A moratorium or ban on vacation rentals is NOT the best way to address vacation rental concerns. Concerns over noise and occupancy violations continue in our city, and we look to our City Council to be a leader in creating positive solutions to enhance residents lives. We are pleading with the City Council to not cause damage to the value of our homes, or the growth of our businesses. A ban will cause a drop in demand for homes here, and confusion in our local real estate market. Less demand will cause a drop in home values, weakening our local economy. A weaker economy will affect nearly all residents, not just vacation rental owners and management companies. Catering companies, restaurants, contractors, landscape and pool maintenance companies and many others will be especially at risk. Residents, business owners, employees and homeowners here want the City Council to help support the value of their homes, not harm it. Several ideas worth investigating, to help implement better enforcement, could include: 1. Implementing electronic signature technology to make renters aware of existing strict noise and occupancy restrictions BEFORE they rent, especially for properties not managed by local property management firms that already institute similar disclosures. Suggest the requirement to use a standardized form for ALL vacation rental homeowners. 2. Stronger commitment for fines for renters that violate the existing ordinance. This puts the responsibility back on a renter choosing to violate the existing city ordinance. Instead of considering $1,000 fines for homeowners that decide to violate a so-called moratorium (which is what the current moratorium suggests), renters should be held financially responsible for their behavior. In conjunction with the aforementioned electronic signature process, it would seem the technology exists that tenants would be required to leave their credit card info, at the time of booking, knowing UP FRONT it could be used in the event of a violation of the local ordinance the city needs to articulate it takes very seriously. This seems FAR LESS complicated than some of the elaborate and complicated solutions being discussed that include somehow devising a plan to determine density requirements or limiting ownership of rentals to one rental per person. Palm Springs is a city based on tourism. We are not like almost all of the other cities that have banned vacation rentals. Most of those cities have well rounded economies based on many different industries. A change in policy for a city like that will not likely have disastrous effects. Palm Springs is different. We don't have anything else to fall back on. Even the city of Santa Fe, New Mexico recently reversed its limit on the number of vacation rental permits, after acknowledging it was difficult to manage violations and that the policy was damaging their economy and financial well being. Vacation renters regularly rate the quality of their stay in Palm Springs among the Top 5 or Top 10 in the entire country. Certainly the City Council wishes to retain such a distinguished rating? We urge the City Council to not ban vacation rentals, but to get serious about continuing to implement better enforcement to help neighborhoods become more peaceful again. Many full time and part time residents alike look to your leadership to help keep the city from experiencing an economic shock that will be difficult to recover from. In the short term, real estate agents are reporting cancelled escrows, as well as angry buyers that recently purchased into our community, that are suddenly faced with the prospect that their home can no longer be used for the purpose they intended. Certainly there is a better way? We urge the City Council to get serious about enforcement, but to save residents home values by voting NO to any current or future moratorium or ban on short term rentals.

One-sided committees can be devastating and should not be allowed under any circumstances.

I am tired of a do nothing congress getting benefits that most of us could only dream about, then refusing to do the jobs they were elected to do. I think it is a shame that our political system, once lauded as the World's Greatest....has become a laughing stock. No wonder terrorists see us as weak, we won't even work together...and the blame falls squarely at the feet of the obstructionists...NO WORK = NO PAY

I want my brother's case reviewed and my brother, Michael S. Hunter, pardoned and released.

We, the residents of Wesley Hills, are aggravated and concerned with the proposed Crown Castle DAS node installations, which we see as problematic on numerous levels.

Support out leaders.

This is just good information for our leader to have. I would think he is the only one that should see this. I hope that will be respected.

In order to guarantee that criminals, domestic abusers, the dangerously mentally ill and others are denied unchecked access to guns, the State of Florida should enact a law requiring verified comprehensive background checks on all sales of firearms. To date, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) has prevented more than two million convicted felons and other dangerous individuals from buying guns. Unfortunately, current federal law requires criminal background checks only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which account for just 60% of all gun sales in the United States. Further, this amendment nullifies the 'default proceed' rule which states a firearm purchase can proceed if not performed in three days by requiring a verified background check. This rule allowed 3,722 gun sales to prohibited persons in 2012.

We as a Nation America must bring to an end all types of racial ignorance. I have been attacked because of Trump's racist remarks about Latino Americans. I fear being killed. Many are acting on Trump's hatred across America. Donald Trump's "Hatred Spew" on Twitter daily must be banned along with him. We are sick of reading his daily "Hate Tweets," which the media pushes daily for rating and dollars. Enough is Enough! We DEMAND that Donald Trump and his Hatred Spew be BANNED from Twitter NOW! Please take a stand - help end hatred. Are you in? Sign the petition if you are sick of Donald Trump's Racism in your Nation. I fear that Trump hatred will get me and others killed. Racism kills.

