CPPC Dec 16th, 2021: As the world turns

Dealing with the BCP project has been tiring: so many misleading statements, woefully unprepared and uninformed people.  I took a break from it all but now I am ready to continue.  

Part of the reason for continuing is that I am keenly interested in how the CPPC develops in the next few months.  It feels as if I were watching a soap and I am sitting on the edge of my seat wondering: will Leino be deposed? will Friedman also be quietly removed? Will quiet but steely Muson be enthroned as Chair?

The soap's storyline: since last year the CPPC has been struggling to have its charge extended in order to continue on to Phase 2 and it was facing deadline of Nov. 1, 2021.  However, the SB kept on dragging its heels.  The CPPC even went so far as to write the charge extension and sending it to the SB so that all that the SB would have to do was sign. But, alas! The SB still did not extend the charge.

When Paolillo became the SB's liaison to the CPPC, he made it clear that he was very disappointed and bemoaned that, after so many years, the project was still in limbo and that he was determined to finish the job that others seemingly had not been able to do.  Whenever the charge extension was brought up, he always hemmed and hawed blaming the other SB members for the inaction but, considering his obvious displeasure with the CPPC's performance, it was evident that he was as unwilling to act as his fellow board members.

Paolillo would also always point out that increasing the CPPC membership would make the SB more willing to act.  One time, the reason (or excuse?) for having additional members was that Phase 2 was a complicated project and that adding people with new "skill sets" was needed.

At the Nov. 3 meeting, it was pointed out by Sugarman that the charge should have been extended by Nov. 1 *gulp!* Paolillo attended the next meeting on Nov 17 and he said that the SB would finally take up the matter at the upcoming Dec. 6 meeting.   But, once again, Paolillo warned that the CPPC membership had to be increased,

Lo and behold! On Dec. 6, the SB congratulated Leino and the CPPC on their wonderful proposal of increasing the CPPC membership! What a great idea in view of the use of subcommittees by the CPPC!  Outstanding proposal! Of course we approve of including it in the charge extension. And here you go! Your charge is extended! Carry on with Phase 2.

Leino stiffly accepted the congratulations and quickly bowed out.

What is my hunch? Paolillo and possibly other SB members are unhappy with the CPPC's performance.  It is likely that the ire is directed at Leino and Friedman as Chair and Vice-Chair but how to ease them out without seeming boorish?  

Update March, 2024. State attorney Leino is gone; he moved out of town about 1 year ago probably to live in his New Hampshire condo. Harvard Business School Muson was made Chair of the CPPC and Friedman stayed as Vice Chair.  At first, Friedman tried to take charge at times but Muson quickly tamed Friedman who nowadays keeps a low profile.

 

 



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