<?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: Today&#8217;s Headlines</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/02/todays-headlines-209/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/02/todays-headlines-209/</link>
	<description>Covering San Francisco&#039;s livable streets movement</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:15:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fran Taylor</title>
		<link>http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/02/todays-headlines-209/comment-page-1/#comment-51951</link>
		<dc:creator>Fran Taylor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:37:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=76991#comment-51951</guid>
		<description>Regarding this notion that the city&#039;s renters are &quot;up in arms&quot; over the proposed extension of parking meter hours, I just returned from testifying in favor of Supe Avalos&#039; legislation to extend just cause eviction protections to tenants in buildings constructed after 1979, and I didn&#039;t see any of the great tenant champions who spoke so forcefully at the MTA against parking meter oppression. 

I think we need a new word: tenant-washing. Like greenwashing, it uses all the right words to avoid really understanding the argument (think Chevron).

I agree that some tenants who live on commercial streets and own cars may be affected adversely by longer meter hours, and the MTA and transportation advocates should work with them to find solutions, perhaps extended residential parking areas, and help them avoid hardship. But tenants as a group are much less likely to own cars than either landlords or homeowners. The SF Tenants Union, during the many political campaigns it has conducted over the years (and, again, during which I have seen none of the above-mentioned champions), is always begging for help moving literature, card tables, etc, because so few members have cars.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding this notion that the city&#8217;s renters are &#8220;up in arms&#8221; over the proposed extension of parking meter hours, I just returned from testifying in favor of Supe Avalos&#8217; legislation to extend just cause eviction protections to tenants in buildings constructed after 1979, and I didn&#8217;t see any of the great tenant champions who spoke so forcefully at the MTA against parking meter oppression. </p>
<p>I think we need a new word: tenant-washing. Like greenwashing, it uses all the right words to avoid really understanding the argument (think Chevron).</p>
<p>I agree that some tenants who live on commercial streets and own cars may be affected adversely by longer meter hours, and the MTA and transportation advocates should work with them to find solutions, perhaps extended residential parking areas, and help them avoid hardship. But tenants as a group are much less likely to own cars than either landlords or homeowners. The SF Tenants Union, during the many political campaigns it has conducted over the years (and, again, during which I have seen none of the above-mentioned champions), is always begging for help moving literature, card tables, etc, because so few members have cars.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

