Petition Tag - council

The Bayside City Council has announced it will close its only community-based childcare centres in Hampton and Sandringham.

This decision was made by the Council without consulting with staff, families or the Bayside community.

These not for profit centres have provided an essential service to Bayside families for over 30 years, and their closure will force 160 families to find alternative care. Private centres have already indicated they will not be able to respond to the overwhelming demand for places.

Disabled and at risk children have not been considered. The centres currently provide priority access for these children and a high standard of care not available elsewhere.

35 employees will lose their jobs – many have worked in the centres for 10 years or more.

The Council has not offered any alternative options for families requiring childcare.

Please sign this petition to show your support in our attempts to prevent the closure of these two much loved and needed facilities.

If you would like to join our mailing list and stay updated, please email us at saveourcentres@gmail.com

Thank you.

View petition

November 4, 2011: UPDATE

Thank you for your wonderful show of support for Collingwood’s Heritage Conservation District. Many of you have left thoughtful and positive comments. I have been deeply moved by your commitment to our downtown heritage district.

I am happy to say that on the council agenda for November 7th, 2011 the motion to remove properties from our Heritage District has been withdrawn!

On Monday November 7th council will discussing the Heritage Advisory Committee’s recommendation to “consider Site Specific Amendments to the 2008 Collingwood Heritage Conservation Plan”. This recommendation would allow for council, the heritage committee, town staff, and the developer to work collaboratively on site development.

Thank you for your part in making this possible.

-------------------------

October 23, 2011:
Collingwood is known and admired provincially, nationally, and even internationally for its downtown Heritage Conservation District.

Our downtown forms one of the largest conservation districts in Ontario and was the first heritage district in all of Canada to be listed in the Canadian Register of Historic Places. This prestigious designation identifies Hurontario Street as “among the best preserved 19th century grand main streets in Ontario.”

And yet, the Heritage District is currently facing its biggest challenge.

Tourists from far and wide come to Collingwood to walk our downtown streets and shop in our stores. Town, regional and provincial publications praise our historic downtown and its architectural heritage. Collingwood has become one of the most popular retirement destinations in Ontario – in no small part because of the beauty of its built and natural landscapes.

And yet, the Heritage District may begin to break apart.

Why? Because Collingwood Town Council has requested a report from its staff on what steps are needed to remove a prominent property from the Heritage District.

Property owners in the Heritage District understand that our downtown represents the heart and history of our town, and as such, is a boost to our town’s tourism and economy. The Heritage By-Law that governs our district was well-researched, well thought out, and approved by town and council. To let a developer simply “opt out” of Collingwood’s Heritage District in order to remove obligations outlined in the By-Law is completely unfair to the many individuals and businesses who have abided by our town’s legislation for years.

If the town council goes forward and allows the property to be removed, then the entire district is vulnerable to similar requests from any other resident or corporation which will slowly erode our heritage. Eventually, there may not be a Heritage District.

Help us to protect Collingwood’s Heritage Conservation District by signing this online petition or one of the paper versions, which are circulating within the Heritage Conservation District.

View petition

We call for the development to be rejected because:

• The drastic loss of sun and daylight to residents in Whitgift House will place some residents in permanent darkness in the winter, increase their fuel and light bills, and have serious consequences for their quality of life

• The loss of sunlight and daylight to the Lambeth High Street Recreation Ground will have a detrimental effect on the quality of the park especially in winter months

• Less than 10% of the development is being put aside for affordable homes. This borough needs more social and affordable housing and not more housing for millionaires!

• The 138 exclusive car parking spaces are completely unnecessary in an area which has some of the best access to public transport in London and will increase traffic noise and pollution in local streets

We want a development that respects local residents, the amenities and character of our neighbourhood, including the listed buildings and other heritage assets of this area.

View petition

Thousands of residents are affected by the worsening housing crisis. Further benefit cuts are forcing people into homelessness and is likely to send low and middle income families into a state of poverty, unable to provide food or heating due to extortionate renting costs. Many people are forced to live in inadequate, unsuitable, unfair conditions!

