A 40-Year Industrial Power Plant
The planning application ZD25/00369/FULL seeks to build a 22.5MW ground-mounted solar farm on agricultural land between Tunstall and East Appleton. This is not a temporary diversification. It is the 40-year industrialisation of our countryside, proposed by a developer with a precarious financial history and based on the same false promises of "biodiversity net gain" that were broken at the adjacent site.
Final Written Objection Deadline: 30th October 2026
⚠️ North Yorkshire Council will consider further written comments before making their final decision.
Statutory site notices invite public representations on the applicant's revised autumn filings (Docs 1981746–1981758).
Once the Council determines the application, only the applicant has a statutory right to appeal. We must defeat this scheme now before it reaches the Strategic Planning Committee.
⚖️ Procedural Truth: Why You Must Re-Object:
- ✓ Your past objection is NOT cancelled: All 130+ previous representations remain legally valid on the statutory file and count towards the official total.
- ⚠️ The Developer's Silence Trap: The applicant deposited new autumn plans specifically to argue: "We have resolved community concerns." If we stay silent, planners can report to the committee that their new mitigations went uncontested.
- ⚡ Why Your Supplementary Email Is Decisive: An updated email puts on the record that the community has scrutinized their revised papers and confirms they fail to solve the 36 weeks of road gridlock, the unreinforced grid curtailment, and flood risks.
Listen: The Tunstall Solar Investigations
The 6-Minute Emergency Action Summary
A high-impact breakdown for neighbours: why all previous objections remain valid, how the Richmondshire Local Plan (CP2, CP3, CP4, CP12) legally shields our community, 36 weeks of road gridlock, and how to submit your updated objection before October 30th.
Why Tunstall Solar Cannot Deliver Power
An investigative masterclass dissecting breaking national news (The Guardian's £505M monthly grid balancing crisis), Enviromena's unreinforced ANM contract (Docs 1981746/1981757), the 2039 transmission queue, fire entrapment, and the waterproof clay deadlock.
Audio briefings generated via Google's Gemini 'Notebook' 'Audio Overview' technology via forensic analysis of statutory planning filings, consultee reports, national energy datasets, and the adopted Richmondshire Local Plan.
The Grid Balancing Scandal: Why Tunstall Solar is a Private Profit, Public Burden Scheme
National news has exposed how unreinforced renewable connections are draining billions from consumer energy bills. Tunstall Solar Farm plugs directly into this broken system.
£505M In a Single Month
The Guardian revealed that grid balancing costs hit an all-time record of £505 million in September 2026, peaking at £47.9 million in just 24 hours. The grid operator is forced to pay billions to shut down renewables behind congested wires, while paying gas plants elsewhere to fire up.
The Unreinforced "ANM" Deal
The developer deposited Northern Powergrid papers (Docs 1981746 & 1981757). They reveal an unreinforced Active Network Management (ANM) connection, chosen specifically to "avoid the cost of reinforcing the Distribution System." NPg has the legal right to remotely shut off (curtail) electricity export whenever the network is full.
Frozen Behind Leeming Bar
Why will Tunstall face chronic curtailment? Because official data from the NESO Register (Row 2119) proves bulk transmission capacity around Leeming Bar and Norton is saturated and locked until 2039. Generating power that cannot move to consumers delivers no real decarbonisation benefit.
The Bottom Line for Councillors & Taxpayers:
The developer asks North Yorkshire Council to sacrifice 80 acres of farmland, endure 36 weeks of traffic signals on Catterick Lane, and accept severe flood and amenity harms in exchange for "clean energy public benefits." But with generation curtailed behind a congested substation and locked until 2039, the public receives a throttled, speculative energy return, billpayers pick up the tab for grid balancing, and our community suffers 100% continuous, permanent countryside loss.
Will Tunstall Solar Lower Your Energy Bills? The Evidence Says No.
The developer claims "clean energy public benefits" to justify industrialising 80 acres of farmland. But in the middle of a national cost-of-living crisis, adding unreinforced, curtailed solar behind congested infrastructure actively inflates network costs for consumers.
RECONSULTATION LIVE
Final Written Objection Expiry: October 30th 2026
Total Consulted: 73
Comments: 131
The Community Voice
The community has spoken with a united voice. Crucially, this opposition is driven by the residents most severely affected.
