Petition to Jerry Brown
Chlorpyrifos Pesticide Tax
We, the students of Oakland Technical High School, ask that there be a 50% tax of the pesticide using the chemical, chlorpyrifos, in California. We support this act because we believe that these particular pesticides with chemical toxins in them are harmful to the health of the public people of California and the rest of the environment. By raising the cost people pay to use them, we hope to reduce the utilization of these pesticides in California. Presently, pesticides are being used more in farms because over the past decade, it has became a norm, but this action has negative effects. For instance, the contamination of our drinking water, air pollution, pollinators being harmed, immunity in pests, and a possible creation of a indescribable disease. An economic effect of the pesticide problem is a decrease in the price of pesticides. This leads to easier access and excessive and usage of pesticides. The chlorpyrifos pesticides are problematic to the public. Because of this pesticide, there are side effects like harmful diseases and damage to the environment. According to the Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1999 and 2002, it states that there were traces of chlorpyrifos in the food of 93 percent of U.S. residents. This shows that chlorpyrifos is a commonly used pesticide even though it is dangerous. It is damaging the developing brains of adolescents by causing many neurological problems, such as reduced IQ levels, the generation of memory loss, and attention deficit disorders. Currently, The United States Department of Agriculture spends about $2.5 billion dollars annually, subsidizing the farming business. The farmers use the money from the subsidies to buy pesticides, so essentially, people are providing funding for poisoning themselves. There are many less toxic alternatives which can get rid of pests on crops as well. Some include, rotenone, pyrethrum, azadirachtin, and ryania. Creating tax addresses the problem by making harmful toxins less of a norm in agriculture. This may lead to less usage and harder access of pesticides. Humans, animals, and plants, are in danger of being affected by these toxins. For example, when it rains, the water washes the pesticides applied on plants, off into large reservoirs of water, polluting them and making them impure. This is a bad thing because most of the drinking water we put into our bodies and consume are contaminated with the pesticides. Another example of a negative effect of pesticides, in general, is Colony Collapse Disorder, also known as CCD. Colony Collapse Disorder is when beehives are vacant, while only the queen and the eggs remains in it. When worker bees collect nectar, they are also collecting the neonicotinoid pesticide, which causes them to get lost on their way back to the hive. Bees play a large role in our lives by providing for about 90% of plants and 30% of crops for humans. They pollinate plants to help them grow. Unfortunately, pesticides are causing bees to become an endangered species. Plants with pesticides that bees suck nectar from are messing with their neurological health. Bees are dying because they are unable to arrive safely to their habitats. The decline in the bee population is due to the effects of systemic pesticides. We believe that if there was a tax on the chlorpyrifos pesticide, we could create a large impact, and lower the risks of environmental damage. Asking for a 50% tax on chlorpyrifos in California is all we want for change. Come join us and make a difference in our land before anymore lives get hurt.
Petition to Keeler's Corner Management
Let Kathy Keep Her Plants!
When Keeler's Corner was managed by a different company 8 years ago, Kathy was told that having plants in the surrounding areas of her apartment wouldn't be a problem, so long as they did not obstruct the path or pose a hazard. Since then, Kathy has steadily been adding to her collection of beautiful plants, ranging from flowers to ferns to small trees (while under the impression that this was still okay). She has raked her yard clear of debris and arranged her plants in such a way that any passerby neighbor will stop to compliment her if they get the opportunity. On September 3rd, Kathy found a notice on her front door giving her 10 days to clear out her plants or risk being evicted. She plans to plead to management today to allow her to stay, plants and all, at least until her lease is up in December and she has enough time to move her things. Kathy suffers from hip problems, and is therefore limited with mobility, making the task of moving so many plants in such a short amount of time extremely difficult. Her stress levels have considerably increased, and she has been trying to find jobs and places to put her plants if worse comes to worst. My goal in telling Kathy's story is that Keeler's Corner may reconsider the notice they gave her and allow her to stay. Her plants are not doing anything except making the nature preserve pathway look even more beautiful, adding further curb appeal to this property. However, because I am somewhat unfamiliar with laws surrounding tenant rights and landlord regulations, I am also petitioning for Keeler's Corner to, at the very least, allow Kathy more time to plan everything out. Let a compromise be reached.
Petition to Muskego Norway School District
NO to Muskego-Norway School District 3rd Referendum and YES to Keeping Muskego Green!
