|Home | Bookmark | Tell||Active petitions in over 75 countries||Follow GoPetition|
Petition Tag - rescind
Congress has now voted itself a total of $16,700 in raises over the last six years. Since 1990, congressional pay has increased from $98,400 to $154,700 in 2003.
"Members of Congress have the only job in the country whose occupants can set their own salary without regard to performance, profit, or economic climate," said Tom Schatz, president of the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste in a press release. "Clearly, members must think that money grows on trees.
"This underserved pay raise is no surprise, as the 108th Congress has shown a voracious appetite for spending," Schatz concluded. "It goes to show how out of touch with reality politicians can be. They forget that their salaries are paid by taxpayers. Americans are being forced to tighten their belts—if they even have a job—yet members of Congress will have an extra $3,400 to do with as they please.
We the United Miners of the Etheridge Shire, draw to your attention the unfair, illegal and unjustified rate increases - without the Statutory Right to Appeal - on mining tenures.
The Etheridge Shire is located in Far North Queensland. It has a long and colourful mining history.
In the early 1980's our local Government commenced charging rates on mining tenures but without supplying any services. These rates have progressively increased with CPI.
On 15th August 2007, without any consultation with the community, ( as set out by law within the Local Government Act) the Etheridge Shire Council increased mining rates - in some instances over 1000%.
While this increase may have been sparked by record global commodity prices there is virtually no active mining within the Shire.
These rate increases are not sustainable and even if people decide to drop their mining tenures, that have possible cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars, they will still have to pay mining rents and rates for another 3 to 5 years to comply with the new mining and EPA regulations and bureaucratic red tape within the system.
The Etheridge Shire Council has also taken it upon themselves to remove the peoples Statutory Right to Appeal. The Etheridge Shire Council has also taken it upon themselves to rescind the right to pay off rates by installments.
Petition for Referendum of Resolution No. 2003-12-04
Resolution No. 2003-12-04 is the adoption of special assessments levied against property owners in the city of Ada, totaling $860,089.74,
for Street Improvement District 2003-1.
To Shelly Kappes, Ada City Clerk:
We the undersigned, citizens and qualified voters of the city of Ada, respectfully order that Resolution No. 2003-12-04, adopted by the city council on December 2, 2003, at the regular city council meeting, be repealed in its entirety by the city council. If this resolution is not thereafter entirely repealed, it shall be placed on the ballot at the next election, or at a special election called for that purpose, as the council determines. If a majority of the voters voting thereon votes against the resolution, it shall be considered repealed upon certification of the election results.
Signers Oath: I affirm that I know the contents and purpose of this petition and that I signed this petition only once and of my own free will.
All information must be filled in by person (s) signing the petition unless disability prevents the person (s) from doing so.
All information on this petition is subject to public inspection.
As required by city charter, Chapter 5, sec. 5.02., this petition for referendum is sponsored by the five following voters:
Timothy E. Wagner 104 4th Street East Rolland Carpenter - 204 7th Street East Sue Merkens - 607 Lily Lane
Joyce Schlagel- 701 East 3rd Avenue Shirley Riley
A resolution, passed by the city of Ada, MN has imposed an unfair and unneeded assessment against most of the property owners of the city, for street maintance, totaling $860,000.00.
It is the intention of this petition to rescind this resolution, and force the council to take the funds necessary to pay for this project from the designated budget.
As of February 1, 2004, Wal-Mart has become the first US retailer to separate credit card transactions from "check" card transactions. Wal-Mart will no longer accept Mastercard debit cards when used with a signature (like a credit card). The reason: Wal-Mart claims the costs are too high.
Although Wal-Mart says that only 1% of transactions involve these cards, that's still a ton of customers and revenue, especially when you're the world's largest retailer. By using a PIN number, debit Mastercard customers forego "zero-liability" protection for fradulent use (yes, it is possible to skim debit cards and record PIN numbers), lose any cash rewards offered for "credit" transactions, and may be charged a fee by their bank for a PIN transaction. If they don't want to use the card at the register, cardholders must use the store ATM and pay the fees imposed by the ATM owner and the customer's bank. In other words, Wal-Mart has indirectly passed the cost of the transaction on to the consumer (though they claim their prices will be lower thanks to their decision) and is pocketing the profit.
In fact, accepting not accepting debit Mastercard doesn't make business sense. Besides angering customers and losing sales, they are still accepting Visa's check card, which carries about the same processing fees as a Mastercard (it makes some wonder if Visa and Wal-Mart aren't collaborating to increase Visa's customer share--it is possible that Wal-Mart was paid to make this decision). Why accept one debit card and not another at the same rate, as is the case with most merchants (Mastercard and Visa are offered as a package deal)? Also, if customers use checks instead of a debit Mastercard, then Wal-Mart runs the risk of receiving a bad check, which costs money to collect.
Obviously, this policy hurts consumers and it also hurts the company, which the cost-cutting executives fail to see. Wal-Mart will learn that being first isn't necessary the best. Many online complaint letters are already circulating, showing that customers are reacting. Wal-Mart needs to drop this policy as soon as possible by trying harder to negotiate with Mastercard and by not playing favorites with Visa.
Oklahoma Natural Gas Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of ONEOK and has violated the public trust by manipulating natural gas prices and over charging consumers. ONG has franchise agreements with a number of cities in Oklahoma and we the voters should be given the opportunity to rescind these agreements. No one should be forced to do business with crooks!