Thanks for efforts to turn this into constructive and more generally applicable legislation. Just putting the brakes on the prior bill wouldn't address the genuine issues.
I apologize for the length of this post. In my view, this is both one of our most important issues for growth and quality .. and one of our biggest failures to date in CDS.
General comments first.
1. I hope there's no one who disagrees that we have a dead-unattractive-commercial-spaces problem. Many sims exist happily with no commerce! But until someone radically rewrites our laws and zoning, that wasn't the CDS plan.
2. It is possible that a vibrant commercial district *can* evolve in the open market with no government intervention. Ours has utterly failed to do so. I note that the turnover of our prime commercial land is radically low. So the incentives for doing so, in our sims, must be quite ineffective -- which is consistent with our sims' LOW traffic count due to a failure to promote CDS. Other models for growth exist, other than waiting around for free market change, like the arts community district in Cetus sim. It looks to me like we'd better explore them.
3. One thing CDS government can do itself is make its OWN space less moribund. I am making other proposals about that, posted elsewhere.
4. We need to balance property rights and enforcement. Realistically, yes, sometimes the CDS government has repossessed and will repossess property, and not just for rent defaults. This was the *unambiguous* intent of the founders. See Appendix 1 below. But there should be clear, plausible and fair criteria. A too-grabby government is both bad for growth, and unconstitutional under our laws.
5. We also have a challenge with the definition of "commercial". Several approaches have been tried. See the marked-up text below. Let's get that sorted out.
6. As I've posted before, I think some of the NGO issues are not specific to the Chamber of Commerce, and should be generalized.
7. There's also an issue about commercial-use rentals which goes beyond this bill,
Comments on the draft are inserted below. And at the bottom, I appended a suggested modified bill draft that implements those comments. Thanks to all for further thought on this, and particularly to Jon Seattle for a helpful, long patient chat about this topic earlier this week.
CSDF REVISED DRAFT, with comments inserted
> Commercial Development Bill
> - The CDS should devote sufficient resources to promote commercial
> development, including developing a promotion plan and materials,
> and a recognized brand for CDS business.
>
> - The space available for commercial projects should include retail
> as well as services, consulting, or games or performance businesses.
> Providing space for these other businesses may be attractive avenues
> of development for the CDS.
(a) There are TWO parts to this perceived definition problem, which was discussed at length (and explored by tour) during the Commerce Commission proceedings let by MT Lundquist. The FIRST is that a private *residential* use thwarts the attractiveness of a commercial zone .. but we must define "commercial: in order to enforce it.
-- The phrase above -- "retail, services, consulting, games or performance business" is one way to define the scope of activity to exclude residential.
-- The 8th term bill uses this term instead -- "trade or production which deals with the exchange of goods and services from producer to final consumer. It comprises the trading of something of economic value such as goods, services, information or money between two or more entities."
-- The original words of the NFS covenants, posted below, referenced "goods or services".
I have seen others too. Let's think it through, and then use the same phrase in all our law, please. I drafted one possibility below.
I see two additional issues in the definition.
i. "Retail' or 'sale' implies payment. I think freebie offerings would be just as valid. Changes suggested.
ii. There's a risk of circumvention and abuse, too. As Claude Desmoulins recently pointed out on these forums, an utterly dead and private residential plot could try to escape the intent of the rule, just by posting a single out of date vendor out front. Is that enough? I try to address that with the 'sufficient activity' rule below.
(b) The other half is equally important: dead unused space, whether or not "commercial". I feel that persistebnt moribund space of any kind is our main problem. Clearly the original legislators had this in mind: look at clause 2 of the NFS covenants below! The current draft does not address this. Here's an example of a possible rule that is a little less discretionary than the broooooad power given the executive branch in 2005 (and apparently never repealed):
"Substantial activity must be evidenced by any of the following: either (a) updates installed on site, no less frequently than every two months, to the goods or services or information content being provided on site, or (b) demonstration of substantial volume of transactions with non-owners on the site each two months, which may be provided by public posting or in confidence to the Chancellor (who will be obligated to keep confidential data provided as confidential, but shall post publicly the fact of its receipt), or (c) SL traffic count on site equal to at least 1/10th of the count at the adjacent public plaza or road serving as its primary land access."
Maybe someone else can suggest a better measure. But I respectfully submit to the RA that, if a "business" does not meet ANY of those three criteria, it's out of date AND not transacting any notecards or anything AND no-one visits .. and then, it's dead as a doornail. In which case it should be welcome to live in CDS ... but NOT in our high traffic, visitor-facing designated prime commercial spaces.
>- The CDS should use some of its resources to support opportunities
> for new business development by its citizens.
