<?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: Paid &#8220;Volunteers&#8221; and Support for Property Rights Initiatives</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/07/paid_initiative.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/07/paid_initiative.html</link>
	<description>The Law, the Universe, and Everything</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 04:29:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ben Barros</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/07/paid_initiative.html/comment-page-1#comment-57948</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Barros</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Jul 2006 21:56:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/07/paid-volunteers-and-support-for-property-rights-initiatives.html#comment-57948</guid>
		<description>Eduardo, I agree, especially with the last paragraph.  Regulators and policy makers have the ability to take the political momentum away from these initiatives by taking reasonable steps to be a bit more fair to property owners, especially ones likely to get a lot of play in the evening news.  And I agree that most Oregon voters were probably not &quot;pissed&quot; in the sense that they were personally impacted by the regulation.  Rather, I think that many Oregon voters thought that land-use regulation in their state had gotten out of hand, in part because of constant news coverage of controversial issues like urban growth boundaries.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eduardo, I agree, especially with the last paragraph.  Regulators and policy makers have the ability to take the political momentum away from these initiatives by taking reasonable steps to be a bit more fair to property owners, especially ones likely to get a lot of play in the evening news.  And I agree that most Oregon voters were probably not &#8220;pissed&#8221; in the sense that they were personally impacted by the regulation.  Rather, I think that many Oregon voters thought that land-use regulation in their state had gotten out of hand, in part because of constant news coverage of controversial issues like urban growth boundaries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
