<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Community Conversation Voices</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/community-conversation-voices/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/community-conversation-voices/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:18:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alan Steinman</title>
		<link>http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/community-conversation-voices/#comment-5226</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan Steinman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:08:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/community-conversation-voices/#comment-5226</guid>
		<description>I certainly hope that Round 2 will not ignore areas such as Muskegon and Grand Haven, as was done in Round 1.  The rationale behind selecting the locations for the 96 conversations was not clear to me, but it strikes me as peculiar that this region was excluded.  It is one of the few areas in Michigan that has had a new growth of jobs; I certainly don't want to sugarcoat its problems, as they are real, but those problems seem systemic throughout the state.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I certainly hope that Round 2 will not ignore areas such as Muskegon and Grand Haven, as was done in Round 1.  The rationale behind selecting the locations for the 96 conversations was not clear to me, but it strikes me as peculiar that this region was excluded.  It is one of the few areas in Michigan that has had a new growth of jobs; I certainly don't want to sugarcoat its problems, as they are real, but those problems seem systemic throughout the state.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