Local Impact Breakdown
- Tunstall Village (Nearest) 23+
- West Appleton (Nearest) 9
- Surrounding Villages 14
- Total Immediate Area 46
Includes East/West Appleton, Hackforth, Hornby & Catterick.
Commercial Interests
Analysis of Support
- Landowners (Beneficiaries) 2
- Construction Co. (Beneficiaries) 3
- GSC Grays Agents 4
- Independent Locals 4
Note: GSC Grays act as agents for landowners with a proven track record of promoting solar developments.
"Genuine community support is statistically negligible."
What they are hiding in the new documents
Enviromena's Autumn 2026 updates are a smoke screen. Here are the material facts:
Construction Noise: ZERO Data
The updated Noise Assessment (Doc 1967094) admits a +16dB breach in operation but fails to assess construction/piling noise entirely. Under NPPF Para 191, the Council cannot determine the impact on health without this data.
Viewpoint Obfuscation
The developer's Landscape and Visual Appraisal (Doc 1981755) now concedes Moderate-Major Adverse visual effects on public rights of way and the setting of the scheduled Bronze Age round barrows (Viewpoints 1, 3, 4, 5, 7).
The "Skylark Squeeze"
The Skylark Mitigation Plan (Doc 1968583) is internally inconsistent. They claim to support 10 territories but provide only 12 tiny 5x5m plots in a field overlooked by hawk-perches (the Tumulus). This is an ecological death trap.
The Curtailed ANM Trap
The developer deposited Northern Powergrid papers (Docs 1981746 & 1981757) confirming an unreinforced Active Network Management (ANM) contract where output will be routinely throttled. Behind upstream bottlenecks (NESO 2039), this benefit is purely speculative.
Concrete-Grade Clay
The applicant’s permeability test (Borehole DS106) confirms impermeable clay at 1.04 × 10⁻⁹ m/s permeability. Swales cannot infiltrate. If water sits on site, it breaches RAF Leeming's 48-hour aerodrome dry-down rule. If discharged, it funnels down-gradient as surface flooding.
Misapplication of Policy (Doc 1981758)
The applicant claims the August 2026 NPPF update invalidates adopted Richmondshire Local Plan protections. Under Section 38(6) of the Planning Act 2004, the statutory Development Plan retains primacy. National renewable policies do not grant a license to cause unmitigated local harms.
Why UK Planning Inspectors Dismiss Identical Solar Schemes
Planning committees often fear refusing solar developments due to appeal risks. However, formal appeal decisions prove that Inspectors routinely dismiss applications that breach the exact statutory thresholds evident at Tunstall:
Badger Sett Disturbance
The PEA (Doc 1967085) admits badger setts are on/near the site. Industrial trenching and piling will cause disturbance, yet the Applicant has provided no enforceable triggers to stop works if sets are breached.
The UK is Watching
People from across the region and country are signing our petition to stop the industrialisation of prime North Yorkshire farmland.
Terence
Chelmsford • 3 weeks ago
"If we keep covering all of our arable land with solar panels there will be no place to grow food crops... also with the short life of most panels there will then be the problem of disposal."
Stephen
Leicester • 2 weeks ago
"Why are these Solar farms being built? One word: Greed... This government needs to invest in locally produced electricity."
S. (Supporter)
Derby • 2 weeks ago
"The UK as a whole is now drowning in solar panels - villages are being surrounded... there will be nothing ‘green’ about importing food because we can’t grow any!"
Takes 30 seconds. Join 1437+ others.
The 8 Reasons It Must Be Stopped
You don't need to be a planning expert to see why this application is flawed. Click any card below to load that issue into your objection letter.
THE GRID REALITY: Curtailed Generation & The 2039 Bottleneck
"A project that can connect locally, but will be routinely throttled off the system."
In response to our campaign, the developer deposited Northern Powergrid distribution papers (Docs 1981746 & 1981757). However, this reveals a major compromise: it is an Active Network Management (ANM) connection.
Northern Powergrid explicitly states this arrangement was chosen to "avoid the cost of reinforcing the Distribution System" by giving them the contractual right to constrain and shut off (curtail) export capacity whenever the network is full.
Official data from the NESO (National Energy System Operator) register confirms why this matters: bulk upstream transmission reinforcement in this area (Leeming Bar / Norton) is not scheduled until 2039 (Row 2119).
