Selection of LRA and Chancellor for 13th RA

[Cindy Ecksol]

Well, after all the informal discussion today during the time when we were waiting for a quorum for RA and during the election results party, I'm still very curious to know how the RA is going to select a leader. In fact I was so confused, that I decided to go back and construct a copy of the constitution that is (as far as I know) fully amended through the end of the 11th RA. I'll tack it on to the bottom of this posting for those who are interested, but where it really belongs is on our portal. Not only could I not find an up to date constitution, I noticed that the 8th-12th RA's have none of the laws they passed posted. (Don't I recall that we have an archivist who took responsibility for that earlier this term?)

In any case, here's the relevant bit for the LRA selection process:

"The Leader of the RA (“LRA”) is elected by the members of the RA at the first meeting after every semi-anuual general election, and at any other time when the office is vacant."

There's also this:

"New RAs shall take office on 1 December and 1 June."

This certainly leaves the timing of the LRA selection open. In past terms, the LRA was elected by the voters, since the top vote-getter in the leading faction was automatically named LRA. In effect, that means that the LRA appointment took place before any swearing in, so the new LRA could get started organizing things immediately. In particular that would mean announcing the next RA meeting, creating an agenda, and soliciting candidates for Chancellor.

Our new and improved system, passed in haste at the end of the 11th RA, left us with a broken process that the 12th RA did not deign to address. In fact, it left us with a big constitutional question: is it "legal" for the new RA to meet before being sworn in for the purpose of organizing itself and (in particular) selecting the LRA?

I've heard arguments on both sides (Arria and Rose lay out some basic concerns here: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2881). Personally I see nothing in the Constitution as it stands that would prevent the new RA members from meeting purely to select a new LRA. But clearly not everyone agrees, so I'm asking the SC to rule on the issue, hopefully in a very timely fashion. Waiting a week and a half for June 1 to roll around seems pretty lame. I'd like to think that by June 1 we'll know who's in the hot seat, have candidates lined up for interviews at that first session, and be able to select a Chancellor for the 13th term that very day AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONSTITUTION. Here's the relevant passage about Chancellor selection:

The application period shall begin when the membership of a new RA is named and end the first day of the new RA term. This provision shall come into force with the next RA election following passage and ratification of this amendment. (ed. note: the Seventh RA)
The chancellor will serve a term ending with the election of the next chancellor by the incoming RA.

To summarize:

1. RA cannot take office before June 1.
2. Taking office does not require "swearing in" -- that seems to be a custom rather than a law from what I can tell
3. The current Chancellor's term ends with the election of the next Chancellor by the incoming RA
4. The application process for Chancellor begins with the announcement of the new RA members and ends June 1 (the day the constitution specifies that the new RA takes office, not the day of the first meeting, which may be later than June 1 and probably will be this year).
4. At the first meeting the RA is required by the Constitution to select a Chancellor
5. The Constitution is silent on the timing for LRA selection under our new election system: there is no particular date specified, nor are there any prohibitions regarding when it cannot be done.

In the light of the fact that if we do not meet informally to select the LRA before June 1 we will be unable to even create an agenda (a responsibility of the LRA), I'd say that we MUST meet as soon as possible (preferably this week) to select the LRA and get the ball rolling. But I'm not the decider: I believe that the SC must give us a ruling on this. So I'm sending a request to Delia asking for an immediate ruling on these issues.

Cindy
<looking forward to an activist RA that works on common-sense issues>

[Cindy Ecksol]

Well, the SC reviewed my request and came back with this answer:

1) the first day of business for the 13th RA will be June 1 when this RA assumes office as specified in the CDS Constitution

http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 889#p15155

There's only one problem: it doesn't answer the question which was "Can members of the incoming RA meet prior to that date to organize itself?" We already knew that the first day of business was June 1.....

And if the answer to that question is "no" then I guess SC is willing to allow other violations of what seem to be clear constitutional directions (like opening nominations for Chancellor the day results are announced and submitting them to the RA) to take place. Am I the only one who finds this completely ODD?

In any case, I know what the first agenda item that I] intend to submit to the RA will be no matter how we actually decide to act...

Cindy

[Delia Lake]

Submitting application to the RA, not to the LRA, is what the Constitution currently says.

Article II - The Executive, Section 5 - Chancellor Selection Process

The Chancellor of the CDS shall be selected by the Representative Assembly from among any CDS citizen who shall make application to the RA.

[Rose Springvale]

Thanks for your work on this SC. Cindy, it's a long standing frustration of lawyers when the "court" won't answer the questions we want but insist on simply applying the law as it is written. The SC can't make new law, only interpret what is there. It is up to the legislature to make the law. In this case, the legislature had lots of time to fix the problem but never got to it. I agree we need to get this on the agenda of the new RA early in the term so there is plenty of time to tie up all the loose ends next term. Personally, I'd like the CDS law to clearly state that the SC is in charge of the conduct of elections, including setting reasonable rules for issues like this, but I understand that others may disagree.

In the meantime, we are stuck with electing both the LRA and the Chancellor at the same meeting. What I believe this interpretation means is that all candidates for chancellor must declare to each member of the newly elected RA. To be safe, Chancellor candidates must drop notecards in world on each of the 13 RA-elect individuals. prior to the first meeting. Many of us want to meet on June 1, though no time has as yet been chosen, but to be safe, I'd recommend that all Chancellor candidates use June 1 as the deadline.

