Activating AlQaeda (the base)

As you may know, the Belmont Community Path is currently in its 25% design plan phase.  The CPPC has announced its intention of submitting the plans to the MPO in early to mid March although now that seems doubtful.

The MPO will provide $16.7M for this project and most of that money (80%) will be Federal funds. The CPPC has successfully inflated that project budget up to at least $25M but have covered the difference via a $7.5M  earmark in the recent pork barrel bill H5248 pushed through by Sen. Brownsberger and Rep. Barrett. 

However, the budget is really a moving target.  Those involved in this project can pocket a bit of money by generating "cost overruns" that  the Boston MPO - unlike other MPOs - has covered up to now.  So these project becomes a potentially  endless source of money limited only by the spending imagination of those involved.  (As an example, the MPO in the last two months have been discussing the cost overruns of 30% and 140% of two specific projects.) 

Because the MPO is key for the implementation of this project, many abutters have send letters to the MPO during public comment periods last year and this year (May 28 2020, Feb 16 2021, March 2 2021).  The CPPC discussed the abutters' letters recently and a CPPC member brought up whether the CPPC should activate its base to write to the MPO in support.

Yesterday, I received a forwarded email from an anonymous source.  It seems the base has been activated and a complete letter template for contacting the MPO is included.

To us abutters, it is not a surprise to know that the base has been activated; we have been expecting it.  Members of  the Executive Committee of Friends of the Belmont Community Path and family are allowed to participate freely in CPPC meetings unlike abutters; we are kept silent.  Nowadays there are three people listed as heads of the organization that was founded by a member of the various town path committees.  For years, one specific person has been racknowledged as head of the FBCP, a neighbor of that longtime path committee member.  In several occasions, I have observed the two confer quietly and the path committee member  give directions (orders?) to his neighbor.

---------------

Dear Friends,

....

Use our template below:
Below is a template email which you may use to draft your comments for the MPO. Copy and paste and customize to your liking. It is not necessary to spend more than 5 minutes on this task and personalized comments are not required, although they are helpful. The MPO will be accepting public comments via email until early/mid May 2021, but we urge you to send your comments by March 22 to influence the proposed budget plan. 

Feel free to reply to this email if you have any questions.

Thanks,
Jarrod Goentzel, Sara Smith, and Eric Batcho
Executive Committee, Friends of the Belmont Community Path

Subject: Belmont Community Path

Dear Mr. Matt Genova,

I’m writing to voice my support for the Belmont Community Path and request that the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization provide Transportation Improvement Program funding for the project as soon as possible.

I’m looking forward to the Belmont Community Path because…[INSERT ONE OR MORE REASONS LISTED BELOW]
 
...... [section deleted0
 
 
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
[INSERT NAME AND ADDRESS]


Popular posts from this blog

The Miracle of the Sketchily Scheduled Public Hearing

I've been on hiatus fron this blog after Nitsch's submission of the 25% design plan at the end of 2021.  All that time, I've continued to observe the CPPC meetings; they have been as interesting as watching paint dry. Nitsch's Michalak seemed to avoid the CPPC but, a few times, the CPPC succeeded in having Michalak show up to give a report of ... non-progress. This was confirmed by someone with knowledge of the project within the MBTA who complained to me of how Nitsch was not delivering the necessary engineering plan although 1 year had lapsed since the request made in 2022. Engineering plan vs design sketch  My MBTA interlocutor explained that an engineering plan is different from the design plan. The latter is a sketch; the former is plan that shows location of items and structures in the subsurface and surface of the project area.  The subsurface items include pipes and cables because you don't want to start digging - for example - to build a wall and then fin...
Read more

A Tangled Web

  Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive " Abutters have asked for the engineering plan for the 25% design submittal or what Stanton called the "revised" 25% design.  Since, on January 10, Michalak (PE or Project Engineer) announced that the Public Hearing had been scheduled then this revised plan had to exist at that date.  JS requested it from MassDOT Public Records on Februaru 23 and waited and waited.  Finally around March 14-15, JS received documents: the original, unrevised 25% design submission from November 2021, ROW papers, and the bridge worksheet with a submission date of January 24. (It's a tunnel or underpass but technically it becomes a bridge).   Note that it is the original 25% not the revised design so it still has a figure indicating that the tunnel will be "jacked".   The other fun part is that the bridge worksheet was submitted on January 24th not by December 21, 2023 as Michalak had said at the Dec...
Read more

Sept 15 - CPPC: A Fog of Words

Image
 Michalak and Clancy attended.   Michalak reported. 7 Channing Rd: Jammal scheduled a site meeting and, at the last minute, cancelled.  Clancy, Michalak will schedule again. Later on, Michalak said that submitting the 25% design did not depend on meeting Jammal: "that connection/spur is in the plan”.   All they wanted is Jammal’s approval of the spur/path planned for the side of the Chase building.  But Michalak conceded that the only thing he can see changing in the 25% are the access points such as the spur.  [My guess  is that they are likely to back down when it comes to the spur.] Soil borings 1.  Borings that required Keolis/MBTA were completed last week (week of Sept 6).   2.  Two other borings to be completed by the end of this week (week of Sept 13th).  These Pleasant St borings moved away from the ROW "to reduce cost and easier access”.* *Via FOIA request, I received Nitsch-GZA-Clancy emails .  This ROW issu...
Read more