Harvard wanted to tear 10 Mt. Auburn down and put in a grossly disproportionate modern building on the corner of Banks and Mt. Auburn. I maintained the neighborhood scale and could very easily have determined the scale of the construction Harvard put in as part of the 2000's zoning effort dominated by machinations of The Machine.

To look at the alternative, just look at the monstrous building Harvard built on DeWolfe Street in the 90s, half a block from the latest residential construction.

I assisted in the saving of Corporal Burns Playground a block further east from the Cowperthwaite construction. Harvard wanted to build on it. Corporal Burns faces on the Charles River / Memorial Drive. Harvard’s new Memorial Drive housing is a block east of Corporal Burns. That housing was made legal by The Machine’s zoning effort.

A responsible alternative would have been the same zoning as we forced on the Inn at Harvard which has exactly the same density as the new Memorial Drive complex. The Inn at Harvard fits the neighborhood and the Harvard campus. That construction would have been responsible in the new Memorial Drive complex.

3. Analysis of effect on the Empire.

Harvard is clearly looking very strongly at expansion in Allston on the other side of the Charles River.

Harvard is destroying the Charlesview subsidized housing at North Harvard and Western and moving those residents to new construction replacing half of the neighborhood shopping center south of Western Avenue and four blocks west of Charlesview. Harvard bought this shopping center and then rendered it nearly empty by refusing to rent as stores became vacant.

The 2 Mt. Auburn building dates back to the early 70's. Neighbors were highly concerned when a developer which claimed to have nothing to do with Harvard proposed the structure.

2 Mt. Auburn was given major variances, was managed by the developer for a few years, and then, dah dah, Harvard owned it.

The great fear has been that Harvard would treat 2 Mt. Auburn as Harvard did so many of its rent control buildings, simply refuse to rent to non affiliates as vacancies occurred. This is the tactic Harvard used to destroy the residential shopping center on Western Avenue.

The games by the Machine which resulted in the construction of the last ten years featured bad faith typical of The Machine. As usual a dirty trick zoning change was involved. The proposal The Machine bullied out of good people was so irresponsible that Harvard found it unreasonable generous to Harvard.

Fine print buried in Machine related zoning of the last ten years or so played games with parking.

10 Mt. Auburn when built was allowed to have significantly less parking than would be expected. This was because of its elderly housing nature. Machine related zoning changes allowed parking for 2 Mt. Auburn to be further away than would previously have been allowed. The Cowperthwaite Street building has parking quite a bit larger than is needed for that building. The changes made using the Cowperthwaite parking for 2 Mt. Auburn.

The obvious maneuver was to use the Cowperthwaite parking for 10 Mt. Auburn, to allow transition from elderly housing to Harvard affiliate.

Harvard is giving that up.

4. What should be done?

Cambridge should buy 2 Mt. Auburn and dedicate it to use for elderly housing, the use for which it supposedly was constructed and which Cambridge appointees made legal.

Central Square, Cambridge, MA, USA: The Machine Shafts Those who trust it as usual.

1. The Cambridge Machine has, apparently, fooled a bunch of zoning petitioners into doing exactly the wrong thing with their petition.
2. Central Square in Context.
3. The real game — Fool well meaning people into respecting a situation worthy of disgust
4. The details?
5. Defeat versus slumber.
6. The Machine con — withdraw, withdraw, withdraw.
7. Standard Game — The Script from the Machine.



1. The Cambridge Machine has, apparently, fooled a bunch of zoning petitioners into doing exactly the wrong thing with their petition.

They have fooled them into withdrawing the petition, thus preventing further consideration for two years.

The smart thing is to simply let it die from inaction. Then you can refile at will.

2. Central Square in Context.

I avoid commenting about strictly in town Cambridge, MA machinations and concentrate on the attacks on the environment, almost all of which are general attacks on the environment. The rottenness of the situation in Cambridge is a key part of the destructiveness, but it is ancillary to whichever outrage they are pulling this time.

Thus, while I have had various approaches on various con games, I have not bothered spending my time on the con games on the blog unless the games are clearly of general interest. The nonsense going on in Central Square and Kendall Square fall into the category of: So what.

3. The real game — Fool well meaning people into respecting a situation worthy of disgust.

The Machine defines the parameters so that the victims think that what is going on in Cambridge is worthy of respect. That is the most important function of the company union, to give credibility to a pretty much non stop outrage and to fool well meaning people into thinking that the City Manager’s organization and the Cambridge City Council are worthy of respect.

It does not matter what the Machine claims to be doing, what matters is that the system is drilled into folks as something to respect, and that people are given the idea that THEY LOVE THE MACHINE.

