Neualtenburg Constitution 2

The rough draft of the Neualtenburg Constitution has been posted. It incorporates most of the things we agreed upon. Also, I tossed in some new terminology and added a couple of new things to give us something to talk about.

Take your time going through it and we'll discuss any additions, deletions, and modifications you might have here.

~Ulrika~

Ulrika,

Looks good to me. My view, given the deadlines to get a proposal to LL, is that we need to get something in place ASAP. Then we can look at how it needs to be amended.

Thanks for your work on this.

.



I am against any secret voting period. Every meeting and vote needs to be posted with no changes.





I thought we agreed that the Artisinal branch would not hold a veto in any manner?




If an impeachment should happen I feel it would be in the best interest of each branch if when there is an impeachment question that the second in command or next highest ranking member take over the duties of said branch.






I disagree completely . canidates to the philosophical branch need to be confirmed with 2/3 vote by the RA period. The artisnal branch should have no say in the matter whatsoever. There is no reason to ammend later what should be in place now.






I disagree completely with the Artisinal branch having any impeachment power and having any veto. They should not be involved in calling emergency sessions either.



have a problem with this. Every citizen is bound by all of the above...SC can not hold themsedlves above the people it serves.

Aww excellent work, Ulrika! I actually feel sorry for you, you have "wasted away" all your weekend with the draft, instead of having some fun (RL or SL ). Speaking strictly for myself - I have been abnormally lazy in SL and only doing futile things, besides the event Saturday morning - I feel ashamed of myself

I agree with Catfart. Your proposal already sums up 1000+ posts or so, several discussions, and puts into place a reviewed and consistent document. Yes, there are probably several changes to propose, but we can have them sorted out after the first government is officially "ruling" the city.

So, here go my L$ 0.02...

Preamble:

- include a reference to both ToS and the Communityu Standards
- include a comment refering to the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights (ie. like "...and to uphold the Bill of Rights (which is based upon the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights),..."

I, 2. - The Representative Assembly Body

If there are 5 parties in the RA, will that mean that there will be 12 people in the RA (7 representative seats, 5 faction seats) or that out of those 7 representative seats, 5 have a double meaning (ie. they are representative seats and faction seats simultaneously), and 2 are "only" representative seats?

From your previous suggestions I would think that the latter is the case. Since it's not very clear, there should be something explaining that.

I, 7. - Powers of the RA

I think that the last item should be:

"- The leader of the RA sits as the leader of the Artisanal branch if the Philosophic branch seeks to impeach a member of the Artisanal branch."

I, 8. - Limits on the RA

LOL!!!! No institutionalised corrupt.... erm, lobbying??? Hahaha! Well, ok

II, 2. - Artisanal Collective Body

Add "citizens" after "participants".

Add "services", ie. "The AC is open to all participants provided they create goods and services for the city." Sorry to be picky As an event hoster, I always feel "left out" hehe (ah yes, by the Lindens as well, it's not just Neualtenburg... *sigh*)

III, 5. - Limitations of the AC

Does this mean that only the total yeas and nays are shown in the journal, or individual voting will be open to the public as well?

BTW, section 7 (Alternative Dispute Resolution) is great stuff! I really hope that Haney passes this idea to the rest of the staff at LL.

And I like the opening paragraph on section 8... but, wow, it's hot stuff, Ulrika, people will start to use Francis Chung's new flamethrower on us You see, it can be interpreted in different ways... like the ability of the SC to pronounce opinions "above the law". However, as I mentioned on another post commenting on Ace's proposal, there should always be a "checking body" that is slightly beyond "elected officials" to comment upon the "elected government". So I fully agree with that paragraph.

IV, 1. - Factions, Size

Include "All members have to be Neualtenburg citizens which should join a special SL group created for the sole purpose of running for seats in the RA.".

Proposal: "No Neualtenburg citizen is required to be part of a faction, and cannot be a member of more than one faction at the same time." (could be part of the body of laws and not the constitution)

Proposal: "Factions are lead by a Party Leader (SL group officer) who vouches for all members in public proceedings and is responsible for their proper ethical conduct." (could be part of the body of laws and not the constitution)

V, 1. - Voting Frequency

Proposal: Do not define the voting frequency here, but allow it to be part of the body of laws (just because there are very different opinions). Or have something vague like this:

"Officials in the Government are elected for a period of time according to the general principles of democratic rotativity to ensure proper representativity in a changing society, whose duration will be fixed by the RA by passing appropriate laws."