FAILED POLICY BALANCE (NPPF & EN-1 / EN-3):
The applicant claims "substantial public clean energy benefits" to justify industrialising 80 acres of farmland. However:
- Local harms (landscape ruin, 36 weeks of road gridlock, flood runoff) are 100% continuous and unconstrained.
- Their claimed generation benefits are heavily compromised and curtailed behind a congested network.
The Grid Reality Checklist STATUS
National & Regional Media Coverage
The press are waking up to the scale of the crisis in North Yorkshire. Independent investigations validate our concerns about food security and landscape industrialisation.
"Food Shortage Concerns"
A major report highlights the risk to Best and Most Versatile (BMV) farmland raised by Tunstall Parish Council.
"Critics argue that taking such productive land out of use undermines the country’s ability to feed itself... North Yorkshire is bearing the brunt of solar industrialisation."
The article reinforces our objection that the cumulative loss of agricultural land in this specific area is unsustainable.
"Smothered with Solar Panels"
An investigation into the 300+ solar applications threatening to change the character of the county forever.
"Residents feel like 'prisoners in their own homes'... blaming a lack of government protection for food security as an 'unforgivable omission'."
Highlights the "salami-slicing" of the countryside and the feeling that communities are powerless against big firms.
"Controversial" Plans for a "Third" Farm
The Darlington & Stockton Times highlighted growing community concern, branding the scheme controversial and noting this is the third large solar farm proposed for the immediate area.
THIS IS NOT A STANDALONE SITE. IT'S PIECEMEAL INDUSTRIALISATION.
This Isn't Just Farmland, It's Our Heritage
The developer's reports fail to address how this industrial site will destroy the historic setting of our community's oldest properties. Public records show Low Pasture and Hollin Farm were integral parts of the historic Hornby Castle Estate.
The exceptional, unspoilt vista from the public footpath today.
The 1930 Hornby Castle Estate sale map, identifying the properties.
The 1930 sale document proving the historic rights of Low Pasture.
National planning policy mandates the conservation of non-designated heritage assets and their rural settings. Siting an industrial power station here permanently shatters this historic landscape.
THE APPLICANT IS IGNORING LOCAL HISTORY.
Read the Conservation Officer's Report → | See the 1930 Estate Document →
The National Picture: Why This Fight Matters
This is not just a local issue. A report from CPRE (Campaign to Protect Rural England) highlights the nationwide threat:
1. It's an Industrial Power Plant
The developer uses "green" language, but CPRE is clear: "These are not ‘farms’, they are industrial-scale power stations... surrounded by high-security fencing, CCTV, and floodlighting."
2. There is a Better Way (Brownfield First)
CPRE argues we must prioritize commercial rooftops, warehouses, and brownfield assets rather than destroying productive countryside.
3. It's a Food Security Crisis
As a nation dependent on imported food, sacrificing high-yielding agricultural acreage directly harms national resilience.
4. The Planning Balance Must Be Defended
Only consistent, documented public objections hold the planning committee to account in upholding its own statutory local policies.
The True Cost: "Middle of an Industrial Site"
This BBC Look North report shows the devastating personal impact of large-scale solar installations on rural families and nearby communities.
Fenced-in public rights of way and security barriers degrade tranquil rural settings into industrial compounds.
Impact: Noise & Disruption
Video footage from nearby Skeeby Solar Farm shows the harsh reality communities face: continuous percussive piling noise during construction and constant heavy HGV traffic.
The developer failed to model piling noise at Tunstall, a critical failure flagged by the Council's Environmental Protection officer.
Impact: Our Bronze Age Heritage
The Bronze Age burial mound (tumulus) known as Milky Hill is a nationally designated scheduled monument in our parish.
Historic England continues to raise grave concerns regarding the erosion of its open ceremonial setting and expansive landscape views.
Impact: Loss of Wildlife Habitat
These open arable fields provide foraging and resting grounds for visiting geese and nesting habitat for Red-List Curlews and Skylarks.
Covering this site in panels and predator-flanked mitigation traps violates Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006.
Proof: Council Misled on Grid Capacity
Official proceedings of the NYC Strategic Planning Committee approving the Brompton-on-Swale solar farm confirm planners were advised Leeming Bar was at full capacity.
