<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A New Year &#8211; A New Planning Commission</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fallschurchtimes.com/997/a-new-year-a-new-planning-commission/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fallschurchtimes.com/997/a-new-year-a-new-planning-commission/</link>
	<description>Falls Church City&#039;s Online Community Newspaper</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 23:02:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Skeptic</title>
		<link>http://fallschurchtimes.com/997/a-new-year-a-new-planning-commission/comment-page-1/#comment-176</link>
		<dc:creator>Skeptic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 02:39:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fallschurchtimes.com/?p=997#comment-176</guid>
		<description>Incumbent commissioner Ruth Rodgers was re-elected by the Council. How could that be? She voted against the low-income housing project! Oh, wait -- do the math: 7 members on the commission, 4 votes required to overturn the previous rejection.  Hockenberry is one vote, so only three more needed. So they don&#039;t need to worry about Ruth Rodgers and they can gain some credibility (?) by not completely stacking the deck -- just 3 out of 4.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Incumbent commissioner Ruth Rodgers was re-elected by the Council. How could that be? She voted against the low-income housing project! Oh, wait &#8212; do the math: 7 members on the commission, 4 votes required to overturn the previous rejection.  Hockenberry is one vote, so only three more needed. So they don&#8217;t need to worry about Ruth Rodgers and they can gain some credibility (?) by not completely stacking the deck &#8212; just 3 out of 4.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

