The St. Petersburg City council is set to review a new noise ordinance which has been drafted without involvement from local businesses. Furthermore, they have openly admitted in public meetings that they have not conducted any formal financial impact studies but they "feel" that downtown will not be impacted greatly. If this ordinance passes as proposed, it has the potential to have a severe negative impact on the culture and vibrant night life for which the city of St. Petersburg has become known. PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO WRITE TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WILL BE VOTING ON THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE District 1 Council Member Gerdes Email: [email protected] District 2 Council Member Kennedy Email: [email protected] District 3 Council member Dudley Email: [email protected] District 4 Council Member Rice Email: [email protected] District 5 Council Member Kornell Email: [email protected] District 6 Council Member Nurse Email: [email protected] District 7 Council Member Newton Email: [email protected] District 8 Council Member Foster Email: [email protected] UPDATE 3: Tuesday, May 12th: At the meeting today, which included residents and businesses alike, the main and positive outcome for the opponents to the proposed noise ordinance was that the city council member Karl Nurse, who brought this ordinance to the table, has stated that for the time being he will only be moving forward with the section of the ordinance that allows the city to increase fines for the current noise ordinance incrementally up to $500 max without asking a judge's permission to do so. Of the ideas brought forth by residents and businesses, the only one that really took hold, that both sides could agree with that also would be constitutional, was to look into consulting with an Architectural Acoustic Engineer to see what sort of sound mitigation techniques can be employed by businesses and residents alike to deflect and/or absorb sound away from residents. It was even mentioned that there may be subsidies the city could provide to assist in doing so. Another option that was suggested was to see if we could move to a decibel system. Due to the legal (here in Florida anyway) and technical difficulties of implementing such a system, this idea is not being pursued at this time. Economic impact studies were also mentioned since many residents and businesses had differing opinions of the economic impact of the proposed ordinance. At this time, it is not clear whether the city will be conducting such a study. Overall the meeting was a positive step forward. Much debate and research is still to come if we are to reach a mutually agreeable position for all. UPDATE 2: Excerpt from the Creative Loafing article linked below: "I do not support this ordinance as written and will vote no unless there are some reasonable changes made to the ordinance," said Councilman Steve Kornell in a Facebook post. UPDATE 1: The City Council will receive the draft of the proposed ordinance at the next council meeting on May 7th at 8:30AM for First Reading and will be setting the public hearing date at that time. (PUBLIC DEBATE OVER THE NEW PIER WILL BE THE PRIMARY BUSINESS FOR THIS MEETING - I expect that the Noise Ordinance issue will not come up until mid afternoon) Related News Articles: (copy and paste into your browser address bar to view) http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/baybuzz/st-petersburg-noise-ordinance-advances/2226729 http://cltampa.com/politicalanimal/archives/2015/04/28/proposed-noise-ordinance-could-quiet-downtown-st-pete-when-the-partys-just-starting#.VUEfDGZhOG8

I have been an employee at Texas Roadhouse for 11 years. I have done great over the past few years, but, with the change in the economy, I have been unable to meet my minimal bills without struggle. I have worked so hard for this company and feel as though they should pay people a living wage. I'm not asking for more to be greedy; I'm asking for more to survive. Please help our cause.

Preserve Rhode Island is the statewide advocate for Rhode Island's historic places. We champion public policy that ensures a future for historic buildings and will energize our state's economy. Currently, 32 projects have been approved for Historic Tax Credits and are either under contract or have contracts pending. These projects will pump more than $215 million into Rhode Island's economy. This leaves 27 additional projects on a wait list to nowhere, as the funding does not exist.

The Billionaire owners of the PawSox want to move from McCoy Stadium in Pawtucket less than a mile down the road at the Apex site on the backs of Rhode Island taxpayers. The owners claim it will bring in millions of revenue a year. We already have an awesome and beloved stadium at McCoy. If they can bring in millions in revenue at Apex in Pawtucket, why can't they do it at McCoy in Pawtucket? It won't create jobs because these jobs are already in our state and city, at the present stadium. Let the governor and legislature know that Rhode Islanders do not want this new stadium! Just say no!

According to a new report from the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce entitled The Economy Goes to College, [https://cew.georgetown.edu/report/economygoestocollege/] college-educated workers in America now make 80 percent more on average than workers without a college degree. That's twice the wage advantage of 50 years ago. The state of Louisiana has reached a tipping point. To allow our public institutions in this state to suffer such catastrophic budget cuts, after the already crippling cuts of 2008-2009 (my Alma Mater the University of New Orleans' state support has already been reduced by $40 million since that time AND THAT'S JUST ONE SCHOOL) will be to "compromise academic quality, further diminish program offerings and limit both educational access and attainment." - University of New Orleans President Peter J. Fos I agree with the Georgetown study's findings wholeheartedly. We need to be increasing our state's college graduates, not reducing them. As the state ranking second-to-worst not only in education but ALSO in everything from health care conditions to legal climate to gender pay gap our legislature should be doing MORE to make college a viable option for our young people, not LESS. The study's authors conclude, "Education is not just the preferred path, but increasingly it's the only reliable path to a middle-class life." The surest way to reduce income inequality, to quantifiably stimulate and sustain economic activity in our region, to lose less of our best and brightest to 'brain drain', and to contribute to an enhanced quality of life is through higher education. Forcing our public universities to file for the equivalent of academic bankruptcy is truly a travesty, especially in light of the hundreds of millions each year wasted on pet projects, special interest groups, and voucher programs for far below sub-par private schools. Protecting the sanctity of quality higher education, at an affordable rate, is the only way to ensure we advance as a state.