At 50:01, Councillors noted the grid was at capacity, assuming that capped cumulative harm. Attempting to add this Tunstall scheme proves the network is oversaturated.
Detailed Reasons to Object
A comprehensive, policy-grounded breakdown of the fatal defects in Application ZD25/00369/FULL.
1. The Curtailed Grid Reality (ANM Connection)
The applicant has deposited Northern Powergrid documentation confirming an altered 22MW offer (Docs 1981746 & 1981757). However, this is an Active Network Management (ANM) contract. Northern Powergrid explicitly warns this was selected to "avoid the cost of reinforcing the Distribution System" by granting them the contractual right to routinely constrain and throttle export capacity. Compounded by bulk transmission bottlenecks (NESO 2039, Row 2119), this facility will face chronic daytime curtailment, severely undermining its claimed public benefits.
2. Council Confirms: 'Unacceptable Noise'
North Yorkshire Council Environmental Protection confirms operational sound (+12dB to +16dB over quiet rural baseline) is "unlikely to be acceptable", constituting a BS 4142 Significant Adverse Impact (SOAEL). Furthermore, the applicant completely failed to provide construction and percussive piling noise assessments for driving thousands of steel piles into dense glacial till, violating NPPF residential amenity and human health protections.
3. Grid Overload & Substation Saturation
The developer claims local "grid capacity" justifies industrialising this agricultural tract. This is refuted by Northern Powergrid data proving the Leeming Bar bulk substation is saturated and requires major switchgear replacement. The Council cannot accept further unreinforced speculative connections when large-scale storage facilities (49.9MW Brompton BESS approved; 57MW Scruton BESS accepted) already saturate the local network.
4. Cumulative Impact & Industrial Clustering
This 80-acre development directly abuts two existing operational solar installations (Stripe Solar & East Appleton Solar, 2016). Siting a third scheme creates an unbroken 34MW industrial utility corridor across the rural Moors Fringe (LCA B16). The developer’s own landscape architect (Doc 1981755, Section 7) formally concedes that from public bridleways, all three schemes will be visible simultaneously, representing a major cumulative visual harm.
5. Heritage Harm & Historic England Stance
Historic England has raised severe concerns regarding permanent, irreversible harm to the open rural setting of the nationally designated Bronze Age Scheduled Round Barrows (including Milky Hill). Industrialising their immediate ceremonial landscape setting violates statutory preservation tests under the Planning Act and NPPF, which mandate that 'great weight' be given to conserving designated heritage assets.
6. 36 Weeks of Highway Gridlock
Following police rejection of their earlier unenforceable speed limit proposal, the developer now admits they require 36 weeks (9 months) of continuous 3-way temporary traffic lights on Catterick Lane (Doc 1967461). Heavy multi-axle HGV turning manoeuvres and persistent tailbacks will disrupt agricultural vehicles, local school transit, emergency services, and nearby thoroughbred racehorse training operations (Philip Kirby Racing).
7. Loss of BMV Land (Misrepresentation)
The developer claims this site is poor-quality land. This directly contradicts the certified Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) Report conducted on the immediately adjacent field (Ref: 15/00448/FULL, Doc 1138168).
That independent survey proved that 29–33% is Grade 3a (Best and Most Versatile) land. Soil classification does not stop at a fence line. The applicant's desktop assertion that the site is entirely non-BMV is an unsupported misrepresentation contrary to Written Ministerial Statement HCWS466.
8. A 'Trojan Horse' Phased Application
The current layout deliberately excludes a northern land parcel (closer to Tunstall village) where the developer has a commercial overage obligation with North Yorkshire Council. The applicant’s initial environmental baselines cover this wider area, indicating an intention to bring forward a secondary phase once initial permissions are secured, artificially salami-slicing the project to mask its true cumulative footprint.
9. Compromised Environmental Screening
During initial screening (ZD24/00527/EIASCR), statutory bodies noted baseline information was insufficient. Proceeding without requiring a comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has left severe omissions regarding hydrogeology, cumulative glint and glare for aviation, and construction vibration impacts that cannot lawfully be deferred to after planning consent is granted.
