Daly Field Rehabilitation

[Will Brownsberger]

Hi Folks,

 

I've just posted some additional information on the plans at my website.

 

Click here to read the post:  http://willbrownsberger.com/index.php/archives/11240

 

/w.

--
 

Will Brownsberger
Visit www.willbrownsberger.com for news.
 
Also follow Will Brownsberger for updates on:
Facebook: Will Brownsberger

[ap...@mindspring.com]

Senator Will:
why does this riverbank land have do be privatized in any fashion?
why can't the dcr keep it up?  this field has been valuable for many years to the surrounding community, why should we handcuff ourselves?
why would one think that Simmons wouldn't want a boat house like all the other institutions that share the edifice complex.
it was not that long ago that riverfront was sacred and only those places "grandfathered in" took up space rightfully belonging to the public.
now slowly but surely the encroachment moves inexorably towards limiting the public's demesne
 
there ought to have been an open transparent public process prior to any legislation being advanced, this is a slippery slope for public policy
it is never too late to do the people's work
many of the heavy users of Daly Field are unaware of this,  not likely to be tune in to the political ways of the local American scene or even,at the risk of being chauvinistic, have a proficient command of our language
 
this issue is a matter in the public realm and should be addressed appropriately by the communities

Paul Creighton

--
To post to this group, send email to AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/AllstonBrighton2006?hl=en

[Abby]

Will,

Thank you for the additional info. This seems like a really terrific
project. I know that there has been some online chatter about this in
the last couple of days, but I think the additional information sets
aside the concerns that have been raised. Particularly that this land
and fields will continue to be available for public use and not "locked
away" by Simmons.

It is a great example of a public private partnership for our
underfunded parks and will benefit Simmons, Brighton High, and the
greater community. The fields are a mess, and renovations and
improvements should encourage far more use by the community.

It is an impressive collaboration by our elected officials, and thank
you all (author of the legislation Mike Moran, Kevin Honan, Jonathan
Hecht,
and Will Brownsberger) for your efforts.

Abby

-----Original Message-----
From: Will Brownsberger <willbrow...@gmail.com>
To: cleveland-circle-community
<cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com>;
chestnut-hill-reservoir-forum
<chestnut-hill-...@googlegroups.com>; hpna <hp...@usa.net>;
AllstonBrighton2006 <AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com>; abnnf
<ab...@googlegroups.com>; Aberdeen-Brighton-residents
<Aberdeen-Brig...@googlegroups.com>; bc_neighbors_forum
<bc_neighb...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Jul 25, 2012 5:24 pm
Subject: [Cleveland-Circle] Daly Field Rehabilitation

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Cleveland Circle Community" group.

To post to this group, send email to

cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cleveland-circle-co...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at

http://groups.google.com/group/cleveland-circle-community?hl=en.

[Eva Webster]

They hang the man and flog the woman,
Who steals the goose from off the common,
Yet let the greater villain loose,
That steals the common from the goose.
 
-- Seventeenth-century English protest rhyme

On 7/25/12 6:19 PM, "Abby" <abigai...@aol.com> wrote:

> It is a great example of a public private partnership for our

> underfunded parks (...)

> It is an impressive collaboration by our elected officials, and thank
> you all (author of the legislation Mike Moran, Kevin Honan, Jonathan
> Hecht, and Will Brownsberger) for your efforts.

Abby, you know I respect you and consider you a friend, but I think you did not think this trough.

Are we supposed to be thrilled that DCR cannot take care of public land, and we need private institutions, such as Simmons College to do it?  I am not thrilled by this in the least!   The next thing I’ll know may be that someone has cooked a deal behind the scenes with BC to “take care” of the C.H. Reservoir.  Excuse?  “We had no choice — DCR doesn’t have money to do it.” Give me a break!  

This was not an exemplary process (with Daly Field), and does not deserve giddy, unconditional gratitude/support.  The tendency to privatize public spaces is extremely troubling, and we should be very worried about it, and demand an open and through public process. (I would say that a deeper discussion about some political and philosophical issues that factor into this matter is also needed.)