Urgent immediate action is called for by both the Government and Local council.

View petition

PLEASE NOTE: THIS PETITION IS NOT CONDONING DOG ATTACKS, NOR IS IT REQUESTING THAT CERTAIN BREEDS BE REMOVED FROM THE "RESTRICTED" REGISTER. THIS PETITION IS CALLING FOR A MORE SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF PIT BULL TERRIERS AND ALSO FOR AN EDUCATION AND TRAINING BASED APPROACH TO PREVENTING DOG ATTACKS.

The Victorian Government has introduced new legislation regarding the status of American Pit Bull Terriers in our society. From 30th September 2011, council rangers have the power to seize and destroy any dog they deem to be an unregistered American Pit Bull Terrier.

Not only does this law continue the discrimination against the breed, but it will undoubtedly lead to cases of mistaken identity, with many breeds and crosses (such as the Staffordshire Bull Terrier) sharing a resemblance with the Pit Bull. Council rangers have been given a guide as to how to recognise characteristics of Pit Bull Terriers, and identification will be based on sight as opposed to the more scientifically correct method of DNA testing.

Only if you can produce a breeders or veterinary certificate confirming your dog is not a Pit Bull will you be saved from having your dog seized. This presents a massive problem for owners of cross breed dogs, and particularly Staffordshire Bull Terrier owners, and, as such, this law must be changed immediately before families risk losing their beloved pets all because of a knee-jerk reaction to a situation.

The government needs to adopt a "deed not the breed" approach to dog attacks and focus their efforts on training programs for both owners and dogs. Many dog breeds require firm handling and proper training, and, if this is done in an effective manner, the liklihood that such a dog would attack for no reason is extremely low. Rarely does a well trained, well adjusted and well socialised dog attack for no apparent reason and people, just as much as dogs, need to be trained to ensure situations that could lead to a dog attacking do not occur.

We call for temperament testing, rather than BSL, and ask that each dog be treated as an individual rather than being subjected to breed stereotypes. DNA testing as opposed to appearances is also necessary to ensure we do not commit innocent dogs to their deaths. Currently, DNA testing cannot override council ranger decisions; i.e. if a ranger believes it looks like a pitbull, DNA testing stating it is not a pit bull is irrelevant. Only if you appeal the decision and take the matter to VCAT can you produce DNA testing as evidence. This matter is getting out of hand and is completely irrational, and the law needs to be changed now.

Since the new legislation's inception, there has been a marked increase in people dumping or abandoning their dogs on the streets, particularly dogs of the pit bull breed. Surely this is yet more evidence that it is irresponsible ownership is the issue when it comes to dog attacks as opposed to breed temperaments! Don't blame an innocent animal for being born of a certain breed. Don't blame an innocent animal for having irresponsible owners who don't train it or train it to be aggressive. Don't blame an innocent animal for being a victim of circumstance.

So, sign the petition and ask the Victorian Government to reconsider it's legislation, prevent innocent people from having their innocent dogs seized and stop this outrageous breed discrimination. We call for a scientific and reasoned approach to the apparent issue of Pit Bulls in our society.

RALLY: http://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=275080639183977

View petition

Perhaps it is about time we changed how "parking enforcement" works. A completely new, friendly approach, not incentivised by money.

Each Council Ward can appoint its own group of "wardens", they may even be local volunteers, with the necessary powers to issue PCN's. Everyone in the ward will know who they are, and have their number to call if they have a problem. The point is however, that they will be welcoming, friendly sort of person, rather than the authoritarian set up we have now.

They will only issue tickets in the most extreme cases and will only issue a ticket as a last resort. The vast majority of PCN's issued currently are completely unnecessary and are purely issued to generate revenue - these would never get issued under this new arrangement.

I realise it may take some time to make these changes but they will be worth it if it encourages a more friendly local community.

In the UK at the moment you can steal and be fined less (or not at all), than the motorist who parks on the wrong line, displays the wrong permit, or just overstays his parking ticket. It is plainly very wrong and unfair.

