<?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: UNC&#8217;s Revised Scooter Policy Woefully Inadequate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.uncscooters.com/uncs-revised-scooter-policy-woefully-inadequate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.uncscooters.com/uncs-revised-scooter-policy-woefully-inadequate/</link>
	<description>Organizing UNC Students, Faculty and Staff Against Ill-Considered Scooter Regulations</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 06:52:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Post BOT meeting update &#171; UNC Scooters</title>
		<link>http://www.uncscooters.com/uncs-revised-scooter-policy-woefully-inadequate/comment-page-1/#comment-141</link>
		<dc:creator>Post BOT meeting update &#171; UNC Scooters</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:49:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncscooters.com/?p=40#comment-141</guid>
		<description>[...] (See a copy of the speech for details) The end result, on paper, is the same as what was in the modified proposal from yesterday: $24 fees and special scooter parking. Thus we did not get everything we [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (See a copy of the speech for details) The end result, on paper, is the same as what was in the modified proposal from yesterday: $24 fees and special scooter parking. Thus we did not get everything we [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keith Longiotti</title>
		<link>http://www.uncscooters.com/uncs-revised-scooter-policy-woefully-inadequate/comment-page-1/#comment-139</link>
		<dc:creator>Keith Longiotti</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncscooters.com/?p=40#comment-139</guid>
		<description>Has anyone looked at the power point presentation?  This is absurd !  A $30 fine if you&#039;re not parked in a MC lot which DPS already acknowledges as overcrowded.  Where do they propose we park  until they figure out which areas are appropriate?  Not to mention the sneaky way the the BOT/South Building is trying to portray the $24.00 parking fee as if they actually listen to us.  I&#039;ve been here long enough  to know that the University will politely listen, but will still do what it damn well pleases.

I for one will keep up the letter writing and email campaigns, but I don&#039;t trust the DPS and will begin to park my scooter off campus.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Has anyone looked at the power point presentation?  This is absurd !  A $30 fine if you&#8217;re not parked in a MC lot which DPS already acknowledges as overcrowded.  Where do they propose we park  until they figure out which areas are appropriate?  Not to mention the sneaky way the the BOT/South Building is trying to portray the $24.00 parking fee as if they actually listen to us.  I&#8217;ve been here long enough  to know that the University will politely listen, but will still do what it damn well pleases.</p>
<p>I for one will keep up the letter writing and email campaigns, but I don&#8217;t trust the DPS and will begin to park my scooter off campus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cristóbal Palmer</title>
		<link>http://www.uncscooters.com/uncs-revised-scooter-policy-woefully-inadequate/comment-page-1/#comment-136</link>
		<dc:creator>Cristóbal Palmer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 04:29:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncscooters.com/?p=40#comment-136</guid>
		<description>This is really disappointing, especially since Chancellor Thorp was so responsive and helpful in talking to us. It&#039;s definitely clear that some of our concerns were heard. I&#039;m especially happy that they agreed to add some sort of rack so that we can secure our scooters. I really hope that the board will be open and receptive to more dialogue, since this map makes it clear that this policy will hurt everybody involved. So sad! Let&#039;s fix this!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is really disappointing, especially since Chancellor Thorp was so responsive and helpful in talking to us. It&#8217;s definitely clear that some of our concerns were heard. I&#8217;m especially happy that they agreed to add some sort of rack so that we can secure our scooters. I really hope that the board will be open and receptive to more dialogue, since this map makes it clear that this policy will hurt everybody involved. So sad! Let&#8217;s fix this!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barbara Ambros</title>
		<link>http://www.uncscooters.com/uncs-revised-scooter-policy-woefully-inadequate/comment-page-1/#comment-135</link>
		<dc:creator>Barbara Ambros</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 01:47:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uncscooters.com/?p=40#comment-135</guid>
		<description>Thanks for forwarding the information.

Woefully inadequate is right! That&#039;s the regular motorcycle map without any new scooter spaces added.

Here is are the minutes regarding the amended policy. See also:

http://blogs.newsobserver.com/campusnotes/a-change-to-the-unc-ch-scooter-policy

And guess what: this is what Public Safety had to say about motorcycle and scooter parking in September 2008. They were aware that motorcycle parking was overcrowded even without scooters and still added the scooters without adding more motorcycle spots (!):

Excerpt from http://www.dps.unc.edu/act/Minutes%20and%20Agendae/Minutes.September08.pdf:

&quot;Potential 08/09 Agenda Items: -Scooter/cart operations/Motorcycle Parking ? Chief McCracken There is no ordinance that directly addresses either vehicle. Currently, scooters cannot be operated on sidewalks but the rider can dismount and push the scooter to a bicycle rack and secure it.  Increased use of motorcycles has presented another parking problem, because there are currently not enough spaces.  Cheryl stated a subcommittee will be formed to start meeting in the next few weeks to develop dialog and policy initiatives.&quot;

Huh??????? How did we end up with this new policy based on this finding?

-- Barbara Ambros
Assistant Professor Department of Religious Studies
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for forwarding the information.</p>
<p>Woefully inadequate is right! That&#8217;s the regular motorcycle map without any new scooter spaces added.</p>
<p>Here is are the minutes regarding the amended policy. See also:</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.newsobserver.com/campusnotes/a-change-to-the-unc-ch-scooter-policy" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.newsobserver.com/campusnotes/a-change-to-the-unc-ch-scooter-policy</a></p>
<p>And guess what: this is what Public Safety had to say about motorcycle and scooter parking in September 2008. They were aware that motorcycle parking was overcrowded even without scooters and still added the scooters without adding more motorcycle spots (!):</p>
<p>Excerpt from <a href="http://www.dps.unc.edu/act/Minutes%20and%20Agendae/Minutes.September08.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.dps.unc.edu/act/Minutes%20and%20Agendae/Minutes.September08.pdf</a>:</p>
<p>&#8220;Potential 08/09 Agenda Items: -Scooter/cart operations/Motorcycle Parking ? Chief McCracken There is no ordinance that directly addresses either vehicle. Currently, scooters cannot be operated on sidewalks but the rider can dismount and push the scooter to a bicycle rack and secure it.  Increased use of motorcycles has presented another parking problem, because there are currently not enough spaces.  Cheryl stated a subcommittee will be formed to start meeting in the next few weeks to develop dialog and policy initiatives.&#8221;</p>
<p>Huh??????? How did we end up with this new policy based on this finding?</p>
<p>&#8211; Barbara Ambros<br />
Assistant Professor Department of Religious Studies<br />
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