The Department of Defense (DOD) has identified climate change as an "urgent and growing threat to our national security, contributing to increased natural disasters, refugee flows, and conflicts over basic resources (like water)." To help prepare for the growing threat of climate change, the DOD adopted a "climate change adaptation and resilience" directive earlier this year. Top officials were assigned jobs of determining how climate change should shape everything from weapons acquisition to personnel training. But House Republicans just passed an amendment to the defense spending bill that prohibits the DOD from spending money on its climate programs. Andrew Holland, who works at the American Security Project, said, "It's actually crazy to me, and it should be crazy to anyone in the military, that Congress is telling them not to do this." (1) In addition to climate planning, the DOD has been leading clean energy research and deployment, in order to reduce the need to go to war for fossil fuels, to save lives lost while transporting fuel for battlefield operations, and to help prevent climate chaos. Given the high costs--in lives, dollars and climate instability--of fossil fuel dependence, the military’s climate and clean energy programs should enjoy strong bipartisan support, not ideological opposition rooted in climate denial. The U.S. Senate maintained funding for the DOD climate directive in its defense spending bill. Senators on the conference committee reconciling the Senate and House bills can remove the anti-climate action amendment from the final legislation.  Please sign the petition to tell senators to reject the short-sighted, "crazy" House legislation that would stop the DOD’s new climate change program. (1) http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/06/republicans-trying-to-stop-pentagon-climate-plan-000149#ixzz4D6Dc1WRo

The Democratic Platform drafting committee rejected amendments to oppose the TPP agreement [1] and to oppose the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. [2] The TPP is opposed by Secretary Clinton, Senator Sanders, the overwhelming majority of House Democrats, the labor movement, the climate justice movement, and groups concerned about access to essential medicines. The Sanders campaign and the pro-peace, pro-Israel lobby J Street [3] had asked the drafting committee to oppose settlement construction and expansion in the West Bank, which are a key obstacle to a diplomatic resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict. On Friday, the Obama Administration called on the Israeli government to stop expanding settlements in the West Bank. [4] In Orlando on July 8-9, the full platform committee will consider these issues again. [5] Urge the Democratic Platform Committee to oppose the TPP and to oppose settlement expansion in the West Bank by signing our petition. References: 1. https://www.thenation.com/article/the-democrats-draft-platform-doesnt-oppose-tpp-thats-bad-policy-and-bad-politics/ 2. http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.727025 3. http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000155-179d-dad1-a777-3f9dee560002 4. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-israel-palestinians-quartet-idUSKCN0ZH3QI 5. https://demconvention.com/platform/

Dear Mr. Schultz, As the largest coffee vendor in the world, Starbucks could be leading efforts to reduce waste in the food industry. You say you "are working to shrink [your] environmental footprint and meet the expectations of [your] customers by reducing the waste associated with [your] business, increasing recycling and promoting reusable cups," yet your company's routine practices suggest otherwise. Though you sell reusable cups and give a discount to customers who use them, I've seen no active promotion of this reward system in the many Starbucks I have visited. I've also discovered that bringing one's own cup is no guarantee that a disposable cup won't get wasted in the process. Your website claims that you "have learned that widespread behavior change is unlikely to be driven by one company alone" and that you "will continue to explore new ways to reduce [your] cup waste but ultimately it will be [the] customers who control whether or not [you] achieve continued growth in the number of beverages served in reusable cups." My own efforts to get you to address the waste inherent in your drip coffee system suggests that this claim is disingenuous. Customers like me, who order decaf in a large travel mug (even one purchased at Starbucks), have noticed that it is routine practice to use a disposable paper cup to catch the coffee before transferring it to a travel mug. Several efforts to head off this practice when I order have proven useless. I've also visited some franchises that sell travel mugs, but won't even sell you coffee in a reusable container. They say it's the law, yet another franchise 20 miles up the road makes no such claim. After three attempts over the last two years to get your company to address these relatively minor concerns, with absolutely no sign of progress, I have come to seriously doubt Starbucks' sincerity regarding waste reduction. Since I believe that Starbucks has the capacity make a real difference, I feel it's time to ask other Starbucks customers to let you know that this is not OK with them either. A company that earns $20 billion a year while adding 4 billion cups to the global waste stream could be doing a lot more to promote reuse, yet I see no evidence that you are interested in addressing even relatively small problems that would actually save you money. So, how can I expect more substantive measures, like offering real cups to those who aren't taking the coffee out in ALL franchises? You should be ashamed. I'm asking anyone who believes that waste reduction is everyone's responsibility to do the following until we see some sign that Starbucks is really listening: 1)Sign this petition to ask Starbucks to renew its commitment to promoting reuse both within its company and within its industry. 2) Share this message with friends and family. 3) Frequent locally owned coffee shops that serve coffee in real cups on premises and promote the use of reusable containers. If we don't lead the charge to stop letting convenience trump common sense, who will? Starbucks could be very influential in leading this effort, but first you have to commit to eliminating systemic waste and actively promote reuse. Can you hear me now? I hope so, because I really do like your coffee! Sincerely, Pat Blakeslee Advocate for Zero Waste