Please sign the petition if you would like this to change.

View petition

Nature of this Petition:
We the undersigned oppose the cuts in doorstep bin collections at farm, rural, outlying and hard to reach properties, resulting from the Special Meeting of the Council Cabinet on 26th January 2011, because of the negative disruption, cost and littering it causes to residents and all affected neighbours.

We call upon the Council to:
Reverse its decision to end doorstep bin collections. Also to continue doorstep bin collections at these properties, until and unless there has been fair, fully costed and wide ranging consultations with all residents who could be directly and indirectly affected.

*********************************************************************
*********************************************************************
THIS SUCCESSFUL CAMPAIGN IS NOW CLOSED.

THE PETITION WITH 1,900+ SIGNATURES WAS HANDED INTO THE COUNCIL ON MONDAY 5 SEPT AND the council voted unanimously to overturn the cuts in bin collections at the full Council meeting on Wed 28th Sept 2011

PREVIOUS RESIDENTS MEETING ATTENDED BY 100 PEOPLE ON 10th AUG AND EVEN MORE PEOPLE ON 31 AUG.

Public Meeting Press Release – August 2011
*********************************************************************
*********************************************************************

IN THE NEWS

Good news for rural properties in Rossendale

Threatened bin collections in Rossendale saved

'Laughing stock' Rossendale bin collection plans scrapped

Doorstep rubbish collections scrapped after 130 years

Council announces new plans subject to feedback being received

Lancashire Telegraph - Residents' fury at meeting over rural bin collections axe

ROSSENDALE MP Jake Berry Bin collection proposals are total rubbish Aug 9 2011

Lancashire Telegraph - Residents hit back as 700 Rossendale homes lose bin collections

Granada Reports - Rossendale Bins Anger

Channel 4 News - Rossendale scrapping doorstep bin collections

The Telegraph –Rural households denied home bin collections to cut costs

Express - Outrage of the families forced to empty their own dustbins



BACKGROUND
This petition opposes the cutbacks in household doorstep bin collections. These are being imposed in Rossendale by the council, without consultation or regard for the high cost and negative impact on residents.

Residents affected by the cutbacks pay high Council tax and have a basic right to have household waste collected from their properties. People living in rural areas are being unfairly discriminated against. These are valid reasons why cuts in front line services are not merited.

These cutbacks in front line services are likely to be just the first step. There is real concern that the council will go further in the future by having more residents handle and transfer smelly household waste to central collection points.

Thousands of residents from 700 properties in farm, rural, outlying and hard to reach parts of Rossendale who are having their bin collections axed and will have to take their rubbish up to two miles to their nearest collection point, known as a ‘dump site’.

Thousands of additional properties are affected and residents are opposed to the cuts in front line services and imposition of unwanted ‘rubbish dump sites’ nearby to their homes, to be used for dropping waste for storage and collection.

Waste has to be at the rubbish dump site by 7am on the day of the collection, but cannot be dropped off the night before, meaning residents have to get up at dawn to get there. There are widespread concerns that rubbish will unnecessarily blight residents around the collection points.

Rossendale Council claim they will save £75,800 by binning collections at farms and rural locations, however this figure is unsubstantiated and likely to be significantly overstated when the true costs of setting up the dump sites, changes to staffing practices and provision of car boot liners are taken into account.

Those affected by the cuts say they are being ‘short changed’ after handing over thousands in council tax every year. Many of the rural properties pay council tax of more than £2,000 per year but the council is cutting services with no redress for residents.

A council decision to introduce recycling to around 700 properties was initially taken by the previous Conservative council. However the current Labour controlled council is going further with cuts in front line services and seems uninterested in reversing that decision. Residents are supportive of recycling and are awaiting proposals from the council on a recycling scheme.

The council is claiming that consultations are taking place, but from the outset, continuation of front line collection services has never been an option. Many of the affected residents have not been fairly consulted and have raised concerns to councillors. There is a lot of ill feeling about the way this is being handled by the council. The council is attempting to claim that residents are readily accepting these cuts in front line services and impositions of dump sites, but there is little evidence of this and Councillors are coming forward to acknowledge that there has been an unfair lack of proper consultation before any decisions were taken.