(the "staggering" should be a part of the constitution)

Mind you, this is just a suggestion, I also agree on the 3 months

V, 2. - Exclusivity

Typo: suppress "and the and Scientific Council" hehe

BTW, I miss the Burgermeister Shouldn't we have that mentioned in the Constitution as well?

Also, we need a section on Citizenship and how to implement it...

I think that's all for now...

I could look this up --but I'm fairly sure it was agreed that on matters of finance The AC would indeed have veto power.

Perhaps you could explain your need here to weaken the AC.

Talen, we have so many posts now, that I also may have missed one proposing the abolition of any veto powers, but, like Kendra, I thought we had agreed on the vetos.

However, originally, both the Guild and the University had "universal veto power" (ie. on all matters under discussion at the Rep. Assembly), and we suggested to lower these powers:

- the Art. Branch has veto power on the budget and all laws pertaining to finance
- the Phil. Branch has veto power on constitutional matters

I have once proposed that this veto power could be overruled by 2/3 of the full RA (as a double-check measure). However, I have not insisted much on this matter, and let the issue silently fade into the background I think we should start Neualtenburg with an "absolute veto" from the Art/Phil Branches, and, if the need arises, change the constitution accordingly.

I really believe that we need these vetos.

I don't fel the Artisinal branch should have any veto because they just shouldn't

I don't see the need for 2 seperate branches to hold veto over the RA ( see how I'm calling it the RA now instead of senate) If in fact the RA makes a law that goes against the Artisinal branch then the Philosophic branch is there to step in and veto.


I also forgot that I think the terms should be the full four months...three months makes no sense when in the scheme of things the city is run on a four month schedule.

Your reasoning here isn't good enough to justify crippling the AC. In your methodology the RA could ask the AC to build something for free --and the AC (which controls finance and taxes) would have to accept the invoice??

I'll make it easier on you --without AC Veto Power on financial matters -- the RA might as well just ask the AC to call for a complete work stoppage, because that would be the only recourse.

Posting a few comments now, though I'm sure I will have more.

I was under the impression that because of this:



Is why the Artisanal Branch can do this:



To me this makes sense. Either the Artisanal Collective has its role as our treasury and service provider, or it doesn't. If it is, then I see no reason why they could not have veto power when it comes to financial situations.

I have a question about this:



Who exactly would the AC go to with their impeachment proposal?


I also agree with Talen on this statement:

First of all the RA can't ask anything of the Artisinal branch that it doesn't want to do. Secondly the RA is about making laws not directing what the Artisinal branch does. Previously we discussed work stoppages in relation to veto power and to be honest you have more power there. Just the mere thought of a work stoppage will stop the RA from doing or trying to pass any laws that would be bad for the Artisinal branch.

I think the Artisinal branch should be approached and have financial issues disscussed before anything would be set forth but I don't see the need of a veto when the Phiosophical branch is the one that is supposed to judge the constitutionality and structure of any pending laws to begin with.

eh.. Those are good points too though. Hmmm.. I'm going to have to think on this some more. Right now I still lean towards what I posted above though.

When it comes down to it I see the Artisinal branch acting as the treasury and setting financial regulations such as taxes and permit fees. The RA shouldn't have need to try and make law regarding these issues unless the Artisinal branch gets out of control and tries to hike taxes up to 90% or something similar.

As in American Government the Senate doesn't set the interest rates.

In the U.S. system both the Executive and Judicial branch have mechanisms for overturning laws. The Executive can veto a law without any justification and the Judicial can overturn a law if it's unconstitutional.


I'd like to get in least two RA voting cycles in next lease. The first RA election won't be representative of a normal election, as the other branches will still be provisional at the time.

Additionally, we should find a sweet spot for election frequency in SL. If it's too short people might become annoyed with constant elections and not take the an elected government seriously, hoping to wait out their term. If it's too long, people might become bored with the process or frustrated waiting for change. So the question is, what is a good term limit to place on seats in the government for SL? Approach it from the perspective of the minority party and the citizen instead from the perspective of ruling party that wants to hold on to power as long as possible. Personally, I think three months is a pretty long time in SL. We managed to build an entire city!