I'd also like to see persons running for the position to announce on the forums, or perhaps RA members should publish the candidates as notecards are delivered. It is good for the community to see who intends to run before the deadline is up, and to encourage more to apply if they aren't happy with the choices.

[solomon mosely]

hi rose, everyone...

forgive my confusion, but just to understand, chancellor apps should be in by june 1. hopefully the new ra will meet on june 1. got that.
rose, when you say we'll be voting on lra and chancellor at the same meeting, do you mean at a june 1 meeting or at whatever meeting the first ra holds after that?

also, has the lra apps been settled? should they be in by june 1 as well? how are they submitted?

again, i apologize if i've asked previously answered questions. just lost track in all the posts in the different threads addressing these issues.

[Rose Springvale]

Good morning Solomon

let me try to clear this for you.

LRA is elected from among the people newly elected as representatives. All are eligible, no need to apply. We will need to self organize our first meeting and the first order of business will be to elect a leader, who sets agenda etc. There is no process for determining when that first meeting will be, but our term begins June 1. If we can get a quorum together for that date, i think that is when we will meet at least to elect LRA. There is a swearing in process which requires SC presence, but the swearing in is not a legal requirement, just a tradition.

Chancellor, on the other hand, can be any citizen. The law specifies an application period for chancellor from the date the new RA is announced, (that would be Sunday, May 23, and ending when the new RA meets for the first time. That's why I say, to be safe, chancellor applicants should assume June 1. The old law allowed for applications to be turned in only to the LRA; since there will be no LRA until the application period expires, the SC has looked at the law and determined that the applications should be turned in to "the RA." It is arguable that an application turned into any single RA member would suffice, but since the position is voted on by all RA members, I'd think that would be risky. Also, it has always been the custom of CDS, at least before last term, to accept nominations even at the meeting where the vote is taken for the Chancellor. In the earliest chancellor elections, we often had only one candidate running. (I remember being imed by RA reps FROM the meeting looking for more candidates.)

Hope that helps!

[Delia Lake]

The Constitution specifies that the period for acceptance of Chancellor applications shall

end the first day of the new RA term.

It does not specify that the election of a Chancellor be done during that first meeting though. The 12th RA had their first meeting on 7 February, and elected the new Chancellor at their next meeting on 21 February.

[Kaseido_Quandry]

The Constitution specifies that the period for acceptance of Chancellor applications shall

end the first day of the new RA term.

It does not specify that the election of a Chancellor be done during that first meeting though. The 12th RA had their first meeting on 7 February, and elected the new Chancellor at their next meeting on 21 February.

That's very helpful! So:

1. We meet June 1.
2. We vote on an LRA, and as much internal self-organizing (e.g., agenda setting, committees) as possible, but perhaps defer all other new/old business.
3. Self-nominations for Chancellor are still open until 11:59 PM SLT on June 1. Can we declare them closed as of our meeting time on June 1? It seems we can't, which would leave the Chancellor vote to the next meeting (ideally that Saturday).
4. We meet again on, say, Saturday 6/5 at a new regular meeting time, elect a Chancellor, and commence regular business.

Sounds right?

[Rose Springvale]

Ah thanks for the clarification! Sounds reasonable and lets us know the results of the LRA election before the deadline for chancellor apps. As there are members of the newly elected RA who are considering running (with full knowledge that they can't be both chancellor and on the RA) this is very helpful.

[solomon mosely]

great, thank you guys.

i was confused about the lra given that in the past it was the faction with the most votes and then the party member with the most votes. correct? well, whatever it was, it ain't now, so i just wasnt sure if we were taking applications or establishing some new protocol for lra elections now. personally, i dont know who is interested.

about the 1st. i'm in. i can be at a june first meeting. just tell me when. are we at that point now?

[Arria Perreault]

I am not sure to be present on 1st June. For this reason, I will ask for a 7-day vote. It means that we will maybe know the result later for both election. Potentially the same person can get both positions after the 7-day vote result.

To be frank, we would give more chance to this first meeting if we meet during the week end.

[Claude Desmoulins]

The constitution allows for the possibility that the election of a Chancellor might take some time.

The chancellor will serve a term ending with the election of the next chancellor by the incoming RA.

So waiting until the second meeting to elect a Chancellor does not automatically create a vacuum in the executive.

[Rose Springvale]

interesting Arria, but your own availability shows more time open during weekdays than on the weekend.

Is anyone else interested in the position of LRA?

[Arria Perreault]

I am ready to sleep less in week end and to meet outside the time I have indicated. During the week, I can't. My main concern is to vote.

[Patroklus Murakami]

We seem to have an answer on one point - the first RA meeting of the new term cannot take place until 1 June at the earliest. In another thread I have asked RA members to post their availability.

The issue I'm not clear on is "Who calls the meeting?" The Constitution is silent on this, it simply talks about how the LRA is chosen. Our RA Rules of Procedure say that the LRA sets the agenda for the meeting and posts it with at least 24 hours notice.

Unless the SC wishes to rule otherwise, I would suggest that the current LRA call the first meeting after considering the availability of the new RA members. We can then elect a new LRA (or re-elect the old one!) at our first meeting.

We might want to change these procedures to make them less clunky for future RAs.