Petition Tag - budget

On July 13, 2003, at 10:34 p.m., Palo
Alto Police Department (PAPD) rookie
Craig Lee drove his police car up to
59-year-old Albert Hopkins, who was
sitting in his parked car on Oxford
Avenue near the intersection of the El
Camino Real in Palo Alto. Lee asked
Mr. Hopkins for identification. Mr.
Hopkins did not initially give his
name, but later confirmed his identity
and his Palo Alto address.

When PAPD rookie Michael Kan stopped
his police car nearby, Lee spoke to
Kan. Kan walked over and ordered Mr.
Hopkins out of his car, and tried to
pull him out. Kan and Lee repeatedly
hit Mr. Hopkins with their batons,
while Mr. Hopkins tried to ward off
blows. Kan and Lee also doused him
extensively with pepper spray. Mr.
Hopkins was overcome, temporarily
blinded, handcuffed, and transported
to the hospital where he was treated
for body injuries, and a swelling near
his eye.

PAPD launched an immediate
investigation, which culminated in Kan
and Lee being charged with felony
assault and misdemeanor battery by a
Peace Officer. During the criminal
trial, all of the senior officers
that arrived on the scene that night
testified that they were concerned
that Kan and Lee could not provide a
reason for arresting Mr. Hopkins, and
so there seemed to be no justification
for use of force.

Presented with a strong case against
the two rookies, 8 jurors were certain
Kan and Lee were guilty: a 2-1 margin
favoring conviction. Despite all this,
Kan and Lee are being returned to
their jobs (after a plea deal let them
off with a mere $250 fine), and we are
told: "it's time to put it to rest and
move on".

We say there can be no rest until our
leaders realize it's time for Kan and
Lee to move on.

This petition arises not from malice
but the desire to safeguard the
community, as we strongly believe:

1. They are not fit for the job. As a
result of their beating of Albert
Hopkins on July 13 2003, and despite
the shocking deal that drastically
reduced the charges, the fact remains
that Officers Kan and Lee each pleaded
'no contest' to a criminal charge of
an act of illegal public violence
while on duty.

Yet, we have not seen Officers Kan and
Lee publicly take responsibility for
their misconduct. Instead, their court
testimony blamed the victim of their
criminal violence - who was not
arrested for any crime - while
belittling the response of their
supervisors that night. Does this
behavior reflect the discipline and
respect for the law that is
fundamentally required of law
enforcement officers? Or does it
indicate a profound employment
mismatch - that cannot be overcome
with any amount of retraining?

2. They cannot serve the interests of
the Palo Alto community. As reflected
in our budget, the safety of the
community is Palo Alto's highest
priority. As the locus of Silicon
Valley and home of Stanford
University, Palo Alto's community
includes guests welcomed from around
the world, that expect and are
entitled to the universal human right
and Constitutional protection) of
freedom from arbitrary arrest or
detention and unreasonable use of
force.

Given its profound authority, our
police force must not include those
who trample the rights of those they
serve, while rejecting the good
judgment of those they serve under.

3. Continuing their employment poses
unacceptable risks. Studies on police
misconduct, such as the Christopher
Commission report (an examination of
LAPD four months after the King
beating), have found that the heart of
the problem is failure to act upon the
few officers using excessive force.
Those officers frequently then go on
to become repeat offenders, who are
responsible for many of the cases that
cost the city in civil suits.

Palo Alto has already paid a $250,000
settlement for Kan and Lee's use of
force. How much would a jury penalize
the city in the next claim that may
result from their use of force, given
that the city was aware of the risk
and chose to ignore it? With budget
revenue rapidly shrinking, how are
such expenses justified?

Therefore, we call on the City Manager
to immediately take this step toward
freeing Palo Alto from the risks and
stigma of brutal injustice that we
believe Officers Kan and Lee's tenure
here has brought us, and begin
restoring Palo Alto as a community
united in its concern for public
safety and human rights.

View petition

The only State Budget that is decided and voted on by the people is the School Budget. Tax increases occur all the time to support all other areas of New York State run "businesses", without a vote from the people.

The one and only budget that supports children and their education is the School Budget and this is voted on by the people and can be rejected. This is discriminatory and unconstitutional!

Children have a constitutional right to a strong, appropriate, and free education, yet if a School Budget fails they lose. Prisoners have more rights than children. We do not vote on a budget that supplies prisoners with the supplies they need and they broke the law. Prisoners are guilty of a crime and are paying the price based on our law of the land. But what price are we paying? What price are the children paying? Why are the innocent children and future of this State paying a higher price than the lawbreakers? Why is the law unfair and discriminatory?

This needs to stop now! The State Legislators need to find a formula that provides schools the appropriate funding that is necessary to perform the duties the State mandates. These monies should be incorporated in our taxes just like all other areas of State budgets and funding, for example, prisoner's supplies.

We need immediate action as this is becoming a detriment to our children and their future and the future of the State of New York.

View petition

In May 2005, the Australian Federal Treasurer delivered a Budget that included a package of tax cuts unfairly skewed towards the wealthy.

This petition has been composed to record people's dissent and dissatisfaction with the proposed regime of tax cuts.

With thanks to Andrew Leigh for permitting the use of some of his previously published commentary in the text of the petition.

View petition

Alaska hosts one of America's last remaining wilderness areas, ANWR. This 19-million-acre refuge was set aside for protection by President Eisenhower in 1960, but Congress in 1980 said its 1.5 million acre coastal plain could be opened to oil development if Congress specifically authorizes it. Recently, the Senate, by a 51-49 vote, rejected an attempt by Democrats and GOP moderates to remove a refuge drilling provision from next year's budget, preventing opponents from using a filibuster -- a tactic that has blocked repeated past attempts to open the Alaska refuge to oil companies. The budget is immune from a filibuster, meaning drilling supporters will need only a majority --not the 60 votes required to break a filibuster -- to succeed when the issue comes up for final action later this year. President Bush has deemed the issue vital to national security.