We never learn about those things until after it's already a done deal.  (Sen. Will Brownsberger should not take heat for this though -- if it wasn't for him we would still not know about this most recent case of institutional expansion. He also maintains a very informative blog that people can learn from — I very much appreciate that.)  And it pains me to say this: our state reps are good at small talk, but try to find out what’s going on with important matters — and there is no time/venue to have intelligent public conversations about the laws and initiatives they work on in our name. People expect more information and opportunities for input.  Mike & Kevin: it’s time to do something about it.  Perhaps we should have town hall meetings (you also have aides who could be proactively informing your constituents about pending bills and other important decisions.)

The truth is that proper maintenance of and investment in public spaces is not high on the Massachusetts legislators' agenda (that's why DCR is notoriously underfunded).  The questions is: why are state elected officials going along with that?  What can we expect in the future?  Public parks and beeches to be given to private companies? Or private “conservancies” unaccountable to anyone doing the work that should be done properly by DCR?  And of course, people should be putting their lives on hold and work as volunteers in their local parks — hell no!  My mother didn’t have to volunteer her life away for local parks, and they were beautiful!  (here, we cannot get DCR to even plant a bunch of daffodils — pathetic!)

This is why right-wingers want the government to be "small" and unable to fulfill its functions, so the government agencies (be it federal, state, or municipal) cannot take care the public domain -- and no one even expects them to -- and then public resources can be exploited by private interests -- and citizens become just guests in private facilities, where they have no say about anything.

Daly Field didn’t become neglected overnight.  Had there been proper planning over the years to restore it and keep it up, it could have become a great public facility that the state could even charge private schools to use, and get income from it.

Eva

[Merrill H. Diamond]

I don't get it....

Sent from my iPhone

Merrill H. Diamond

DIAMOND SINACORI, LLC

IGNITION RESIDENTIAL, LLC

231 West Canton St., Suite 1

Boston, MA 02116

617-512-1027 (tel)

Read my latest blog posts at http://ignitionre.com/blog

[RonH]

This is just institutional theft.  It's a terrific project for Simmons.  It stinks for the average citizen.  Just look at the hours "set aside for public use".:  It's a farce.

cleveland-circle-community@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

cleveland-circle-community+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Frank Byrne]

$$$$

Sent from my iPhone

[Andrew M. Fischer]

On 7/25/2012 6:11 PM, ap...@mindspring.com wrote:
> Senator Will:
> why does this riverbank land have do be privatized in any fashion?

Because the one percent don't want to pay their fair share of taxes

> why can't the dcr keep it up?

Because the one percent don't want to pay their fair share of taxes

> this field has been valuable for many years to the surrounding
> community, why should we handcuff ourselves?

Because we don't have the tax income to take care of it through
the government, the arm of the people.

See above

Andrew M. Fischer matter in the public realm and should be

[Katherine von Stackelberg]

What is to get?  You will lose the field

Sent from my iPad

--
To post to this group, send email to AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/AllstonBrighton2006?hl=en

[Kressel Shirley]

Eva,

I'm so grateful to you for articulating so well all these points.  I, as you know, have been fighting for decades against privatization of parks, schools, libraries, T stations, and all other public assets.  It seems to me that the more egregious and obvious the problem gets, the less attention is paid by the public -- in fact, the more popular these privatization "solutions" become!  People have been brainwashed to accept the neocon/neoliberal argument that private charity and volunteerism (the "thousand points of light") are a proper substitute for the public realm and for democratic government.  In fact, they are willing to keep paying more and more taxes and fees, and yet also to contribute more donated time and money to private entities who ride in to "rescue" us, at our own expense and with the loss of our democratic rights.  Politicians lie to us, tell us we're broke -- and at the same time give away hundreds of billions of dollars to corporations and a handful of moguls; why don't we demand that our money be used for our services?  