> Therefore under this act:
> 1. The Chancellor is requested to develop a promotional plan for CDS
> commercial activity (including retail, services, consulting, or games or
> performance businesses) with the help of a experienced business consultant.
> L$25,000 is made available for this purpose.
Seems like a good idea. I have no idea whether the suggested amount is appropriate. Anyone have data? I'd expect to implement this via a 2-week open bid process specifying what we want, and then look around for "local to SL" consultants to make sure we get a few bids. I suggest that if the RA wants to enact something budgetary, about this, it pass a bill in the form "don't contract or spend more than $L xxxxx without obtaining RA approval." ALso, it needs a deadline. I have suggested one.
> 2. The CDS will set aside not less than 15% of all commercial plots that it
> owns (either through abandonment or new development) for new business
> development by CDS citizens.
Hmmmm. The idea that we should use new or abandoned land for promote commerce is good. But I don't think the mandate goes far enough. I'd rather do this with 100% of reclaimed COMMERCIAL zoned land, and apply the 15% to new full sims. That would exceed the minimum mandate of this law as written, so this law probably would permit that approach.
I would like CDS to exercise a first right of refusal on any sale of a commercial zoned plot. In other words. if Sudane *sells* rather than *abandons* her Time Worn Treasures store (for example), I want CDS to have the right to purchase it at our stated statutory price before anyone else. We'd have to budget for this. But that's fine; it would revitalize our two real commercial zones (NFS platz hub and CN hub) a bit faster.
This would be completely in line with - and weaker than - our original laws. See NL 4-7 at http://portal.slcds.info/index.php?id=148. Under which they just GRABBED the land back and paid the statutory price.
> a. Land under this program would be allocated by competition. Citizens
> would file a business [description] with the Chancellor who would set
> procedures for evaluating that plan in a non-partisan way.
> b. Citizens winning the competition for specific plots would have the
> right to lease those plots for a period of six months at 50% [of] the
> [CDS stated] tier rate without having to purchase the plot. Note that this
> lease does not, by itself, satisfy the requirements for citizenship.
> c. At the end of the lease the citizen would have the right to purchase
> the plot. No business may lease land under this program more than once.
> d. If [the] chancellor fails to find a qualified citizen interested in leasing
> a plot under this program within three months of its becoming available,
> the plot may be released for sale.
The above is an interesting approach. Good idea! Let's try it. I made a few suggested nonsubstantive corrections in [brackets].
> 3. The provisions of the 8th RA's Commerce bill providing for rent surcharges
> on commercial property are hereby repealed.
Let's see what the consultant says. I do not like doing nothing or only teeny-tiny things; I do not like governments waffling forever; I also do not like unenforceable laws.
-- As to rent: I believe that prime commercial rents should be higher. See NL 4-6 at http://portal.slcds.info/index.php?id=146 . That way, moribund uses are incentivized to go somewhere else.
The differential is probably not high enough! I am going to look at this, and seek public input. as a part of studying rents generally. Time to re-evaluate them in light of the radically changed SL market. (Not sure change is needed -- but we haven't even really looked at the big picture for a while.)
-- As to recapture: If there is a test for commercial property being commercial, there must be SOME disincentive if the land owners consistently fail that test. The original NFS covenants permit "recapture at fair cost"! Is the current government weaker of will today, than in 2005? Sorry, but a rule without an enforcement procedure is an ignorable joke, and will NOT work. What does the RA propose as an enforcement device?
> 4. A charter for the Chamber of Commerce contemplated by the 8th RA's
> Commerce bill should come before the RA for approval before taking effect.
On the C of C as an NGO, I'd suggest a slightly different approach. I keep coming back to Pat's point that the government should not tell private groups what to do, most of the time. How about this?:
"No CDS Chamber of Commerce or similar merchants group may exercise any advisory powers in CDS matters until it is operating under an NGO charter approved by the RA."
Regards JP
==== ==== ====
APPENDIX 1:
Commercial Spaces langauge from original NFS covenant
* * *
(1) The primary purpose of the parcel is commercial, either goods or services. The ground floor, at least, must be devoted to commercial purpose. The upstairs may be residential. The owner may apply for free "rental" of the Platz area in front of their parcel for the purpose of moveable objects… tables, chairs, vendors. The Executive Branch reserves the right to arrange such objects consistent with the free flow of traffic through the Platz; and removal of the objects for various events (such as the regular Sunday flea market).
(2) The owner is expected to devote substantial effort to the growth of their business at this location. We expect you to make money. A city approved vendor may be required so as to track the success of this. Some form of money or dwell tracking may be performed, and there may be a criteria permitting continuance. Should the owner fail to achieve a success commensurate with the goals of the City for its Platz, the City may exercise the right of eminent domain and "Reclaim" the parcel at fair cost.