~Ulrika~

I still believe four is the way to go...it directly correlates to our lease and we can see exactly what progress has been made for the good of the city by the elected representitives in that time.

This statement is very true but the Artisinal branch is neither executive nor judicial...thats the role of the Philosophical branch.

How is it decided which faction members will get a seat? Is a vote taken within the faction, or does a faction leader decide...?

I'm not quite sure I like this idea of 'hotswapping' representatives.

I thought I'd hit a couple of questions here, so this is for everyone not just Talen.

I modeled the Artisanal branch after the U.S. Executive branch. We should think of it as an equal to the other branches and give it powers accordingly. I still am a little bit unclear about how members excercise their will within the Artisanal branch when it comes to interacting with other branches. Also, is there a way to remove Meisters if they cease to contribute?

Also, I forgot about the Burgermeister! Would that person just be the leader of the RA or did you all have a different idea?

Lance, right now a faction can pull individuals in and out of the seats at will, however we could change that if you have another proposal. The reason this was done is to give emphasis to the party platform not the individual. If you read the General forum, you'll see that it is impossible for me to post on any subject without people bringing up the SDF or Neualtenburg. I'd like to provide politicians the ability to disappear within their factions such that the election issues don't become focused on individuals and their perceived qualities. Right now it is left up to the factions how to select members, although now that I think about that we should clearly define that process as well.

Finally, let's continue to discuss the length of terms for elected officials. I really like Gwyneth's idea of staggering the election times. Since we have three branches, that implies an election schedule based on integer multiples of three. It seems natural that a term should be three months. However, we could do four-month terms that had a quiet month in the middle where no elections took place.

I've since realized that factions need to vote (posted later and since added to the constitution) and should be inserted in this list right before the representative vote. It looks like a four month term might make sense.

Week
1
2
3 Artisanal Election
4

5
6
7 Philosophic Election
8

9
10
11 Factions
12

13
14
15 Representative Election
16

~Ulrika~

This could be addressed further in Das Gildehaus thread --but in answer to the second question -- Meister's need to contribute (an amount to be set) on a monthly basis, or they go back to being Journeymen.

Say the Artisinal branch decides it wants to hike taxes to 95% and the RA passes a bill that states that taxes should never exceed 35%....then the Artisinal branch veto's it. This scenario will likely never happen but it could. The Artisinal branch already has power with the the financial end. Then you have the Philosophic branch with not only an executive veto but also judicial rights. I seriously don't think both houses should have veto over the RA.

We still need to address section 8 and the powers given there to the Philosophic branch as well.

I thought only the RA was to be elected so why do we need to stagger elections? I still maintain that 4 months should be the term it fits with the lease and each session can then be judged by what they were able to get done by the time the next report is due.

The Artisanal branch can't raise taxes at all. However, it can veto a bill that tries to cap or set a tax rate. Mostly likely, as stated in the constitution, the Artisanal branch would resubmit the bill with a modified cap or rate for a vote instead of just killing it. This makes sense, as it is their work that will be taxed after all.

~Ulrika~

I think the must be the source of your confusion, Talen --The RA sets what the AC's tax bill is to the city --The AC only sets tariffs (sales tax) on goods sold so it can meet it's tax bill.

Your example then would be --what if the RA decides to set the AC's tax bill as 95% --the AC without veto power would be forced to set tariffs at 98% and split the remaining 2% to the artisans involved.

The other two branches hold elections for internal positions. So they are internal votes not involving the public. Technically, the factions should also do this internally right before an election too. I think this makes a good case for a four month term.

First the faction vote, then the RA vote, then the AC vote, and finally the SC vote. If we stagger them every month, that would make the terms four months long. I would agree to this, provided this is not the case for the upcoming term.

I'd like to have the first terms during the next lease be halved in length so we can work out the bugs in the system by having two cycles. I think this is a reasonable compromise.

~Ulrika~

The question still remains, though- how is it decided which representatives from a certain faction get a chair? If it is up to one specific person, that could create serious problems.

Yes. It's a great question and I think it's revealed that we need some more work in the faction section of the Constitution.

What I propose is that all factions choose which members get seats using single transferable votes (STV) in an internal vote. This will be identical to how the general public selects votes for factions and will allow us to reuse the code for both elections. The results will be confidential and will provide an ordered list.

~Ulrika~