<?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: Massachusetts Town Rejects Snyderization</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2007/09/06/massachusetts-town-rejects-snyderization/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2007/09/06/massachusetts-town-rejects-snyderization/</link>
	<description>68.3 Square Miles of D.C. News and Opinion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:05:00 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Washington City Paper: News &#38; Features: Blogs</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2007/09/06/massachusetts-town-rejects-snyderization/comment-page-1/#comment-46499</link>
		<dc:creator>Washington City Paper: News &#38; Features: Blogs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2007 22:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/index.php/2007/09/06/massachusetts-town-rejects-snyderization/#comment-46499</guid>
		<description>[...] council voted unanimously to toss out the parking ordinance, and several councilmembers publicly apologized to residents and the local business community for having fallen for the safety pitch. After [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] council voted unanimously to toss out the parking ordinance, and several councilmembers publicly apologized to residents and the local business community for having fallen for the safety pitch. After [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave McKenna</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2007/09/06/massachusetts-town-rejects-snyderization/comment-page-1/#comment-35333</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave McKenna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Sep 2007 03:24:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/index.php/2007/09/06/massachusetts-town-rejects-snyderization/#comment-35333</guid>
		<description>jeff:

your venom is fab, jeff! i particularly love: &quot;Get real!&quot; but I&#039;d be, to use your parlance, a &quot;flat-out liar&quot; if I said you make any more sense than Miss Teen South Carolina. You write that no private lots parked cars til Six Flags upped the price (in 2006), and anybody who says they&#039;ve parked cars &quot;for years&quot; is (here it comes again!) &quot;a liar.&quot; And then you concede Palazzi &quot;may&quot; have parked cars &#039;back in the mid-90&#039;s.&quot; 

Huh? 

But, I concede that your unconventional definitions for &quot;for years&quot; and/or &quot;liar&quot; are irrelevant to the point I think you&#039;re trying to make, Jeff. I think you&#039;re saying the Agawam councilmembers didn&#039;t err by trying to do Six Flags bidding, and that their only mistake was crafting a &quot;poorly written&quot; bill to benefit the amusement park. 

If so: Get real, Jeff! (Thanks for bringing that back!) 

Don&#039;t believe me and my biased, one sided version. Let&#039;s check out the Springfield Republican&#039;s Sept. 6 story on the council&#039;s unanimous vote to throw out the parking ordinance crafted for Six Flags.(http://www.masslive.com/metrowest/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1189066605208470.xml&amp;coll=1) 

Some snippets:


Councilor Ruth Carr Bitzas said the ordinance &quot;is all about Six Flags and their ability to have all the parking privileges.&quot;...

Councilor Robert E. Rossi said he was upset with himself because he allowed himself to be hoodwinked [by Six Flags].... 

Some councilors criticized Mayor Richard A. Cohen for selling the ordinance on the pretense of public safety when, they said, it was really designed to protect the financial interests of Six Flags New England.

&quot;Since we&#039;ve implemented it and found out how it functions and operates, we find safety isn&#039;t the real reason it&#039;s transpired....,&quot; Council President Donald M. Rheault said.

What part of &quot;Officials Apologize for Parking Ordinance&quot; (the headline in the Republican&#039;s piece) don&#039;t you understand, Jeff? And that&#039;s just one piece. Go read the other accounts of the meeting from any news source near Agawam.  They&#039;re consistent, and entertaining.

Also, Jeff, if I still have your attention, I&#039;d love to hear your rationale for the coincidences between the Agawam/Six Flags situation and the FedExField pedestrian ban from 2000. And, Jeff, I would be honored if you would use this space to present the side of the Agawam/Six Flags parking story that hasn&#039;t yet been told.

Oh, one more thing, Jeff: Six Flags in Agawam has upped the top parking price to $30, not $15, the only figure in your rant. The big price is what created a windfall for Palazzi and the other businessmen near the amusement park. The way you tossed out &quot;one-sided and biased,&quot; it&#039;s sorta strange you left the $30 tab out.