Residents are in the process of organising further meetings. Check back here for details.

Please support your neighbours in opposing the cutbacks by signing this petition and inform everyone you know who has an interest.

View petition

I recently attended an art walk through The Rocks heritage precinct and noticed the use of chalk stencils, as temporary signage for pop-up art projects.

I think this style of promotion would work well for the Newcastle CBD to promote an increase in foot traffic, in areas that are hidden within the Hunter Street Mall.

I would like to create a temporary 'path' of chalk stencil logos that will attract attention and increase foot traffic in streets that are not being visited often.

The Newcastle CBD has many rotten and decaying properties, and a result of this, is a lack of interest to visit the Newcastle CBD.

I aim to create a public street art walk and would like to promote the artworks that are 'hidden' from regular walkways with temporary chalk stencils.

The aim is for people to 'hop' between the artworks in Hunter Street mall, following the chalk stencils, like a child on an Easter egg hunt. Sounds fun, right?

Temporary chalk signage is a type of promotion that could assist in generating customers to these spaces and surrounding business'.

There are environmentally safe options, water based, chalk aerosols that will last up to 30 days.

After approaching Newcastle City Council on advice for how to legitimately install such temporary promotional material, I was met with little support and no vision for support, in the future.

Please see the below quotations:

"Thanks for your enquiry concerning information and advice relating to temporary chalk stencilling advertising to be erected /installed on footpaths for events and public artworks within the Newcastle Local Government Area.

I am able to assist you with your enquiry and provide the following information:

· Any form of advertising, whether temporary or permanent, on either public or private property, is required to comply with Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. Council regards the installation or erection of advertising materials as development activity and anyone considering undertaking this activity is required to submit a Development Application with Council. If the activity is undertaken without an approved development application, an offence is committed under Section 76A (1).

· The fine for installing or erecting advertising materials without development consent is $1500 for an individual and $3000 for a company.

· Council has also experienced once this type of advertising is installed, the installer makes no effort to remove it and the responsibility falls back on Council to do this. There are obviously costs to rate payers for this to occur and Council resources are diverted away from other activities to remove the advertising.

· Council is also of the view that if the chalk / talc is affected by rain and it makes its way into the storm water system which runs into the harbour, there is the potential for a pollution incident to occur.

· Council recently investigated a matter where a Sydney based advertising company installed numerous chalk based stencils on footpaths in the Newcastle CBD without development consent. Council received a number of complaints from business owners. The chalk stencilling was not easy to remove despite efforts by Council’s graffiti team. The company involved was fined $3,000 and had to return to Newcastle and under Council supervision, remove the stencilling.

· In summary, if you want to install or erect chalk based advertising stencils on footpaths within the Newcastle Local Government Area, you must submit a development application. If the advertising is installed or erected without an approved development application, you would commit an offence under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, the matter would be investigated and you could be liable to a fine."

I asked Council for the costs and procedures of submitting a Development Application for footpaths and received this reply:

"In response to your other questions regarding a Development Application, I conferred with my manager & was advised when submitting a development application, the consent of the owner of the land, whether public or private, is required as part of the application. As Council is the owner of the land (footpaths in streets within the CBD and Hunter Street Mall), it is not envisaged permission to conduct the activity you want to conduct would be granted."

View petition

Kempsey Shire Council's proposed application to IPART for a Special Rate Variation has been strongly opposed by the Kempsey Shire community, yet despite this the council decided to proceed with the application even though during the 2011 meetings it was firmly expressed it would cause considerable hardship to the community.

It raises serious concerns about community representation on issues affecting the community.

This is an opportunity to have your voice heard, as this petition will be delivered to the organisation IPART who make the decision on applications for Special Rate Variations and who consider community input.