We know they do that; we read about, for example, the $46.5 million to Liberty Mutual Insurance, one of the richest corporations in the world, while our libraries and schools and parks and human services are starved. Why? Why do we accept this?  

Do you think these institutions are being kind and giving away their money for nothing?  You should study up on what has happened with Rotch Field in the South End, Ebersol Field in the Esplanade, the Boston Common Frog Pond, Emerson College and the Common, Emmanuel College and Clemente Park,  in the Fenway, the Greenway Conservancy, and so many other parks; many have already been taken over by private entities who have closed out public uses by controlling the design, the hours, the use fees, some are now facing privatization and commercialization.  Institutions are rapidly annexing our public parks as part of their athletic programs and campus lands; by donating a little maintenance money, they are getting incredibly valuable use and control rights to our public realm; of course they always promise not to limit public use, but that's not the way it goes later.  The City and the state have spent years recruiting Friends groups for every public open space, to bring in private money while the governor and the mayor give away our tax revenues to their corporate friends; creating these "public-private partnerships" are a major goal of the parks departments at both levels, and private money is already funding a large proportion of our parks; do you think those Friends and donors don't want anything in return?  Control of uses or hours of public use? Special privileges? The right to throw out whomever they don't like?  

I've been working (in my spare time, ha ha) on a book on this issue, the privatization of the public realm.  But as I keep working on it, the situation keeps getting worse; I hardly even know how to frame the arguments any more, because at some point they are axiomatic -- how do you argue basic sense and logic?  I have many times read such comments praising public-private partnerships that have come to save our impoverished government, and decided to just give up.  "I give up," I say about twice a day.  But I can't, really.

The public realm is being rapidly sold or given away, by both Democrats and Republicans.  (Which is why I have turned to the Green Party, which opposes corporate welfare and values the public realm and true democracy; no, it's not a wasted vote -- we'll never get what we want if we don't vote for it.)

It's sad and frightening to realize that the next generations of children will grow up thinking that they owe everything they get to some generous corporation or philanthropic wealthy donor, instead of realizing that all their shared riches are being stolen from them and they are being taught to be grateful for crumbs while in fact they give those "benefactors," in tax breaks, land deals, deregulation, etc., much more than they get from them.

I'm especially dismayed that Jon Hecht and Will Brownsberger are on board with this.  I expected better from them.  And I think we should get them into a meeting and tell them so.

What can we do, in some organized way, to stop this destruction of the commons -- of the very idea of the commons?  We need to get people together and have conversations about this. That would really scare the politicians who are funded by these corporations and billionaires and yes, institutional leaders, if we got together to talk about what this means, that it is all wrong. and that  we won't tolerate it.   How do we do it?  

I ask all of you, my friends on this list: What should we do to save our public realm?  

Shirley

PS Isn't Daly Field, a DCR park, subject to Article 97 of the state constitution?  If it is, a 2/3 vote of the state legislature is required before any change of ownership, control or use. Which this is.

Shirley Kressel

27 Hereford Street

Boston, MA 02115

617-421-0835 home

617-515-3403 iPhone

[janice imonti]

Eva, You certainly have my vote!

[John A. Yannis]

Not sure what my opinion is yet. But here is some info regarding Article 97, since I got curious about that footnote in Shirley's email. This is from http://protectmassenvironment.org/article_97.htm:

In November 1972 the citizens of Massachusetts approved at the ballot Article 97, which became the 97th Amendment to the State Constitution. The amendment reads:

"The people shall have the right to clean air and water, freedom from excessive and unnecessary noise, and the natural, scenic, historic, and esthetic qualities of their environment; and the protection of the people in their right to the conservation, development and utilization of the agricultural, mineral, forest, water, air and other natural resources is hereby declared to be a public purpose.

The general court shall have the power to enact legislation necessary or expedient to protect such rights.

In the furtherance of the foregoing powers, the general court shall have the power to provide for the taking, upon payment of just compensation therefore, or for the acquisition by purchase or otherwise, of lands and easements or such other interests therein as may be deemed necessary to accomplish these purposes.