4. The details?

I was approached during, I guess, the drafting of a zoning proposal for areas on the edges of Central Square. I asked a lot of questions and I communicated my lack of confidence in the Machine’s front behind the supposed proposal because of the very clear Machine participation. The details are irrelevant. The most important factors, after giving credibility to the Cambridge Administration and City Council are to fool people into thinking The Machine is worthy of Respect.

I offended the sensibilities of the “activists” and I did not want anything to do with them anyway. I am concerned with reality.

5. Defeat versus slumber.

The Cambridge Chronicle reported this week that Susan Yanow was in the process of withdrawing the Susan Yanow Petition, the workproduct of the Machine and its friends.

After checking and ensuring I had no contact information for Yanow, I immediately contacted a friend who is involved in the effort.

I communicated reality, a very bad thing to try with somebody under the control of The Machine.

Zoning initiatives have a life of their own, all spelled out in Chapter 40A of the General Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Machine has no use for Chapter 40A. Their reality is whatever their controllers tell them is reality.

A very key provision in chapter 40A concerns withdrawal of a petition. It says that withdrawal is the same as a defeat and bars consideration of the matter again for two years.

How do you get around it? You tell the city council you will not push the matter and, please forget about it. About six months or so after it is filed it goes into a state of limbo from which it cannot be resuscitated except by reinitiating the petition.

But you can resuscitate it and you can file a similar petition containing a lot of the same provisions, all with no problem.

You just do not withdraw it.

6. The Machine con — withdraw, withdraw, withdraw.

The Machine has informed the petitioners that they cannot win. So the Machine has advised the petitioners to do exactly the wrong thing. Withdraw the petition and have the punishment associated with a defeat without actually suffering a defeat.

The cause is given the worst possible treatment and no member of the City Council can be blamed, because the petitioners stabbed themselves in the back.

The Machine achieves its goals. It has fooled a bun ch of people into thinking the Machine is their friend and the Machine has achieved their real objectives. Fool those people into thinking the City of Cambridge has a viable system and fool outsiders into thinking the Cambridge City Council is a bunch of good guys.

The pitch given to me was that the City Council would defeat the proposal so there is no sense in fighting. Withdraw it.

So the victims get the worst possible result WITHOUT ANY CITY COUNCILORS TO BLAME. By withdrawing the petition, bad city councilors are protected from taking bad votes.

In the responsible way of handling it, just asking for no action, bad city councilors are also protected from taking bad votes, but the petitioners do not have the punishment associated with a withdrawal / defeat.

Instead, the Machine has talked the petitioners into getting the punishment of a defeat WITHOUT A VOTE SHOWING THE BAD GUYS TO BE BAD GUYS.

Would the city council take a vote on its own and give the petitioners the punishment associated with a defeat?

Hell, no. There would be no benefit to the bad members of the city council. The opponents of the petition are able to avoid the scorn which the petitioners would have for them if they took a vote the petitioners sad they did not want and they voted against the petitioners.

A pol would have to be a total fool to force a vote under such a circumstance.

So The Machine has persuaded the petitioners into voluntarily giving themselves the punishment associated with being voted down, WITHOUT HAVING THE BENEFIT OF BEING ABLE TO POINT OUT IRRESPONSIBLE CITY COUNCILORS.

7. Standard Game — The Script from the Machine.

The running theme of The Machine: “You can trust me, I’m your friend.” Followed by“You can’t win, you can’t win, you can’t win, but have I got a deal for you.”

A very rotten organization.

Response to Cambridge Chronicle’s praise for the Machine on the Charles River, Concise description of the Cambridge Machine

1. General.
2. Letter to the Editor.
3. Concise description of the Cambridge, MA, USA Machine.

1. General.

In the Thursday, October 20, 2012, edition of the Cambridge Chronicle, and on line, the Chronicle did a puff piece misrepresenting the actions of the Cambridge Machine at Magazine Beach as helpful to Magazine Beach.

I offered a response in a letter to the editor.

2. Letter to the Editor.

Editor
Cambridge Chronicle

I was fascinated by your front page report on The Machine’s discovery of Magazine Beach. The front organization stands for one good thing which it brags about. It stands for many bad things which it keeps as secret as possible.

They fight for the destruction of the parking lot at the foot of Magazine Street. It is needed by little people who picnic in that area. Their explanation translates: How dare you fight destroying the parking lot. We don’t have the money yet. You might beat us.

There are very serious problems at Magazine Beach. Those problems have been created by the misbehavior of Cambridge and the State during 13 years of irresponsible destruction and animal abuse. The machine’s history of Magazine Beach does not include the last 13 years.

By telling people to look at everything else they:

• Are fighting for the continued deliberate starvation of the Charles River White Geese whose food for most of the last 32 years has been forcibly taken from them.

• Are fighting to keep poisons being dumped on the playing fields to keep alive sickly introduced grass which replaces healthy environmentally responsible grass they needlessly destroyed. The destroyed grass continues to survive next to the parking lot they now want to destroy.