10. Harm to Residential Living Conditions
The scheme concentrates 40 years of heavy industrial operations (inverter whine, transformer hum, perimeter security fencing, and pole-mounted CCTV) into the immediate curtilage of neighbouring residential dwellings. This severely impairs the peaceful enjoyment of domestic properties, contrary to NPPF policies requiring development to secure a high standard of amenity for existing occupants.
11. Ecological Failure: The 'Skylark Trap'
Surveys confirm 10 active breeding pairs of Red-Listed Skylarks across these open arable fields. The applicant proposes cramming compensation plots into a single field beneath a mature pine treeline and the elevated Tumulus. Mature trees provide direct hunting perches for raptors and corvids, creating a lethal 'predator sink' that violates Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.
12. Corporate Instability & Decommissioning Risk
The applicant group operates via special purpose project vehicles with dormant balance sheets, while associated entities next door have experienced company dissolution. Relying on an unenforceable planning condition for site clearance 40 years down the line is unacceptable; an independently underwritten restoration escrow bond must be legally secured up-front to protect the community.
13. Drainage Impasse & RAF Leeming Safety
Geotechnical testing (Doc 1967170) confirms the site is underlain by impermeable clay with an in-situ conductivity of only 1.04 × 10−9 m/s. Sustainable drainage swales cannot infiltrate water into the ground. Holding standing water violates RAF Leeming aerodrome safeguarding rules (must drain dry within 48 hours to prevent birdstrike hazards), while discharging it channels dangerous surface run-off downslope.
14. Admitted 'Moderate-Major' Visual Harms
The applicant’s updated Landscape and Visual Appraisal (Doc 1981755, Rev P06) formally concedes "Moderate-Major Adverse" residual visual effects from multiple public rights of way and bridleways (Viewpoints 1, 3, 4, and 5). Enclosing 80 acres of open arable countryside with industrial metal fencing permanently degrades the expansive character of the Moors Fringe (LCA B16).
15. Failure to Prioritise Brownfield & Rooftops
Opposing this scheme is pro-smart-energy, not anti-renewables. National planning guidance establishes that ground-mounted installations should direct development toward previously developed land, commercial rooftops, and brownfield assets rather than taking productive agricultural countryside out of vital domestic food production.
16. Zero Local Economic Dividend
The operational facility creates no lasting local employment or rural enterprise benefits. Instead, it extracts economic value from the surrounding agricultural supply chain (feed merchants, agronomy, contractor labour) while routing revenues to distant institutional developers, leaving the local rural community to shoulder all the infrastructure burdens.
17. Statutory Primacy of the Local Plan
The developer’s latest planning addendum attempts to dismiss Richmondshire Local Plan policies (CP1, CP2, CP4, and CP12) as having 'limited weight' following national policy updates. Under Section 38(6) of the Planning Act 2004, the adopted statutory Development Plan retains full legal primacy. National energy targets do not override severe, unmitigated local environmental harms.
18. Fire Safety & Emergency Access Risks
The layout fails to comply with National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC) guidelines. The site provides no engineered perimeter hardstandings capable of supporting heavy emergency appliances over saturated clay tracks, and includes no dedicated static water storage for boundary cooling. An electrical transformer fire or rapid field wildfire poses severe entrapment and spread risks.
Important Documents & Evidence
Official Planning Application
View the full application (ZD25/00369/FULL), documents, and comments on the Council Planning Portal.
Go to Portal →National Planning Policy Framework (Dec 2024)
The Government's planning policies for England. Key paragraphs include 180 (cumulative impact), 191 (noise), and 135 (amenity).
Read the NPPF →Richmondshire Local Plan (2012–2028)
The statutory Development Plan for North Yorkshire Council (Richmond area). Under Section 38(6), this plan retains legal primacy. Key policies include CP12 (protecting landscape & heritage), CP4 (settlement limits & amenity), CP3 (protecting BMV farmland), and CP2 (cumulative renewable impact).
Download Local Plan Core Strategy (PDF) →Northern Powergrid ECR (Feb 2025)
Public grid register. Confirms Tunstall (22.5MW - Stripe Solar), Brompton BESS (49.9MW - GRID), Scruton BESS (57MW - Balance Power) & E.Appleton (4.5MW - Stripe Solar) connect to Leeming Bar.
Download the ECR File (.xlsx) →Grid Note - PROOF OF OVERLOAD
Proves the Leeming Bar substation is at capacity and requires a 'switchgear replacement' before new connections can be safely added.