Lands and easements taken or acquired for such purposes shall not be used for other purposes or otherwise disposed of except by laws enacted by a two thirds vote, taken by yeas and nays, of each branch of the general court."

Whether the General Court since then has exercised its "power to enact legislation .. to protect such rights" I don't know. But this text alone doesn't seem to me to require legislative approval of every lease or rental (which stands to reason, since this would be a time-consuming, inefficient way to run things). 

"Such purposes" in the last paragraph refers to TAKINGS (in the prior paragraph) to further "these purposes" (promoting our rights to clean air etc.). So it empowers the Legislature to TAKE land (with compensation) if it would promote those purposes -- if YOUR land was on the river, this might worry you. (Actually it allows them to pass laws which would allow such takings.) And the last paragraph says basically 'if you take it for that purpose, you better USE it for that purpose.'

So, Article 97 seems to me like it might be an obstruction if the land in question was originally obtained by an eminent domain "taking" under a law passed pursuant to Art. 97; I have no information on that question as to this parcel. It certainly doesn't prohibit all leases not approved by two-third majorities. 

Hope this helps.

John Yannis

---

From: Kressel Shirley <shirley...@comcast.net>
To: Eva Webster <evawe...@comcast.net>
Cc: AllstonBrighton2006 <allstonbr...@googlegroups.com>; cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com; Chestnut Hill Reservoir Forum <chestnut-hill-...@googlegroups.com>; hp...@usa.net; ab...@googlegroups.com; ABRA Group <Aberdeen-Brig...@googlegroups.com>; BC_Neighb...@googlegroups.com; Will Brownsberger <willbrow...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 11:10 PM

Subject: Re: [AB2006] Re: [Cleveland-Circle] Daly Field Rehabilitation

--
To post to this group, send email to AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/AllstonBrighton2006?hl=en

[Ellen McCrave]

a thought...

Will Brownsberger hasn't yet responded to comments on THIS forum & I
am not sure he will, but he DOES respond when you post on his website.
It may be worthwhile to post this discussion, comments etc. & get a
response from him.

Look for the Daly Field topic heading.

http://willbrownsberger.com/


and, by the way, the Brighton-Allston Swimming Pool, along the river
in the same general area- has been closed. The DCR states:

"DCR is committed to a public process in the fall to gather
neighborhood input on the future use of the Brighton-Allston pool
site"

It will be interesting to see what is proposed...
If interested, you can call DCR & ask to be notified when they will
have a "neighborhood input" process in the fall.

Thank you.
Ellen

ps- thank you Eva & Shirley for so clearly articulating what is so
very wrong with this process.


(from DCR website:

Closed for the 2012 season

DCR swimming facilities are often 40 to 50 years old and are generally
more susceptible to weather-related deterioration due to their short
operating season. The Brighton-Allston Swimming Pool and the Hall
Memorial Swimming Pool in Stoneham will not open on June 23. The
decision to close the pools was made based on budget limitations,
facility concerns, and low attendance at both sites.

“The decision to close the Brighton-Allston and Stoneham swimming
pools is a decision that does not come easily to the agency and we
recognize the affect on the communities involved,” said Commissioner
Lambert. “However, after carefully weighing all of the options, DCR
leadership decided to move forward with closure of these two pools.”

The Stoneham and Brighton-Allston swimming pools see the lowest
attendance of all DCR Pools. Additionally, both Stoneham and Brighton-
Allston pool facilities are within 2 miles of alternative DCR swimming
pool facilities. In the case of the Brighton-Allston pool, the
facility’s condition was also a factor. Significant modernization and
renovation would be required to make the pool operational for another
season.)

[Hwglaser]

With all due respect, Right Wing Left Wing is not a good way to
characterize a decision to go forward or not with any undertaking.
Each like kind effort should be evaluated on its own merit. I have
faith in our Representatives decision to upgrade the Area to better
serve the whole Community. The College also provides a service to the
Community.