(3) The owner is required to take care to maintain the theme of Neufreistadt. Because this location is the Platz, additional oversight will apply. A compliance committee of the Guild reserves the right to prohibit signage, objects, or goods for sale which it feels contrary to the intentions of the City with regard to the Platz, a decision which is appealable to the SC.
* * *
==== ==== ====
APPENDIX 2
Summary of proposed changes as REVISED bill text,
and miscellaneous action items
> Commercial Development Bill [revised]
>
> - The CDS should devote sufficient resources to promote commercial
> development, including developing a promotion plan and materials,
> and a recognized brand for CDS business.
> - The space available for commercial projects should include retail
> as well as services, consulting, or games or performance businesses.
> Providing space for these other businesses may be attractive avenues
> of development for the CDS.
> - The CDS should use some of its resources to support opportunities
> for new business development by its citizens.
>
> Therefore:
>
> 1. Commercial activity means [the sale or offering to the public
> of virtual goods, services, consulting, games or performances]
>
> 2. Substantial activity means sale or offering activity in a volume
> that is evidenced by any of the following: either (a) updates installed
> on site, no less frequently than every two months, to the goods, services
> or information being provided, or (b) demonstration of substantial
> volume of transactions with non-owners on the site each two months,
> which may be provided by public posting or in confidence to the
> Chancellor, or (c) SL traffic count on site equal to at least 1/10th of the
> count at the adjacent public plaza or road serving as its primary land
> access.
> The Chancellor is obligated to keep any such confidential data provided
> under this law as confidential, but shall post publicly the fact of its
> receipt.
>
> 3. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. The Chancellor is requested to
> develop a promotional plan for substantial commercial activity within CDS
> with the help of a experienced business consultant. The Chancellor must
> secure approval from the RA to contract or commit for any consulting
> payment in excess of [L$25,000] for this purpose. The final report
> shall be posted publicly no later than 15 November 2008. The report
> should address options for incentives, land prices, land uses and programs
> to promote commerce.
>
> 4. COMMERCIAL LAND SET ASIDE. The CDS will set aside not less than 15%
> of all commercial plots that it owns (either through abandonment or new
> development) for new business development by CDS citizens, in the following
> manner.
> a. Land under this program would be allocated by competition. Citizens
> would file a business [description] with the Chancellor who would set
> procedures for evaluating that plan in a non-partisan way.
> b. Citizens winning the competition for specific plots would have the
> right to lease those plots for a period of six months at 50% [of] the
> [CDS stated] tier rate without having to purchase the plot. Note that this
> lease does not, by itself, satisfy the requirements for citizenship.
> c. At the end of the lease the citizen would have the right to purchase
> the plot. No business may lease land under this program more than once.
> d. If [the] chancellor fails to find a qualified citizen interested in leasing
> a plot under this program within three months of its becoming available,
> the plot may be released for sale.
>
> 5. RENT SURCHARGE REPEAL. The provisions of the 8th RA's Commerce
> bill providing for rent surcharges on commercial property are hereby repealed.
> Re-examination of legal and other incentives for substantial commercial activity
> is expected after the earlier of 15 Noevmber 2006 or receipt of the above
> consultative report.
>
> 6. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, etc. No CDS Chamber of Commerce or similar
> merchants group may exercise any designated advisory powers in CDS matters
> until it is operating under an NGO charter approved by the RA.
[draft ends]
Note that, outside of this bill, in this message I've identified 4 other action items:
1. CDS will make efforts as a government land owner to make its own commercial space less moribund. See separate postings.
2. The original 8th term bill also required the Chancellor to officially designate commercial space. I am preparing maps, and plan to make that designation as a report to the RA and public, as required by several other CDS laws in force, as soon as the repeal of the penalty rent clause goes through. (Because, as discussed with the RA, if I do it before then, our law requires me to start charging the penalty rent.)
3. I plan to come back separately with plans to implement the right of the government to enforce current commercial covenant laws, unless the RA provides an answer to that question in their enactment.
4. I expect also to come back with draft legislation permitting some commercial zone rentals. Our laws currently prohibit subtenants somewhat -- as a citizenship issue. I do not think that's equally applicable to commercial retail space, where subtenants are much more common in SL, and need not affect citizenship.
5. I suggest that we enact more clear and general rules about recognized NGOs. That might have solve dthe current disagreements about the C of C structure at the start. See that separate forum thread.
[end]
== My Second Life home is CDS. Retired after three terms
== as chancellor of the oldest self-governing sims in SL.