Read the Grid Note →Scruton BESS FAQ (Fence Dike Ln)
Developer (Balance Power) FAQ confirming the 57MW Scruton BESS project connects to the Leeming Bar substation (Est. 2030).
Read the Scruton FAQ →Developer's Public Record (Stripe Solar)
Public Companies House records for Stripe Solar Ltd (08105442), listed in the ECR as customer for both the existing E.Appleton site and the proposed Tunstall site.
View Company Overview →View Filing History →
Historic England Objection
HE OBJECTS due to harm to Bronze Age Barrows, finding developer's assessment "insufficient".
Read Historic England's Letter →EIA Screening Report
Shows Historic England found info "insufficient" early on, yet Council decided no full EIA needed.
Read the Screening Report →Council Meeting Minutes (July 8, 2025)
Official minutes confirming the committee was incorrectly assured the grid connection would be "at capacity" after the Brompton application.
Read the Minutes →Developer's Initial (Wider Interest) Plan
This "early draft" layout was sent by the developer's PR team (Alpaca) to the Parish Council (Sept 2024). It shows their interest in a much larger area, including the northern 'overage' land, proving the current plan is 'salami-sliced'.
View the 'Alpaca' Plan →Developer's Present (Reduced) Plan
The final, submitted plan, which excludes the northern parcel—likely to avoid a payment to NYCC, which expires in 10 years.
View Current Plan →Highways Authority Concerns
NYC Highways reject applicant's HGV plan as unsafe, demanding passing places near Catterick Ln junction.
Read Highways Response →Developer Financials (Public Record)
Applicant's 2024 report (Companies House) showing £11.6M loss, £26.2M net liabilities, and DORMANT project company.
View Filing History →Developer Personnel Link (Anesco)
Press release showing Enviromena's CCO was Sales Director at Anesco (original developer of failed adjacent site) during its 2015 planning.
Read Press Release →Adjacent Site: The 2015 'Promise' (Condition 9)
The "Biodiversity Management Plan" was not just a suggestion; it was a formal, legally-binding Condition 9 of the original planning permission 15/00448/FULL. This is the plan that was later broken.
Read the 'Promise' (Biodiversity Plan) →Read the Granted Permission (See p.2) →
See all files for 15/00448/FULL →
Adjacent Site: Proof of Failure (2021)
A 2021 monitoring report for the adjacent site (15/00449/FULL) shows promises were broken: the Hazel Coppice 'southernmost row... died' (p.24).
Read the 2021 Failure Report →See all files for 15/00449/FULL →
Adjacent Site: Final Accounts (Public Record)
The 2022 accounts for East Appleton North Solar Ltd (adjacent site) from Companies House, filed before its dissolution.
View Filing History →Adjacent Site: Company Dissolution
The official Companies House Gazette Notice confirming the company for the failed adjacent site was DISSOLVED in April 2025.
View Filing History →CPRE Report: The Problem with Solar
Report from the Campaign to Protect Rural England on why industrial solar on farmland is the wrong choice.
Read the CPRE Report →National Food Security Policy
Official government and parliamentary statements (inc. HCWS466) establishing the policy to protect BMV land.
Read HCWS466 →Read GOV.UK Policy →
'Salami-Slicing' Article
Northern Echo article reporting on the Tunstall plans, questioning if the proposal is being "salami-sliced" to avoid scrutiny.
Read the Article →Green Pledges & Higher Bills
Guardian explains how green levies are set to increase energy bills for UK households - a major concern during the cost of living crisis.
Read the Article →Noise Impact Assessment
The developer's Noise Assessment (Nov 2025). Fails to model construction noise.
Read Noise Assessment →Design & Access Statement
Applicant's main planning document detailing the proposal and construction.
Read DAS →How To Object
The most effective way to object is by sending a formal email directly to the Planning Authority before 30th October 2026.
Alternatively, submit representations via the Council Public Access Portal.
You MUST PASTE (Ctrl+V or Long-Press Paste) this text into your email!
Step 2: Click to Open Email & Send to Council(Addressed to PlanEnquiries.ric@northyorks.gov.uk, Cc'ing Case Officer Jessica Harrison and campaign archive.)
Step 3: Support the National Petition
Sign the Petition (1,437+ Signatures)