-----Original Message-----
From: Eva Webster <evawe...@comcast.net>
To: AllstonBrighton2006 <allstonbr...@googlegroups.com>;
cleveland-circle-community
<cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com>; Chestnut Hill Reservoir

Forum <chestnut-hill-...@googlegroups.com>; hpna
<hp...@usa.net>; abnnf <ab...@googlegroups.com>; ABRA Group
<Aberdeen-Brig...@googlegroups.com>; BC_Neighbors_Forum
<BC_Neighb...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Jul 26, 2012 3:54 pm
Subject: [Aberdeen] Re: [AB2006] Re: [Cleveland-Circle] Daly Field
Rehabilitation

They hang the man and flog the woman,
Who steals the goose from off the common,
Yet let the greater villain loose,
That steals the common from the goose.
 
-- Seventeenth-century English protest rhyme

On 7/25/12 6:19 PM, "Abby" &lt;abigai...@aol.com&gt; wrote:

&gt; It is a great example of a public private partnership for our
&gt; underfunded parks (...)

&gt; It is an impressive collaboration by our elected officials, and
thank
&gt; you all (author of the legislation Mike Moran, Kevin Honan,
Jonathan
&gt; Hecht, and Will Brownsberger) for your efforts.

On 7/25/12 6:19 PM, "Abby" &lt;abigai...@aol.com&gt; wrote:

&gt; Will,
&gt;
&gt; Thank you for the additional info.  This seems like a really
terrific
&gt; project.  I know that there has been some online chatter about
this in
&gt; the last couple of days, but I think the additional information
sets
&gt; aside the concerns that have been raised.  Particularly that this
land
&gt; and fields will continue to be available for public use and not
"locked
&gt; away" by Simmons.
&gt;
&gt; It is a great example of a public private partnership for our
&gt; underfunded parks and will benefit Simmons, Brighton High, and the
&gt; greater community.  The fields are a mess, and renovations and
&gt; improvements should encourage far more use by the community.
&gt;
&gt; It is an impressive collaboration by our elected officials, and
thank
&gt; you all (author of the legislation Mike Moran, Kevin Honan,
Jonathan
&gt; Hecht,
&gt; and Will Brownsberger) for your efforts.
&gt;
&gt; Abby
&gt;
&gt; -----Original Message-----
&gt; From: Will Brownsberger &lt;willbrow...@gmail.com&gt;
&gt; To: cleveland-circle-community
&gt; &lt;cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com&gt;;
&gt; chestnut-hill-reservoir-forum
&gt; &lt;chestnut-hill-...@googlegroups.com&gt;; hpna
&lt;hp...@usa.net&gt;;
&gt; AllstonBrighton2006 &lt;AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com&gt;;
abnnf
&gt; &lt;ab...@googlegroups.com&gt;; Aberdeen-Brighton-residents
&gt; &lt;Aberdeen-Brig...@googlegroups.com&gt;;
bc_neighbors_forum
&gt; &lt;bc_neighb...@googlegroups.com&gt;
&gt; Sent: Wed, Jul 25, 2012 5:24 pm
&gt; Subject: [Cleveland-Circle] Daly Field Rehabilitation
&gt;
&gt; Hi Folks,
&gt;  
&gt; I've just posted some additional information on the plans at my
website.
&gt;  
&gt; Click here to read the post: 
&gt; http://willbrownsberger.com/index.php/archives/11240
&gt;  
&gt; /w.
&gt;
&gt; --
&gt;  
&gt;
&gt; Will Brownsberger
&gt; Visit www.willbrownsberger.com for news.
&gt;  
&gt; Also follow Will Brownsberger for updates on:
&gt; Facebook: Will Brownsberger
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; --
&gt; You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
&gt; Groups "Cleveland Circle Community" group.
&gt; To post to this group, send email to
&gt; cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com.
&gt; To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
&gt; cleveland-circle-co...@googlegroups.com.
&gt; For more options, visit this group at
&gt; http://groups.google.com/group/cleveland-circle-community?hl=en.
&gt;

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Groups "Aberdeen-Brighton Residents Association" group.

