Why do school buildings cost so much?
posted at 1/1/2008 2:49 PM EST
You raise a good point, in that the construction unions are very aggressively part of the problem as well.
An excellent example of just how bizarre things get is to look at the Department of Conservation and Recreation, the City of Cambridge, and the Charles River.
Cambridge's government stays in place as a result of strong combined lobby, the Cambridge Pols, which brings together a whole bunch of interest groups including the interests of nine members of the Cambridge City Council in getting reelected.
A few years ago, the DCR took a pol. The results of the pol indicated that a clear majority of people thought that the Charles River was perfectly good as is and did not need to be improved.
So the DCR along with the City of Cambridge are aggressively improving something which does not need to be improved and tossing in whatever lies will do the trick.
One of the key lies is that the City of Cambridge runs around calling itself pro-environment. On a tertiary level, they are pro-environment. What the Cambridge Pols never talk about is the extreme destructiveness of the government on a primary level.
The DCR spent four years promising all comers that their "improvements" to the Charles River would not "harm" the Charles River White Geese, a highly gaggle of geese who have lived for 25 years withing half a mile each way from the BU Bridge.
So in September 2004, Cambridge and the DCR started starving the Charles River White Geese. The DCR explained its four years of promises by saying that they do not consider starving them to be harming them.
The Charles River White Geese fed for those 25 years off grasses accessable from the Charles River by land. In September 2004, the City of Cambridge finished up a sewer project in the eastern half of the habitat across from the Hyatt.
They heartlessly, on completion, left a wall barring access to the grasses in that half of the habitat from the Charles River.
At the same time, Cambridge and the DCR barred the eastern half of the food of the geese at Magazine Beach. They destroyed the wetlands between Magazine Beach and the Charles River by trucking it away. They put in three walls barring access to the grasses from the Charles River.
The following year, a typical group of "non profits" explained this destruction in a photo op which bragged that the destruction was going to improve swimming.
So the DCR and Cambridge put in a wall of bizarre bushes that blocked access to the Charles for swimming.
Perhaps most visible in this supportive nonsense was a developer funded group which has distinguished itself for the last several years by destroying as much protective vegetation on the Charles as they can get away with. Each year for four or five years now, this vile entity has poisoned as many eggs as they can get away with of water birds nesting near the Charles River.
This environmentally destructive developer funded group calls itself the Charles River Conservancy.
Now the DCR and the City of Cambridge plan to dig up seven acres of perfectly good grass at Magazine Beach and replace it with grass and poisons. Addition of more of their beloved poisons to the Charles River has been prohibitted by the EPA. Will that stop them?
They want their kids rolling around in these poisons. What do you think?
Well, last I heard, the City of Cambridge was arguing that it does not have to respect civil rights guaranteed by federal law because Cambridge's laws to not protect those civil rights.
A MCAD examiner has found probable cause of discrimination, but Cambridge is going to a further level to defend its "right" to discriminate against specific handicapped persons.
That issue is over a guide dog. A lady claims that that cops sicced a pit bull on her guide dog in the front office of the police station. Conveniently, the cops neglected to put film that day in the camera which is always on in that lobby.
We have truly reprehensible governments. They use very reliable and destructive front groups to keep things going.