View petition

Westbury Primary School was established in 1839. TheTasmanian Labor Party wishes to close down this vital part of our growing community to reclaim money they have over spent while being in government

View petition

As it stands currently, Russell Island only has a small section of footpath that covers only a couple of Km's of our wonderful Island. Many people are left unable to use all the wonderful spaces our Island has to offer because the road edges are dangerous and inaccessible to many.

Mothers with prams suffer, those with less abled bodies are also unable to reach our only sand beach, and children are unable to ride their bike or walk to school due to lack of footpaths or smooth road edging. Those without cars are hindered by the lack of footpath so therefore have no choice but to use the local cab to get from place to place, putting a large dent in their weekly budgets.

View petition

Snoopy & Cheeky (father & son) have been in foster care with Val since she rescued them from being sent to the pound, they have become very attached to Val, her son and her 2 chihuahua's. Val lives on a large block and her dogs are treated like her own children and spend most of their time inside being one of the family.

Val contacted Toowoomba Regional Council about permission to keep Snoopy & Cheeky and her request has been denied, regardless as to the properties suitability for an additional 2 dogs.

Toowoomba Regional Council has special circumstance clauses on this matter and I find it hard to believe Snoopy & Cheeky fail be identified as special circumstances by council.

View petition

Picture a beautiful, relaxing wildife habitat which provides a home for millions of animals and birds. Imagine that the same place hosts hundreds of oxygen-producing trees. Imagine that the place also provides a home and livelihood for at least a few farmers and other workers.

Now imagine bulldozers hurtling in and ripping up the trees, running over innocent animals and maybe even injuring one or two children. This is what almost certainly will happen and the Council want to call the new town "Cranbrook". They say that this for "economical reasons". But the fact is that it will do far more bad than good as the farmers will lose their livelihoods.

If any lower individual wanted to do this, they would be prosecuted by law, but the council are not in trouble for this. Why? Because they talk in posh language, they are high in power and may claim that they are "using resourceful land to build a new community for economical purposes" rather than saying that they are tearing down trees and destroying beautiful fields to build busy highways, shops, houses and leisure centres for their own evil money.

They say that it will provide employment, but this can sometimes be achieved by fixing and reusing old buildings. They also say that it will create more homes and prevent homelessness. The right way to prevent homelessness would be to fix and reuse old homes, lower household costs and fund homeless charities such as Shelter and the Salvation Army.

How would YOU like to lose your home and/or livelihood?

View petition

Howden house was completed in 1795 and has had many owners throughout its many years. But in 1964 the Carnegie trust gave a grant of £12,000 to convert the house from offices into a community centre for the new town. But in recent years the house has lay unoccupied.

The House was bought by a company to develop the house into offices and housing. However the house has been left in awful state. The house is close to becoming beyond disrepair.

View petition

The current high levels of traffic utilizing Briar Rd Felixstow has seen an increase in accidents, speeding and noise, impacting on the residents along Briar Rd and surrounds.

This has resulted in numerous accidents most recently on 24/05/11 on the corner of Turner St and Briar Rd. With numerous elderly residents & families in the area, urgent action is required to reduce the level of speed motorist’s use along this road and minimize future risks to residents in the area.

View petition

Frankston Council wants to extend the outdoor smoke free zones to most of the major shopping strips in Frankston.

This will affect nearly all small business' in the affected areas, running small business is hard enough already, we need EVERY type of customer, smokers OR non-smokers. Cafes pay big dollars to the council to provide outdoor smoking areas for their diners and now they want to take it all away.

The Nanny state is getting out of control! Help us by signing our petition today!

View petition

Recently, Cheshire East Council voted to increase the rent paid by Market Traders across the county by a staggering 25%. There has been no legitimate reasons laid forth by the council with many seeing it as a move to oust markets from towns in a bid to create revenue from car parking and other schemes around Cheshire.

Market traders have always worked with very streamlined profit margins, pinched even tighter by the need to remain competitive with the all- consuming supermarkets and their insatiable appetite for moving into all areas of financial opportunity.

It's understandable that in a recession and a time of great financial hardship for everyone, these traders are struggling already and a hike of 25% will force many traders out of a profession through sheer running costs alone.