To post to this group, send email to

aberdeen-brig...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

aberdeen-brighton-r...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at

http://groups.google.com/group/aberdeen-brighton-residents?hl=en.

[Eva Webster]

Howard,

It would be very comforting to think that people of all political
persuasions can be equally either for or against dismantling/privatizing of
the public domain (including public education and services) -- but that is
not the case.

The vast majority of people who lean left are in favor of maintaining the
public domain (be it open space, education or services), and the vast
majority of people who lean right don't have a problem with privatizing it
(and I think it's only because they don't fully understand the consequences
of putting everything in private/corporate hands).

Those who don't identify with neither "wing" may indeed be undecided.

But the fact that our predominantly Democratic state legislature is
comfortable with advancing the goals of the "right wing" (for lack of a
better word) by privatizing public open spaces is ironic and truly
perplexing.

E.

[Jonathan Kamens]

Eva,

I take issue with your characterization of "the vast majority" of people on the left or right. I certainly do not fit your stereotype, and many of my friends and acquaintances don't either. Rather, we agree with Howard that individual proposals should be evaluated on their merits.

If you wish to close your mind to even considering the possibility that private management of a particular public resource might be a good thing, that is your prerogative, but please do not presume to speak for others.

Regards,

Jonathan Kamens

[Eva Webster]

On 7/26/12 5:26 PM, "Jonathan Kamens" <j...@kamens.us> wrote:

>

Eva,

> I take issue with your characterization of "the vast majority" of people on

> the left or right. I certainly do not fit your stereotype...


There are exceptions to every rule, Jonathan.  You may indeed be “unique”.  But it is in fact impossible to go through life (and especially navigate through political issues) without making certain generalizations.  For example, we have reasons to believe that “birds fly”, and it is true -- unless you’re a penguin or a dodo.

And it is you who jumps to the conclusion that I am “closing my mind that private management of a particular public resource might be a good thing”.  I do not.  For example, no one expects the federal government to become a solar energy producer on the vast areas of deserts that are federal lands (re. recent proposal of the Obama administration to use those lands in that way).

But to expect that the COMMONWEALTH of Massachusetts should be able to maintain public open space along the Charles River in Boston for all people to use -- without any private Board chaired by the president of Simmons College -- is not something that is remotely unreasonable.

[Kressel Shirley]

Actually, I must sadly agree that people of all political factions are being equally persuaded that the public domain should be replaced with private charity, given at the whim of the givers, if and when and to whom they feel like giving as suits their own needs.  Their reasons may be different, but it all ends up the same.  

Republicans want to starve government and thus "demonstrate" that it is not only broke but inherently incompetent, so that public tax funds can be diverted to their eagerly waiting corporate hands -- which are so competent that they have repeatedly decimated the national and world economy to benefit a few insiders. But at least the Righties know they are destroying the economy and the society for corporate benefit, and they believe that's the right way to run a civilization.  Survival of the craftiest, most rapacious, most selfish, which they consider the most deserving.  The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism and all that.