In April, the Oregon House and Senate held hearings on raising the minimum wage. That’s an important step – it allows these proposals to move forward in a legislative session that will be winding down before you know it. A higher minimum wage means more than a raise for our lowest-paid workers. It means boosting the purchasing power of consumers in every corner of the state. That’s money that goes directly into the local economy as workers pay rent, buy groceries and support local stores selling household essentials. It also means fewer families relying on public assistance programs -- and businesses, not taxpayers, paying the full cost of labor. Minimum wage opponents would have you believe that this is a debate about teenagers working a summer job. That’s just wrong. The reality is that today’s minimum wage worker is likely to be a woman in her thirties, working full time, and often supporting a family. And nationally, about 80 percent of all minimum wage workers are now 20 years or older. Let’s keep up the pressure!

The purpose of the TPP/TTIP is to protect guaranteed corporate profits at all cost and as a result, we would be subject to the whims of corporate lawyers and could be sued into oblivion for not understand our absolute lack of rights under this dictatorial doctrine. This so called trade agreement would give them the right to sue entire countries out of existence for inhibiting their guaranteed profits as a result of banning, product destruction or even regulating either the corporation and or its subsidiaries. Hitler would have wet his pants with glee if he had something like this! I strongly suspect many will be afraid to sign this, but if we don't take a stand now, we're all screwed!

I have been personally affected by this and feel employers are wrong in not providing paid time off to recover from an illness. We shouldn't have to choose between loosing money or coming to work sick. This is morally wrong.

Over the last 5 years Governor Christie's Economic Development Authority has given $5.4 BILLION to the wealthiest and most politically connected .01 percent of New Jersey corporations – at a cost to our underfunded schools, our crumbling roads and bridges, and our state pension fund. Enough! J.P. Morgan. Lockheed Martin. Prudential. Panasonic. Citibank – all of them have received tens of millions in public dollars from Chris Christie. In exchange for tax cuts, they are supposedly creating jobs. But we have no idea whether they are actually doing so, because Chris Christie has never even bothered to ask them, despite being required to by law. In many cases we know for a fact that corporations just moved jobs from town to town. The worst, like Citibank and Campbell’s Soup, took the tax breaks and laid people off anyway. Here’s the worst part: every dollar doled out to Prudential is a dollar that can’t be spent fixing a bridge, paying a schoolteacher, or making college more affordable. While giving out billions in subsidies with one hand, Governor Christie has cut property tax credits for middle-class families and the Earned Income Tax Credit for people struggling on the brink with the other. These reckless subsidies have skewed our state budgets out of balance and put the interests of NJ’s richest residents and corporations ahead of the rest. Enough is enough.

LB 599 would lower the minimum wage for young Nebraskans under the age of 18 from $9.00 an hour to $8.00 an hour just months after Nebraskans overwhelmingly voted to increase the minimum wage. This legislation is discriminatory and goes after a group of Nebraskans who do not have a political voice and often have to work in high school to support their families and pay for the high cost of college. We should be RAISING the minimum wage, NOT lowering the minimum wage for hard working Nebraskans. Business owners have hired lobbyists that have been effective at getting this past the first round of debate. We need to stop it at the next round of debate, and we need your voice to do it. Young Nebraskans have no lobby so we need you to tell Nebraska legislators to stand up for fair pay for Nebraskans who work hard!

In the wake of one Free Trade Agreement after another, I've watched several local businesses like Bobs Candies, Merck Chemical, and Delphi close their plants here in America, then re-open them outside our borders. I've observed the negative economic impact, like the cheap foreign-made bicycle sales that Big-mart Stores have wrought upon local business icons like Owens Sporting Goods, only to later watch the prices rise again after having eliminated that competition. The imported products that NAFTA & CAFTA style agreements inundate our markets provide an economic incentive to see even more local business interests give way to international ones. That's caused me to come to the horrible conclusion that the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) that I've heard so much about lately isn't good for our local economy and is a job killer, not a job creator. Even worse, the jobs that aren't killed outright have their wages slashed in order to compete with workers in places like Malaysia and Vietnam. We could and ought to have open debate on the pros and cons of the specifics contained in the 26+ chapter, 1000+ page TPP agreement. International interests and those aligned with them oppose public participation because when claims like the creation of 650,000 new jobs get debunked by investigative reporting from sources like the Washington Post as being closer to zero, their credibility for advancing American interests erodes. Besides, who wins if we must compete with Korean workers who make $1/hour? Are we supposed to count on such poor workers over there to purchase enough American made vehicles to make up for our other job losses? What will they buy our products with...they've got virtually no purchasing power now and with a $1/hour rate of upward mobility...they never will. It looks great when the plan is drawn up. Unfortunately, the field implementation never goes according to plan and America gets left on the hook, every time. Now I've been informed that Congress has introduced a Bill to give President Obama the authority to negotiate the terms of the TPP, in secret meetings, without public scrutiny, by invoking a procedure know as Fast Track Authority. Under Fast Track, the final version of the trade agreement achieved by the President cannot be debated or amended by Congress when it gets sent back to them. This final version is offered only for an up or down vote. It's an ultimatum, not a negotiation. I'm not willing to hold hands with Washington by trusting them to do what's right to prevent sending more jobs overseas, again. Neither should you! Please consider signing on to this Petition to encourage both our Senators and Representatives to oppose Fast Track and embrace the warmth that sunshine brings to the open and public disclosure of trade negotiations.

This petition is dedicated to the segregated and discriminated populations of Alabama that are very real today.