It is vital that action is taken now to show Cheshire East council the people of the towns want to keep their Markets.

View petition

Since the government announced its proposals to reform the NHS, pressure has been growing from all directions calling on them to think again and drop the Health and Social Care Bill. Health professionals, Unions, service users, charities and the public have all expressed deep concerns.

These include the estimated £3 billion it would cost to implement the changes which would effectively privatise almost 1 million NHS staff in England by 2014. Over £80 billion of tax payer’s money will be handed over to GP consortiums and a commissioning board who will be able to introduce major changes without any real public scrutiny or accountability.

Clinical services will be opened up to 'any willing provider' opening the door to cowboy private companies, smashing down quality of care and lead to the NHS being subject to EU competition laws. Foundation Trusts will be free to make as much money as they like from private medicine allowing them to concentrate on more wealthy patients from home and abroad while NHS budgets are squeezed. The expansion of private providers will inevitably bankrupt and close many local NHS services and hospitals. GPs will not really be in charge but will be under the thumb of a remote commissioning board and will not have a say over which providers will be included on the new national register.

The Bill does not protect against conflict of interests between those commissioning and the private providers meaning decisions could end up being based on profit rather than the needs of the patient. Hospital referrals will require the rubber stamping of 'management referral' teams often run by private companies seeking to cut spending.

Due to widespread opposition to the Bill, the government has recently announced a 2 month break in the Bill to "pause and engage". Please sign this petition calling on the Council to support the wishes of the vast majority of the population and contact the local MPs demanding that the Bill is dropped.

View petition

Since the government announced its proposals to reform the NHS, pressure has been growing from all directions calling on them to think again and drop the Health and Social Care Bill. Health professionals, Unions, service users, charities and the public have all expressed deep concerns.

These include the estimated £3 billion it would cost to implement the changes which would effectively privatise almost 1 million NHS staff in England by 2014. Over £80 billion of tax payer’s money will be handed over to GP consortiums and a commissioning board who will be able to introduce major changes without any real public scrutiny or accountability. Clinical services will be opened up to 'any willing provider' opening the door to cowboy private companies, smashing down quality of care and lead to the NHS being subject to EU competition laws.

Foundation Trusts will be free to make as much money as they like from private medicine allowing them to concentrate on more wealthy patients from home and abroad while NHS budgets are squeezed. The expansion of private providers will inevitably bankrupt and close many local NHS services and hospitals. GPs will not really be in charge but will be under the thumb of a remote commissioning board and will not have a say over which providers will be included on the new national register. The Bill does not protect against conflict of interests between those commissioning and the private providers meaning decisions could end up being based on profit rather than the needs of the patient.

Hospital referrals will require the rubber stamping of 'management referral' teams often run by private companies seeking to cut spending. Due to widespread opposition to the Bill, the government has recently announced a 2 month break in the Bill to "pause and engage". Please sign this petition calling on the Council to support the wishes of the vast majority of the population and contact the local MPs demanding that the Bill is dropped.

View petition

If you do not know the background to this battle or would like a recap, please click on the following link, Keri-Anne's Facebook notes, which will take you to a Facebook page that has the original preamble. You can also get more in depth information from Dave's Facebook notes and up-to-date information from Charterhouse Fields Facebook page and our You Tube channel:


Latest from the Charterhouse Residents' Association Leaflet

You may have heard or read reports about the result of the campaign to Save Charterhouse Fields. We thought we should keep you informed.
The Council have granted the lease of part of the fields to Blue Coat school.
Does this mean we have lost?

• No! *They had to add in to the lease the rights of residents to use and access the land.
  Our rights are clearly stated.


• *Also, all the northern half of the fields will now be registered as 'Public Open Space'.


• *The school and council have declared there is no intention to fence off any fields.

A notice has recently been placed in Johnson Park, Constitution Road, Dulwich Hill, notifying dog owners that the park is an on-leash area and that penalties may apply if dogs were off-leash.

We would like to ask the Council if they would consider declaring the area of Johnson Park that is not within 10m of the playing apparatus, an off-leash area from 5.30am to 7am each day.

