April 21 CPPC: There's a new sheriff in town!

P.C's. excellent brief summary of this meeting:

The 1st hour was a cppc bitch session about nitsch(??).

Then, i think they gave up on getting patrice and glen to help them with nitsch.  Now, they are enlisting mark to talk to nitsch.

Then, they asked mark about bikepath part 2 and the cppc. I dont think either mark or glen or patrice were overwhelmingly enthusiastic about the cppc being involved although they did not object.

Mark is all for the bikepath.

I think mark is sending a message with how he handled russ to maybe glen & patty & the rest of the crew.  That is if you dont perform, you will be replaced.

Then the subjects evolved into getting other town committees involved. This is where i fell asleep. No loss.  What a waste of time!!!!!

Vince talks in circles. Oh oh oh. So does Bonny.

Fun fun fun.

_____________________________

Now for the boring long version:

Meet Paolillo.

Paolillo is the new BOS liaison to the CPPC and, swiftly, he seized control of the meeting from Chairman Leino during the time he was there.   His attitude and words reflected impatience with the CPPC's lack of progress in forcing through this project and he signaled that he would ram it through at any cost.

It was obvious that Paolillo is a full supporter of the BCP project as much as Sen. Brownsberger.   He said that he was “anxious to move this [the BCP project] forward” and stated that he will meet with residents/abutters but that will not stop him from “moving forward” “to get Phase 1 and 2 into the MPO’s TIP” funding schedule.  “I am here to support you in any way I can” - he added. He is “concerned that the MPO has heard some negative comments” that will affect funding.

[This people seem to be in an  absolutely delusional state.  The fact that the MPO does not have the funds does not seem to sink in.  Also, "some negative comments" refers to multiple abutters' public comments received by the MPO in 2020 and 2021.]

Nitsch complaint fest.  

Clancy contacted MBTA’s Asst. Manager Jody Ray and Nitsch a few weeks ago as agreed with the CPPC but neither have replied.  (Clancy contacted Ray about the soil boring permits and Nitsch about various updates.)  In addition, Clancy explained that Nitsch should have met with 722 Pleasant on April 12th and 710 Pleasant on April 7th and that Nitsch had kept in the dark about the visits' outcomes.

Sugarman pointed out that Nitsch also had not updated the website. Stanton expressed “extreme level of frustration” with Nitsch’s lack of action and response and Lawrence agreed with Stanton. Bowen wants Nitsch to produce a schedule and a crestfallen Leino pointed out that that was  one of the things that he has repeatedly requested and that Nitsch has consistently failed to deliver.   Leino said that Nitsch’s “unresponsiveness" “has made this committee’s job more difficult”.   Muson and Friedman are also upset with Nitsch and both have been working jointly on a complaint letter to Nitsch.  Friedman explained that she started by "focusing on the website’s lack of progress, lack of update”.  

Garvin seemed to cringed at the thought of sending the complaint letter. She wants the town to have a conversation with Nitsch before sending a letter saying “that we are pissed off" .  She is concerned that the letter will trigger Nitsch's “animosity” making it harder for staff who have to work with Nitsch now and in the future.  She is concerned about “litigation” and “liability” issues and asked that the letter be reviewed by town counsel.


[It seems the CPPC is looking for a scapegoat when in reality, it is entirely the CPPC’s fault for hiring what was obviously a subpar company beginning with their proposal and initial presentation.]

 
Paolillo proposed joining Clancy on a call to Nitsch to express grievances.   Clancy protested that Paolillo was ignoring Garvin and that Garvin had to be included because he (Clancy) works closely with Garvin and will not allow Garvin to be blown off.


 

 

 

 

 

[Note: Paolillo’s behavior did have a whiff of male chauvinism.   Maybe this is how he envisions a woman's role?  It should be interesting to see how this works out with Friedman, Sugarman, Muson, Bowen and Garvin at these meetings.]

 

Phase 2.

Leino said it was “quite complicated” and talked of submitting (or already submitted?) a MassTrail application to be used towards the Phase 2 - 25% design.  He complained again that the CPPC’s “charge is very limited with respect to Phase 2” but the indications are that the BOS is  reluctant about expanding the charge.

Outreach to stakeholders - Phase 2.

Hard lessons learned by the CPPC from Phase 1's mistreatment of abutters translates into a Phase 2 plan to engage with other committees as “stakeholders” early on.   Unlike the stakeholders’ list they made when Nitsch was hired, abutters now are listed (list here).   But the project's juggernaut is on a roll and engaging the abutters will be akin to appeasing the sheep so that - the CPPC may hope - they will peacefully walk to their [properties'] slaughter.

Paolillo proposed expanding the CPPC membership because - he implied - the CPPC has been overwhelmed with the Phase 1 task  (as P.C. indicated, not a great vote of confidence on Paolillo's part for giving the CPPC's plea to be in charge of Phase 2).  Asserting herself, Garvin said that she approved of an expansion.








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