However, the United States' continual reliance on foreign oil is believed to be linked with global climate change and other environmental hazards. Environmentalists contend that while new technologies have reduced the drilling footprint, ANWR's coastal plain still would contain a spider web of pipelines that would disrupt calving caribou and disturb polar bears, musk oxen and the annual influx of millions of migratory birds.

What's more, speculations are that the United States will not reap the benefits from drilling for another decade, and only at a minimal rate of 1 million barrels a day (1/20th of current US daily consumption) at peak drilling. Relying on middle eastern oil is also a pertinent national threat. We believe more resources should be placed in renewable energy instead of reliance on coal, oil, and natural gas supplies.

We urge Senator Dole and Senator Burr to reconsider their stance on drilling in the Alaskan Refuge.

View petition

I have seen the National Park service decreasing the budget. The public is losing service and protection it deserves due to the budget cuts.

View petition

Mississippi is voting to cut the education budget by $16 million. As we are number number one in illiteracy, highschool drop-outs and teen pregnancy in the country, how can the government consider trying to cut education?
The State Superintendent of Education, Dr. Henry Johnson states "In order to move Mississippi forward, education must be our first priortity. Today's children are the workforce and leaders of tomorrow."

View petition

The purpose of this petition is to have appointed Sheriff Jim Wilson immediately removed from office and allow the citizens choice of Sheriff to take immediate command of the Sheriff's Department. The department is in turmoil. Frivolous spending, very low morale, intimidation of employees, irresponsible changes and the 2005 budget are the main concerns.

Jim Wilson must be removed immediately to allow the newly elected Sheriff the opportunity to create the budget he will administer, not one created by Jim Wilson who does not have the communities best interest at heart. Jim Wilson states he is a public servant. If he is a true public servant, he will serve his public's desires of him not being in office and the new Sheriff installed. Jim Wilson can not offer any valid justification for remaining in office until January. It is strictly personal for Jim and not for the good of Williamson County. Jim must be removed immediately in order to prevent his further destruction of the Sheriff's Department, leaving a complete mess for the elected Sheriff to clean up. Please join us in sending a strong message to our County Judge, Commissioners and Jim Wilson.

View petition

After 3 succesful straight to video sequels, give Wishmaster 5 a decent budget to compete with the likes of Jason & Freddy and keep Chris Angel as the director and no friggin angel subplots either!!!!!!

View petition

"[Is there] going to be a raise? Do lions eat meat?" Stephen Joel Trachtenberg

Petition against The George Washington University (GW) increasing tuition.

It's time to take a stand. On February 24, 2003, the GW Hatchet announced a tuition increase will be voted on by the Board of Trustees this Friday. This comes on the heels of last year's 4.9% rise in tuition. The administration's nonchalant attitude towards tuition hikes is unacceptable. However, until we, the students of GW, make our displeasure known this is the kind of treatment we can expect. Join a mass assembly of students as we make a public demonstration of our opposition to the economical burdens being put on us by the administration's lack of fiscal prudence. We ask the administration to re-examine a budget which includes multiple costly expansionist projects and extravagant spending on programs like Colonial Inauguration (CI) and Parent's Weekend before they choose to further increase our tuition.

On Wednesday, February 26, 2003, we will protest in Kogan Plaza and J Street. Please participate and take a stand by signing this petition.

View petition

Whereas, the District of Columbia government is currently in the process of awarding a new contract to manage the city's animal control and animal shelter efforts.

Whereas, the last time the city undertook this process, five years ago, the contract was initially awarded to an underqualified, inexperienced, and poorly funded organization.

Whereas, just four months later, the shelter was in chaos, the animals' living areas were filthy, and the adoptions program was in total disarray.

Whereas, at the time, dogs and cats were packed in overcrowded conditions and left in cages covered with their own waste, often with little or no food, while sick and injured animals sometimes went for days without treatment.

Whereas, only after a series of news stories uncovered the horrific conditions there and the D.C. Council held a hearing on the issue was a new contract awarded to the Washington Humane Society, the group that currently manages both programs.

Whereas, it appears that a similar process is unfolding this year, and that the contract may once again be awarded to an organization that does not have the experience, qualifications, or financial stability to fulfill its mission in aiding and protecting the animals and people of the city.

Whereas, the city's budget process has left this year's contract vastly underfunded.

Whereas, the DC animal control and shelter programs cost roughly $1.3 million to run in the current fiscal year, yet the city's budget for next year only allocates $700,000 for both programs.

Whereas, the average amount spent on animal control in 16 comparable U.S. cities is $2.62 per resident per year, yet the District would be spending less than half that amount -- only $1.22 per person. (source: National Animal Control Association)

Whereas, it would clearly be difficult, if not impossible, for any organization to provide the animal control and shelter services the people and animals of D.C. deserve for the amount budgeted by the city.

Whereas, dozens of prominent animal welfare and pet support organizations have joined together in the Coalition for the D.C. Animal Shelter to fight for the city's animal shelter and control contract to be fully funded and awarded to a qualified group.

Whereas, the goal of the Coalition is not to advocate or promote the merits of any particular humane organization in the contract process, only to ensure that the contract is fully funded and fairly awarded to a qualified organization.

Whereas, the Coalition believes that any organization hired to run the shelter and animal control needs to be experienced in law enforcement, have a track record in shelter management and be financially stable.

View petition