The law allows for such an accommodation to be made: see s13(6) of the Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW):

"(6) A local authority can by order declare a public place to be an off-leash area. Such a declaration can be limited so as to apply during a particular period or periods of the day or to different periods of different days. [...]"

At this time of the day there are never any children using the park, and indeed the primary users are dog owners walking their dogs. For the Council to approve the area (other than that within 10m of the playing apparatus) as an off-leash area for this limited period in the early morning would result in an enhanced opportunity for responsible dog owning members of the community to use the park, whilst not causing any detriment to families with young children.

View petition

Reading Borough Council have changed the visitor parking permits which local residents who live within the restricted parking zone receive each year. Each household use to receive 20 free permits a year ( 2 books with 10 permits). These permits were full day permits which were valid from the day specified until the following morning at 10am.

This has now been changed, each household will receive 1 book with 20 permits these are now called Half Day Permits. The restrictions are that your visitor will have to specify either am or pm for one permit. AM times are 8am - 2pm and PM at 2pm - 8am the following morning.

This means you will now have to specify when your visitors arrive to your home, if they arrive mid morning and left after 8am the following morning you would potentially use 3 permits for just one visit!

As each permit costs £1 this will be a charge of £3 per visit after 6 visits you would definitely have to order a new permit book (with 2 permits left from your free book) at a cost £20.

Even if visitors did not stay over night you would use on average 2 permits per visit. So each book would give you 10 visits!

No doubt visitors will be caught out after failing to leave at 8am ( if an additional permit isn't used, with the intention of leaving at 8am) and finding a parking ticket at a cost of £30! Leaving us all on edge due to having an overnight visitor.

Residents are allowed a further five (paid) books after the free permit book is issued.

View petition

In January, after a lengthy tender process, Aberdeen City Council awarded the contract to operate The Belmont Picturehouse to their "preferred bidder" i.e. not City Screen (the current operator). So far no progress has been made on an agreement for the new company to takeover.

City Screen will finish operating The Belmont on 26th May 2011 and there is a real danger that if no agreement is in place by this date that the cinema could close to the general public.

The aim of this petition is to show the Council that The Belmont Picturehouse is a valued cultural entertainment venue within the community and closure would not only threaten the jobs of the people that work there but also affect the cultural output of the city.

View petition

This is a continuation of our petition submitted to Brighton and Hove City Council at their Full Council meeting on 24 March 2011 - total signatures at that point were 835.

This petition is part and parcel of a campaign to persuade the council that there are compelling and justifiable grounds on which to carry out a complete review of the road layout and management in and around the Hollingdean Dip.

Anecdotal evidence shows that there have been many near misses over a number of years as vehicles race through the Dip without regard for the safety of pedestrians many of whom are school children walking to Hertford Infants School.

The residents on this campaign are of the view (clearly expressed at Full Council) that a holistic approach is essential so that current problems relating to speeding, parking on corners and double yellow lines and a dangerous bus stop configuration are dealt with and that, most essentially, priority is given to pedestrians over vehicles.

View petition

We are requesting Baw Baw Shire Council's Planning
Department to insert a condition on the above mentioned
Planning Permit to require the Applicant to retain the row of
trees on the Southern boundary of the proposed Subdivision
PSB 0079/10.

View petition

The neighbors surrounding the area of Gloria, Perry and Brice
Streets are tired of the constant need of phoning the police
due to the following: Theft, obvious drug dealing, distruction
of village property, and private property, constant littering to
our own properties and young children not being properly
taken care of: All due to the lack of responcibility of the
owners, and or landlords of the Apartment complexes located
on the middle to south end of Gloria ave.

View petition

Erskine has had a 3g Synthetic All Weather Pitch ( AWP )
for over 5 years. In those years the Community of Erskine,
Bishopton and Inchinnan have used the facility extensively
especially the Football Community who have rented the
surface from the Council for training and games.