August 1, 2016 To The School Board of Muskego-Norway: We oppose the Muskego-Norway School District’s 3rd Referendum that was placed on the April 5, 2016 Ballot, which was voted down by Norway, and marginally passed with 56% of total voters in Muskego voting yes. More specifically, we oppose construction on the land located on North Cape Road between McShane Drive and Hi View Drive, and are requesting that this land be left as green space and listed as an area of high conservation priority. This land provides approximately 60 acres of mixed habitat consisting of partial wooded, partial marshland, and partial open land which has sustained a variety of native flora and fauna for decades, as well as provides a buffer for predatory animals. According to The City of Muskego Conservation Areas and Priorities website, this area is encompassed by existing DNR protected wildlife areas, existing protected conservation areas, and areas of high conservation priority. Some of the animal and plant species which thrive on this land are included on Wisconsin DNR Endangered and Threatened Species Watch List, such as but not limited to the following: Peregrine Falcon, Southern Flying Squirrel, Big Brown Bat, Little Brown Bat, Bobolink, Wild Petunia, Purple Milkweed, Smooth Phlox, Prairie Thistle, Blue-stemmed Goldenrod, Prairie Plum, Fly Honeysuckle, and numerous insect species. These animal and plant species are in addition to all other species that thrive on this land but not listed on an endangered/threatened watch list. This land has helped maintain the rural atmosphere and culture that attracts and adds value to Muskego homes and community as a whole. The school district plans to construct a middle school on this land beginning in 2017. There are currently two middle schools within this district. According to our City’s Awards and Rankings, Muskego was ranked “The 2015 2nd best city place in all of Wisconsin to raise a family in”, directly referenced from http://www.onlyinyourstate.com/wisconsin/raise-family-wi/ which reads, “Kids are well-prepared for college in Muskego, with the average ACT score being just under 24. Your family will enjoy a really nice quality of life, with plenty of outdoor activities to do such as fishing and hiking”. This information is taken directly from the City of Muskego website. This is evidence that Muskego is, and has already been, exceeding the expectations in terms of academics and quality of life, and validates that the proposed referendum is not necessary, and that this would be another example of mismanagement of tax payer dollars. This referendum is projected to exceed 43 million dollars, therefore increasing property taxes. Not only would construction on this land adversely affect wildlife, it would also disturb surrounding homeowners and residents. This land is located in a quiet residential area, and construction/development of this area would exponentially increase traffic noise, resulting in a disturbance of the peace, leading to noise and traffic pollution causing a decrease in quality of life, decrease in quality of health, and decrease in home value. In order to align with Muskego’s values, especially in terms of upholding conservation efforts that have already been made by Muskego’s Department of Lakes, Forestry, and Conservation; and to protect Muskego residents, we must value, maintain, and respect the diverse natural resources, as well as the structures that currently exist. It is not in the best interest of our community to build/develop this land, nor does it coincide with Muskego’s vision, and we ask that it is left as green space as well as to be listed as an area of high conservation priority. Leaving this land as green space is critical to sustaining what Muskego has worked to achieve, allowed the community to thrive, as well as to the continued growth and development of Muskego’s community in a multifaceted direction. Sincerely, Concerned Citizens of Muskego and Norway
Petition to Keith Frederick, Dan Brown, Craig Redmon
Stop the sale of invasive plants in Missouri
The negative impacts of invasive species are far reaching and in the United States hundreds of millions are spent each year combating them. In 2012, Indiana land owners and managers spent $5.85 million to manage invasive plants on their land while a separate study found that invasive species cost the United States more than $120 billion in damages every year (Pimental et al. 2005). Missouri is no different and spends millions to fight these foreign plants that are wreaking havoc on our local ecosystems. Yet, you can go into any nursery or large retailer and purchase the same plants that many state agencies spend their limited resources fighting to eradicate or control. Why should the state of Missouri allow retailers to continue to sell known destructive, invasive plants to the detriment of our public and private lands? Citizens of Missouri need to speak up and let our voices be heard: Stop the sale of invasive species and let our ecosystems have a chance at recovery. Currently, the Missouri Department of Conservation lists the following plants as the top invasives: (http://mdc.mo.gov/your-property/problem-plants-and-animals/invasive-plants Autumn Olive Bush Honeysuckle Callery (Bradford) Pear Canada Thistle Common Buckthorn Chinese Yam Reed Canary Grass Crown Vetch Common & Cut-leaved Thistle Garlic Mustard Japanese Honeysuckle Japanese Hop Japanese Knotweed Japanese Stiltgrass Johnson Grass Kudzu Leafy Spurge Multiflora Rose Purple Loosestrife Sericea Lespedeza Musk Thistle Spotted Knapweed Old World Bluestem Wintercreeper Tall Fescue Other states have regulated invasive species and it only makes sense to do so. New York state has the following regulations which Missouri can utilitize as a blueprint to guide the drafting of our states regulations:http://www.dec.ny.gov/regulations/93848.htmlPlease help spread the word and put this common sense solution in the public spotlight.