• Are fighting to keep the playing fields smaller than they should be. Massive areas have been converted to drainage to drain off the poisons needlessly being dumped there.

• Are fighting to keep Magazine Beach walled off from the Charles River with a bizarre wall of introduced vegetation which has never been explained. Vegetation next to the Charles elsewhere is destroyed twice a year.

• Are fighting to keep the boat dock closed.

• Are fighting to keep yet another massive wall of bushes being built in the tiny area to which they have confined the Charles River White Geese by their bizarre machinations.

The machine at Magazine Beach is copying its successful tactics at Alewife.

The Machine spent 14 years claiming to defend Alewife. They succeeded in destroying acres of Alewife for a “flood control” project which cannot be achieved by their destruction but which can be done under the parking lot across the street. They have killed hundred of resident animals. They are working for perhaps total destruction.

The game is the same: yell about everything else. Ignore their friends’ outrageous behavior.

The Machine always sounds great. Reality commonly is the opposite.

3. Concise description of the Cambridge, MA, USA Machine.

The concept of the Machine which established itself around James Leo Sullivan and Robert Healy is that of a company union. The Machine has been very effective as a company union and has shown itself to be an excellent example of the reason why true Unionists have contempt for company unions.

The idea of a company union is to prevent real organization and possibly get some bad stuff done in the process.

Company unions step into a void and fill that void, rottenly, preventing action that needs to be done.

I recently published a taste of this in my remembrance report for James Leo Sullivan, published at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/first-half-of-cambridge-ma-usa-city.html.

Harvard University announces more detail on its Allston expansion

Today’s (October 19, 2012) Harvard Gazette provided a link to Harvard’s announcement concerning its filing yesterday of plans for its expansion in the Allston neighborhood of Boston, MA.

Allston is located on the south side of the Charles River from the area in Cambridge, MA we have most discussed. The future Harvard Medical School relocation two blocks south of the main site shown appears to be key in the worst environmental destruction going on.

Here are two maps from the report, one an apparent satellite view, the other more detailed. Full explanations are at the link below.

The street going through the middle of the main area shown leads directly to Harvard Square and the main Harvard University campus, on the north side of the Charles River.

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/10/paperwork-for-a-new-future/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=10.19.12%2520%281%29.

Cambridge City Council Documentation: Environmental Destruction and Heartless Animal Abuse at Magazine Beach Playing Fields

1. General.
2. July 30, 2007 vote.
3. February 27, 2006 vote.
4. September 13, 2004 vote.

1. General.

I have done more study on the City Clerk’s records.

I find the following three votes since the City started saving these on line as votes of the City Council in May 2003. Copying is a pain. There are some formatting differences here from the originals.

Links are provided in each case.

There are votes, to my memory, under the City Manager’s communications concerning games with funding, moving money from a category which is more blatant than they would like to a category which sounds less irresponsible.

They could have happened before May 2003. They could be findable under the computer records.

I am calling it a day.


2. July 30, 2007 vote.

O-23
IN CITY COUNCIL

July 30, 2007

COUNCILLOR DAVIS
COUNCILLOR DECKER
COUNCILLOR GALLUCCIO
COUNCILLOR KELLEY
COUNCILLOR MURPHY
MAYOR REEVES
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
COUNCILLOR SULLIVAN
VICE MAYOR TOOMEY

ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to consult with the Department of Conservation and Recreation and the Cambridge Legislative Delegation about the status of the timeline for refurbishment of Magazine Beach; and be it further

ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter.


July 30, 2007
Adopted by the affirmative vote of nine members.
Attest:- D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk


A true copy;


ATTEST:-
D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk

http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?action=search&item_id=18789


3. February 27, 2006 vote.

O-43
AMENDED ORDER IN CITY COUNCIL
February 27, 2006
COUNCILLOR KELLEY
COUNCILLOR SULLIVAN
COUNCILLOR DAVIS
COUNCILLOR DECKER
COUNCILLOR GALLUCCIO
COUNCILLOR MURPHY
MAYOR REEVES
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
VICE MAYOR TOOMEY ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the appropriate City departments as well as the Department of Conservation and Recreation to develop an update on the status of ongoing work at Magazine Beach; and be it further

ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter.


In City Council February 27, 2006
Adopted as amended by the affirmative vote of nine members.
Attest:- D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk


A true copy;


ATTEST:-
D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk

http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?action=search&item_id=10226

[Ed. The unamended order is linked.]

4. September 13, 2004 vote.

The Department of Conservation and Recreation using money from the Cambridge City Council started heartlessly starving the Charles River White Geese in September 2004.