We find it ASTONISHING! that after 5 years of renting the
facility at a cost of around £21,000 a year the Football
Community in the area has to go elsewhere for a suitable
surface to train and play on during the winter months.

Due to the Council's Pitch Strategy the new Park Mains
High School is to have a Sand Dressed AWP which the
Governing Body of Youth Football in Scotland ( SYFA ) has
declared not a PREFERRED SURFACE TO PLAY GAMES OR
TRAIN ON! The nearest 3g AWP to Erskine is Renfrew High
School so the kids of Erskine, Bishopton and Inchinnan will
have to travel to Renfrew at the least to train in winter on
a 3g surface.

Given the council has had an estimated £ 100,000 from
the Football Community in pitch rental over the 5 years we
find it DISGRACEFUL! that the needs of the Football
Community in Erskine, Bishopton and Inchinnan have
been overlooked in favour of Hockey.

Please sign our petition and join our campaign on facebook
under Save Erskine Football to provide Erskine, Bishopton
and Inchinnan with the 3g AWP that it deserves so that all
sports can be played on it.

View petition

In March of 2011 a St. John's (NL) City Councilor introduced a motion calling for a full review of City Council.

It was requested to have a full review conducted of Council including but not limited to:

- Remuneration,
- Positions,
- Duties,
- Roles,
- Responsibilities, and
- Accountability.

This motion was rejected in a 9 to 1 vote. A truly accountable Council with the best interests of the people in mind would have nothing to hide, and would welcome a review to show areas where improvements could be made, or operations made more efficient.

View petition

It is a well known fact that Leigh became one of the largest towns in Europe without a Railway Station when the old lines where removed decades ago. A community organisation called Transport for Leigh (www.transportforleigh.org.uk) who are made up of a mix of volunteers from Leigh intend to change this and need your support to make it happen.

Over the past decade Wigan Council has considered various options to enhance the chronic state of transport infrastructure in Leigh. The current poor level of accessibility and connectivity has been holding back the economic regeneration of the town greatly and limiting opportunities for people in Leigh. Wigan Council have currently settled on supporting a £76 million scheme called the Leigh – Salford – Manchester Guided Busway as their next big thing and it looks like this could be going ahead.

TFL believe that what the town actually wants is to see a Rail Link brought back to Leigh and to actually get cars off the road. TFL are therefore in the process of gauging the level of support for a full investigation into and development of a Rail initiative to take place that will enable submissions to occur to secure future rounds of transport funding within Greater Manchester for pedestrian rail in Leigh. On the back of this TFL in late 2010 asked Stobbart Rail, who install railway infrastructure, to price up a railway station in Leigh out of interest – it came in at only £52million which was far less than the £130million quoted by Wigan Council and GMPTE historically.

At TFL’s first major public meeting in February 2011 over 200 people packed into a small room to hear more about TFL and what we have been doing. With little marketing this huge turnout was impressive and demonstrated the huge determination from the town to speak out on this issue. Unsurprisingly all were in favour of developing a Railway project aimed at getting Leigh back on the national rail network and easing the huge level of car congestion on local roads, the main commuter routes into Manchester and beyond whilst also unlocking future regeneration in Leigh and helping local businesses grow. For clarity this is not an initiative aimed at moving any industrial heavy goods into or out of Leigh. It is aimed at a rail solution solely for commuters and leisure travellers to connect them directly to the Manchester - Liverpool rail line and beyond.

The intention of running a petition is to demonstrate to Wigan Council, GMPTE, Local Councillors and Leigh MP Andy Burnham exactly what the town wants for its future on the topic of transport investment and importantly to do it with one voice. Many people feel that historically the Council have not undertaken this type of real public engagement and have gone along unchecked. If the whole town speaks out jointly the Council will need to work with TFL and the community to make this happen.

View petition

On 13th March 2011 a letter signed by 46 Equity members appeared in the Observer newspaper:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2011/mar/13/theatre-funding-cuts-actors

The letter speaks out about local and Government cuts to the arts and culture.

Read the letter here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2011/mar/13/letters-arts-spending-cuts?INTCMP=SRCH

View petition