<?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: Commission cuts down year-round seal rope permit request for La Jolla Children&#8217;s Pool</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lajollalight.com/2012/10/02/commission-cuts-down-year-round-seal-rope-permit-request-for-la-jolla-childrens-pool/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lajollalight.com/2012/10/02/commission-cuts-down-year-round-seal-rope-permit-request-for-la-jolla-childrens-pool/</link>
	<description>Enlightening La Jolla since 1913</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 19:16:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: karen</title>
		<link>http://www.lajollalight.com/2012/10/02/commission-cuts-down-year-round-seal-rope-permit-request-for-la-jolla-childrens-pool/#comment-259156</link>
		<dc:creator>karen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2012 13:46:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lajollalight.com/?p=95870#comment-259156</guid>
		<description>the seals must be romneys neighbor !!! </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the seals must be romneys neighbor !!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Resta DaStory</title>
		<link>http://www.lajollalight.com/2012/10/02/commission-cuts-down-year-round-seal-rope-permit-request-for-la-jolla-childrens-pool/#comment-259055</link>
		<dc:creator>Resta DaStory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:14:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lajollalight.com/?p=95870#comment-259055</guid>
		<description>too bad the story did not include the fact that there already is an application in the works to CLOSE THE BEACH TO ALL HUMANS AND ACCESS for half the year...that is a key point in that there is no end to this and it will be closed completely year round much as Casa will be next, then Shell, then the Cove and sooner than later we will have nothing but a minature Sea World along the coast... </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>too bad the story did not include the fact that there already is an application in the works to CLOSE THE BEACH TO ALL HUMANS AND ACCESS for half the year&#8230;that is a key point in that there is no end to this and it will be closed completely year round much as Casa will be next, then Shell, then the Cove and sooner than later we will have nothing but a minature Sea World along the coast&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rhyne</title>
		<link>http://www.lajollalight.com/2012/10/02/commission-cuts-down-year-round-seal-rope-permit-request-for-la-jolla-childrens-pool/#comment-259049</link>
		<dc:creator>rhyne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2012 21:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lajollalight.com/?p=95870#comment-259049</guid>
		<description>Pat Sherman and the La Jolla light... How is it that you continuously manage to exclude the information about how the city does not fulfill its obligations to maintain this community beach which in turn has created an unsafe situation for the people? You never mention the legal and binding trust that CLEARLY outlines and protects the ABSOLUTE access for the people? Are you somehow in the pocket of Brian Pease, APRL and the FOS, joined in the fight to remove humans from this beach? That&#039;s what it seems like. Rarely if ever have you written an article that actually represents both sides of the issue fairly, as respectable journalism suggests is the right thing to do. Perhaps the next one you&#039;ll take that into consideration... ya know, because the majority of San Diego citizens do NOT want this beach closed solely for the seals. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pat Sherman and the La Jolla light&#8230; How is it that you continuously manage to exclude the information about how the city does not fulfill its obligations to maintain this community beach which in turn has created an unsafe situation for the people? You never mention the legal and binding trust that CLEARLY outlines and protects the ABSOLUTE access for the people? Are you somehow in the pocket of Brian Pease, APRL and the FOS, joined in the fight to remove humans from this beach? That&#039;s what it seems like. Rarely if ever have you written an article that actually represents both sides of the issue fairly, as respectable journalism suggests is the right thing to do. Perhaps the next one you&#039;ll take that into consideration&#8230; ya know, because the majority of San Diego citizens do NOT want this beach closed solely for the seals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.lajollalight.com/2012/10/02/commission-cuts-down-year-round-seal-rope-permit-request-for-la-jolla-childrens-pool/#comment-259048</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2012 21:16:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lajollalight.com/?p=95870#comment-259048</guid>
		<description>Bryan Pease should NOT be described as a &quot;public interest&quot; attorney.   It&#039;s just plain inaccurate.  
  
The term &quot;public interest law&quot; is usually used to refer to lawyers who represent the  &quot;underdogs&quot;, the weak, etc..  Bryan Pease wants to bar children access to a safe swimming place created specifically for children.  How is that representing those who can&#039;t represent themselves?  
  
I think a more apt description would be &quot;anti-public interest attorney&quot; </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bryan Pease should NOT be described as a &quot;public interest&quot; attorney.   It&#039;s just plain inaccurate.  </p>
<p>The term &quot;public interest law&quot; is usually used to refer to lawyers who represent the  &quot;underdogs&quot;, the weak, etc..  Bryan Pease wants to bar children access to a safe swimming place created specifically for children.  How is that representing those who can&#039;t represent themselves?  </p>
<p>I think a more apt description would be &quot;anti-public interest attorney&quot;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bigdipper</title>
		<link>http://www.lajollalight.com/2012/10/02/commission-cuts-down-year-round-seal-rope-permit-request-for-la-jolla-childrens-pool/#comment-259046</link>
		<dc:creator>bigdipper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2012 19:58:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lajollalight.com/?p=95870#comment-259046</guid>
		<description>Cordaro repeated the same lie he told when he worked for NOAA.   The City has a letter of permission from NOAA stating it can remove the seals any time it wants.  Cordaro ran the rehab program that preferentially released hand raised harbor seals from Sea World for 11 years to create the colony.   He wants that beach closed to cover his tracks. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cordaro repeated the same lie he told when he worked for NOAA.   The City has a letter of permission from NOAA stating it can remove the seals any time it wants.  Cordaro ran the rehab program that preferentially released hand raised harbor seals from Sea World for 11 years to create the colony.   He wants that beach closed to cover his tracks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