But, thanks for playing the Feud...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jeff:</p>
<p>your venom is fab, jeff! i particularly love: "Get real!" but I'd be, to use your parlance, a "flat-out liar" if I said you make any more sense than Miss Teen South Carolina. You write that no private lots parked cars til Six Flags upped the price (in 2006), and anybody who says they've parked cars "for years" is (here it comes again!) "a liar." And then you concede Palazzi "may" have parked cars 'back in the mid-90's." </p>
<p>Huh? </p>
<p>But, I concede that your unconventional definitions for "for years" and/or "liar" are irrelevant to the point I think you're trying to make, Jeff. I think you're saying the Agawam councilmembers didn't err by trying to do Six Flags bidding, and that their only mistake was crafting a "poorly written" bill to benefit the amusement park. </p>
<p>If so: Get real, Jeff! (Thanks for bringing that back!) </p>
<p>Don't believe me and my biased, one sided version. Let's check out the Springfield Republican's Sept. 6 story on the council's unanimous vote to throw out the parking ordinance crafted for Six Flags.(<a href="http://www.masslive.com/metrowest/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1189066605208470.xml&#038;coll=1" rel="nofollow">http://www.masslive.com/metrowest/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1189066605208470.xml&#038;coll=1</a>) </p>
<p>Some snippets:</p>
<p>Councilor Ruth Carr Bitzas said the ordinance "is all about Six Flags and their ability to have all the parking privileges."...</p>
<p>Councilor Robert E. Rossi said he was upset with himself because he allowed himself to be hoodwinked [by Six Flags].... </p>
<p>Some councilors criticized Mayor Richard A. Cohen for selling the ordinance on the pretense of public safety when, they said, it was really designed to protect the financial interests of Six Flags New England.</p>
<p>"Since we've implemented it and found out how it functions and operates, we find safety isn't the real reason it's transpired....," Council President Donald M. Rheault said.</p>
<p>What part of "Officials Apologize for Parking Ordinance" (the headline in the Republican's piece) don't you understand, Jeff? And that's just one piece. Go read the other accounts of the meeting from any news source near Agawam.  They're consistent, and entertaining.</p>
<p>Also, Jeff, if I still have your attention, I'd love to hear your rationale for the coincidences between the Agawam/Six Flags situation and the FedExField pedestrian ban from 2000. And, Jeff, I would be honored if you would use this space to present the side of the Agawam/Six Flags parking story that hasn't yet been told.</p>
<p>Oh, one more thing, Jeff: Six Flags in Agawam has upped the top parking price to $30, not $15, the only figure in your rant. The big price is what created a windfall for Palazzi and the other businessmen near the amusement park. The way you tossed out "one-sided and biased," it's sorta strange you left the $30 tab out.</p>
<p>But, thanks for playing the Feud...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2007/09/06/massachusetts-town-rejects-snyderization/comment-page-1/#comment-35204</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2007 14:23:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/index.php/2007/09/06/massachusetts-town-rejects-snyderization/#comment-35204</guid>
		<description>Get real.  The city council is a bunch of morons that didn&#039;t think through the ramifications of the poorly written ordinance.  Anyone who claims that they&#039;ve been parking cars around the park for years is a liar.  Not until Six Flags upped the price to $15 did anybody start parking cars their.  Palazzi is a flat out liar.  He may have parked a few cars back in the mid-90&#039;s but from 2000-2005 he didn&#039;t.  I&#039;d really like to see his income tax reports that show the revenue.  Oh wait, he didn&#039;t claim it, that&#039;s why he hasn&#039;t sued yet.  Thanks Dave for writing such a one-sided and biased account of the goings on.  You&#039;ve done a real service to the readers of this rag of a newspaper by reporting both sides of the news.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Get real.  The city council is a bunch of morons that didn't think through the ramifications of the poorly written ordinance.  Anyone who claims that they've been parking cars around the park for years is a liar.  Not until Six Flags upped the price to $15 did anybody start parking cars their.  Palazzi is a flat out liar.  He may have parked a few cars back in the mid-90's but from 2000-2005 he didn't.  I'd really like to see his income tax reports that show the revenue.  Oh wait, he didn't claim it, that's why he hasn't sued yet.  Thanks Dave for writing such a one-sided and biased account of the goings on.  You've done a real service to the readers of this rag of a newspaper by reporting both sides of the news.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

