<?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: Selling Chicago. Good, bad or a necessary evil?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://trueslant.com/lauraheller/2009/11/09/selling-chicago-good-bad-or-a-necessary-evil/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://trueslant.com/lauraheller/2009/11/09/selling-chicago-good-bad-or-a-necessary-evil/</link>
	<description>[Please go to 'Settings' to change your Tagline]</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Jun 2010 18:16:08 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Megan Cottrell</title>
		<link>http://trueslant.com/lauraheller/2009/11/09/selling-chicago-good-bad-or-a-necessary-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-131</link>
		<dc:creator>Megan Cottrell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:15:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trueslant.com/lauraheller/?p=347#comment-131</guid>
		<description>Hi Laura! Thanks for doing a post on this. I forgot about my comment, so I didn&#039;t check until now. Thanks for answering it so thoroughly. 

I think you&#039;re right - it&#039;s a slippery slope. Sponsorship seems not so bad, but when we start selling off infrastructure, like you said, it can go terribly wrong. Also, it says something profound about our financial situation. It&#039;s like we&#039;re hocking city owned property at the pawn shop. That is never a good sign. 

Again, thanks for posting on this! So great to have a question answered to thoroughly!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Laura! Thanks for doing a post on this. I forgot about my comment, so I didn&#8217;t check until now. Thanks for answering it so thoroughly. </p>
<p>I think you&#8217;re right &#8211; it&#8217;s a slippery slope. Sponsorship seems not so bad, but when we start selling off infrastructure, like you said, it can go terribly wrong. Also, it says something profound about our financial situation. It&#8217;s like we&#8217;re hocking city owned property at the pawn shop. That is never a good sign. </p>
<p>Again, thanks for posting on this! So great to have a question answered to thoroughly!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura Heller</title>
		<link>http://trueslant.com/lauraheller/2009/11/09/selling-chicago-good-bad-or-a-necessary-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-129</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura Heller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:03:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trueslant.com/lauraheller/?p=347#comment-129</guid>
		<description>I really think it would be great if Target sponsored the stop, for all those reasons you mention Fruzsina. The whole development had such promise but has turned into something very different from what was originally envisioned and announced. The biggest take away from watching the process, is that very little is being done for the community. It&#039;s all about the politician and private business involved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really think it would be great if Target sponsored the stop, for all those reasons you mention Fruzsina. The whole development had such promise but has turned into something very different from what was originally envisioned and announced. The biggest take away from watching the process, is that very little is being done for the community. It&#8217;s all about the politician and private business involved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fruzsina Eordogh</title>
		<link>http://trueslant.com/lauraheller/2009/11/09/selling-chicago-good-bad-or-a-necessary-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-128</link>
		<dc:creator>Fruzsina Eordogh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:25:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trueslant.com/lauraheller/?p=347#comment-128</guid>
		<description>I think this shift in maintenance would be a good thing- if Target did sponsor the station, it would be in Target&#039;s best interests to make sure the el station stop outside their store is in prime condition. 

If the station was dirty, falling apart and dangerous, would you even want to go into their store? I sure as hell wouldn&#039;t. 

Also something to consider: This Target would be the only store on the North side accessible by el, and I am betting the Wilson stop would receive an exponential increase in foot traffic because of it. The Wilson stop is going to need renovation because of that Target, and what better way for Target to get some good PR then by showing it &quot;cares&quot; about the community? They sure as hell need it with the Wilson Yard mess.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this shift in maintenance would be a good thing- if Target did sponsor the station, it would be in Target&#8217;s best interests to make sure the el station stop outside their store is in prime condition. </p>
<p>If the station was dirty, falling apart and dangerous, would you even want to go into their store? I sure as hell wouldn&#8217;t. </p>
<p>Also something to consider: This Target would be the only store on the North side accessible by el, and I am betting the Wilson stop would receive an exponential increase in foot traffic because of it. The Wilson stop is going to need renovation because of that Target, and what better way for Target to get some good PR then by showing it &#8220;cares&#8221; about the community? They sure as hell need it with the Wilson Yard mess.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