Democrats, on the other hand, are responding, gullibly, to the their cynical, lying politicians' cries that the government is broke, alas, and without transferring control (and, ironically, boatloads of public money, viz the Greenway Conservancy) to private entities, we will simply not have all those wonderful "public" services any more. The Democrats (equally bought out by corporations and mega-campaign contributors and so preferring to pander to the right than to explain to the public what's really happening) have fallen in with the Republicans, to, for example, dismantle public education and replace it with No Child Left Behind (or, "No Child's Behind Left"), charter schools, union-busting, high-stakes testing, leading to vouchers, which will benefit primarily religious schools where vouchers would cover the full tuition and grades are not an obstacle (poor flunking black kids will not, contrary to rumor, be able to take their vouchers to Phillips Exeter Academy and ascend thus to the middle class).  Obama is the worst in this regard, having hired the Lord High Executioner, Arne Duncan, to engulf the system in this destruction by just dangling a few bucks before the governors' and mayors' noses, for which they will sell out the children (actually, only the poor children) -- because "we're too poor" to fund our school system.  Park advocates, like the Friends of the Boston Common and Public Garden, and really just about every park advocate I know, short-sightedly parrot the "we're too broke" mantra and welcome conservancies, corporate naming rights, private donations attached to privatizing use privileges, etc.  When I point out that, for example, the mayor of Boston and governor recently teamed up to give $46.5 million to Liberty Mutual, one of the richest corporations in the world, to subsidize its (unlawful) 300-ft tower in the "blighted" Back Bay, parkies turn to me quizzically and ask, "Why are you bringing up Liberty Mutual? This is a discussion about parks!"  The state just approved $31 million for corporate subsidies -- even as yet another study was published saying that tax breaks don't accomplish anything (http://www.lincolninst.edu/news-events/news-listing/articletype/articleview/articleid/1890/property-tax-breaks-to-lure-businesses-largely-ineffective-report-says).  The mayor is as we speak putting together a really tricky scam that will reward a developer and his new tenant, State Street Bank (and the Bank of America as an investor in the scam), for moving State Street's downtown employees to the seaport, to the tune of $11.5 million in taxpayer money.  All the money we "don't have" is simply being siphoned off to the corporate buddies of our politicians.  Even after I present this and other evidence of money-siphoning, the liberal advocates turn to me and say, "But, Shirley, we have to make deals with corporations and developers and institutions and donors, because the city/state is broke, and we won't get our park/school/library/road repair/transit service!"

It's like those dreams, where you are talking but it seems to be a different language and no one understands you.

The Greenway Conservancy has siphoned from the government $17.5 million for four years of maintaining a park the size of a dozen suburban house lots, and is now threatening that if it doesn't get $10 million from the state for the next six years, and then keep getting at least $1.2 million a year, it's going to simply "turn the park over to the state, and the state doesn't have any money."  Get it?  We have no money to take care of the park, but we've found $17.5 million to take care of the Conservancy with its executive director getting a quarter million a year and a bevy of other chiefs getting six-figure salaries, and we're now threatened that we must cough up much more money, or we'll have to care for the park ourselves!  What the $@!&**! is going on here?  I cannot even get the politicians to simply issue a Request for Proposals and get some competitive bids from contractors, to see how much this maintenance really should cost (my information is that it's under $500,000 a year).  I can't get them to chuck the Conservancy, take its $15 million of banked money as the law allows, and give it to the state DCR so the state agency can do its job.  (DCR has been cut by about a third since Deval was elected; it now has $70 million to maintain 450,000 acres, or about $150 an acre; the Greenway Conservancy's budget last year was about $5 million, and they contemplated an eventual budget of $11 million a year (half of it coming from the state), about $1 million an acre. The City spends about $7,000 an acre for its 2,200 acres.)  When I say the state should take care of its Greenway, park advocates -- I mean, genuine, sincere, long-time tree-hugging activists -- look at me as if I am just crazy: "Shirley, don't you see, the state is broke, it has no money for the park!"  

Different languages.

In a democracy, people get what they deserve.  

And charity is not justice.

Shirley

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cleveland Circle Community" group.
To post to this group, send email to cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cleveland-circle-co...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cleveland-circle-community?hl=en.

[John Spritzler]

Hi Eva,

I was out of town when you sent your email below, but I want to say now that I agree with you here 100%. Thanks for expressing these views.

--John

---

From: "Eva Webster" <evawe...@comcast.net>
To: "AllstonBrighton2006" <allstonbr...@googlegroups.com>, cleveland-cir...@googlegroups.com, "Chestnut Hill Reservoir Forum" <chestnut-hill-...@googlegroups.com>, hp...@usa.net, ab...@googlegroups.com, "ABRA Group" <Aberdeen-Brig...@googlegroups.com>, "BC Neighbors Forum" <BC_Neighb...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 7:57:30 PM

Subject: [Aberdeen] Re: [AB2006] Re: [Cleveland-Circle] Daly Field Rehabilitation