<?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: Double Whammy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.southoldvoice.com/2010/02/double-whammy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.southoldvoice.com/2010/02/double-whammy/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:40:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Betsch</title>
		<link>http://www.southoldvoice.com/2010/02/double-whammy/comment-page-1/#comment-221</link>
		<dc:creator>John Betsch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:30:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southoldvoice.com/?p=2350#comment-221</guid>
		<description>BEHIND CLOSED DOORS...Last Friday 3/19th, there was meeting of some Trustees, Zoning Board Members and Town Attorneys.  I attempted to sit in to listen to the discussion but was not allowed to attend.  Apparently the &quot;Sunshine Law&quot; was not applicable.  While it is true the letter of the law was followed (not having a quorum of these boards attend to avoid public attendance) but from my viewpoint, not the intent of the law.  It would seem that to come up with a workable and sellable solution, public input would have been welcome.  Apparently not the case...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BEHIND CLOSED DOORS&#8230;Last Friday 3/19th, there was meeting of some Trustees, Zoning Board Members and Town Attorneys.  I attempted to sit in to listen to the discussion but was not allowed to attend.  Apparently the &#8220;Sunshine Law&#8221; was not applicable.  While it is true the letter of the law was followed (not having a quorum of these boards attend to avoid public attendance) but from my viewpoint, not the intent of the law.  It would seem that to come up with a workable and sellable solution, public input would have been welcome.  Apparently not the case&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Bergen</title>
		<link>http://www.southoldvoice.com/2010/02/double-whammy/comment-page-1/#comment-218</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Bergen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:30:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southoldvoice.com/?p=2350#comment-218</guid>
		<description>Speaking only for myself and not my fellow Trustees, I agree that this is an issue and feel that it needs to be addressed.  The Trustees suggested that this issue be addressed several years ago.  Unfortunately while a meeting has been called, the Trustees are only allowed to send two representatives to the meeting, not the entire Board.  To have more then two Trustees present makes this a &quot;public meeting&quot; which must be posted and in which others can attend.  So the two Trustees will need to bring information back to the entire Board for a discussion and a recommendation.

Dave</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Speaking only for myself and not my fellow Trustees, I agree that this is an issue and feel that it needs to be addressed.  The Trustees suggested that this issue be addressed several years ago.  Unfortunately while a meeting has been called, the Trustees are only allowed to send two representatives to the meeting, not the entire Board.  To have more then two Trustees present makes this a &#8220;public meeting&#8221; which must be posted and in which others can attend.  So the two Trustees will need to bring information back to the entire Board for a discussion and a recommendation.</p>
<p>Dave</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Betsch</title>
		<link>http://www.southoldvoice.com/2010/02/double-whammy/comment-page-1/#comment-217</link>
		<dc:creator>John Betsch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Mar 2010 00:09:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southoldvoice.com/?p=2350#comment-217</guid>
		<description>This was discussed at the Town&#039;s LWRP meeting on Febrruary 25th. A meeting is being arranged between the ZBA and Trustees to discuss the issue. Let&#039;s see what comes of that meeting!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was discussed at the Town&#8217;s LWRP meeting on Febrruary 25th. A meeting is being arranged between the ZBA and Trustees to discuss the issue. Let&#8217;s see what comes of that meeting!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