The following vote shows on the record:

************
O-14
IN CITY COUNCIL

September 13, 2004

COUNCILLOR DAVIS
VICE MAYOR DECKER
COUNCILLOR GALLUCCIO
COUNCILLOR MAHER
COUNCILLOR MURPHY
COUNCILLOR REEVES
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
MAYOR SULLIVAN
COUNCILLOR TOOMEY

ORDERED: The City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on the maintenance and improvement issues at Magazine Beach.




September 13, 2004
Adopted by the affirmative vote of nine members.
Attest:- D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk


A true copy;


ATTEST:-
D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk

http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?action=search&item_id=4382

Reality and the con games from the Cambridge, MA, USA Political Machine: Magazine Beach destruction

1. General, personal knowledge.
2. City Manager report, October 17, 2012.
3. City Manager Report, May 22, 2006.
4. City Manager Report, December 20, 2004.
5. Awaiting Reports.


1. General, personal knowledge.

We have gotten the usual con game from the Cambridge Machine. This time from Person 3.

Now they are denying that Cambridge had anything to do with the environmental outrage and heartless animal abuse at Magazine Beach.

I have posted a quote from Kathy Podgers stating that she was actively involved in fighting Cambridge’s outrage at Magazine Beach.

I have gone back through the City Clerk’s on line records and pulled out a few reports from the Cambridge City Manager. The good on line records only date back to May 2003. Hard copies can be obtained way back if you go through the bother.

The reality is that I was present for the key vote in the last meeting of 1999, in which the Cambridge City Council voted to spend about $1.5 million on environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse at the Magazine Beach playing fields in exchange for control of use of the Magazine Beach playing fields.

The vote was unanimous. One of the destructive people voting for the environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse currently anchors news at New England Cable News. I am a strong watcher of New England Cable News, but I cannot stomach his false impression of sainthood. I do not watch him.

In our discussions in 1999, he repeatedly jerked tears about how much his kids loved the Charles River White Geese. I have no knowledge if he informed his kids of his paying for heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese.

The following are copied from the City Clerk’s records since May 2003. I probably missed a lot. Relevant links are provided.

2. City Manager report, October 17, 2012.

September 17, 2007

To the Honorable, the City Council:
In response to Awaiting Report Item Number 07-95, regarding a report on the timeline for refurbishment of Magazine Beach, please be advised of the following:

We were informed on September 11, 2007 by Richard Corsi from the DCR that the bid package for Magazine Beach was delayed once again, due to a change in the location of the control box for the irrigation system, which required further review and revisions to the drawings. He anticipates that the bid documents will be ready to send out for bids in mid-October of 2007. This latest delay will result in a construction delay, thus the field will not be renovated in time for next year’s Little League season. No projected completion date was provided.

Very truly yours,



Robert W. Healy
City Manager

RWH/mec

http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/cmLetter.cfm?action=search&item_id=10685

3. City Manager Report, May 22, 2006.

May 22, 2006

To the Honorable, the City Council:
In response to Awaiting Report Item Number 06-23, regarding a report on ongoing work at Magazine Beach, please be advised of the following:

The reconstruction of the stormwater outfall at Magazine Beach is substantially complete. The contractor is presently completing the “punch list” work on the isolation structure. Once this work is complete, work with then begin on the shoreline restoration. All work should be completed by the end of July.

Very truly yours,



Robert W. Healy
City Manager

RWH/mec


http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/cmLetter.cfm?action=search&item_id=7467

4. City Manager Report, December 20, 2004.

December 20, 2004

To the Honorable, the City Council:

Please find attached a response to Awaiting Report Item Number 04-78, regarding a report on the maintenance and improvement issues at Magazine Beach, received from Department of Conservation and Recreation Commissioner Katherine F. Abbott.

Very truly yours,



Robert W. Healy
City Manager

RWH/mec
Attachment(s)

http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/cmLetter.cfm?action=search&item_id=3418

5. Awaiting Reports.

Awaiting reports is a list of items the City Council has asked from the Cambridge City Manager.

I find five such items listed in a search result but the actual items searched for do not seem to be linked. Two of these items concern the Magazine Beach pool. I found corresponding reports in the above search but they do not seem to be directly relevant. In this case, since I do not seem to be able to get the documents, I am providing the list which came up.

The list:

October 5, 2009; Awaiting Report 09-62
Report from the City Manager:
report on keeping the Magazine Beach pool opened.

September 17, 2007; Awaiting Report 07-95
Report from the City Manager:
report on the timeline for refurbishment of Magazine Beach.

May 22, 2006; Awaiting Report 06-23
Report from the City Manager:
report on ongoing work at Magazine Beach.

January 10, 2005; Awaiting Report 04-58
Report from the City Manager:
report on what it would cost the City to purchase the MDC pool at Magazine Beach.

December 20, 2004; Awaiting Report 04-78
Report from the City Manager:
report on the maintenance and improvement issues at Magazine Beach.