Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Proposals for legislation and discussions of these

Moderator: SC Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Almut Brunswick
LRA
LRA
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:49 pm
Contact:

Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Almut Brunswick »

Dear fellow CDS citizens,

namely act CDSL 13-05 requires in Paragraph 1:

Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two terms in succession.

In the current situation with one uncontested candidate for Chancellorship who has already served two terms in succession, we run into the problem to fill this role for the next term. Though the motivation for this regulation is obviously "borrowed" from the US presidency rules, the RA suggest to abolish this regulation from the law, especially because the Constitution does not urge to establish a limit of terms in succession.

I realize that this limit is likely intended to prevent a creeping customary habit of keeping chancellorship by a single person for a long time and thus to scare off other potential candidates. Therefore, perhaps deleting the limitation clause without replacement is not the best option. For example, one could make further candidacies after two or more terms subject to the approval of the SC and/or the RA. This should be discussed in the RA. The focus for the moment should be to definitely avoid a vacancy in the chancellorship for the coming term.

Please use the remaining time till the next scheduled RA meeting on May 18 for finding a legally appropriate but pragmatic solution.

Thank you,

Almut
LRA of the 40th term

User avatar
Rosie Gray
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 2060
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:47 am

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Rosie Gray »

Almut Brunswick wrote: Sun May 05, 2024 11:30 am

Dear fellow CDS citizens,

namely act CDSL 13-05 requires in Paragraph 1:

Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two terms in succession.

I realize that this limit is likely intended to prevent a creeping customary habit of keeping chancellorship by a single person for a long time and thus to scare off other potential candidates. Therefore, perhaps deleting the limitation clause without replacement is not the best option. For example, one could make further candidacies after two or more terms subject to the approval of the SC and/or the RA. This should be discussed in the RA. The focus for the moment should be to definitely avoid a vacancy in the chancellorship for the coming term.

I agree with you, Almut, both on the concern and on the possible way to handle it.

"Courage, my friend, it's not too late to make the world a better place."
~ Tommy Douglas
User avatar
Lilith Ivory
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Lilith Ivory »

Reading the RA transcript and this forum discussion I wonder if no one has read the post of our Dean - inworld and at the forum

Chancellor conundrum
Post by Callipygian » Sat May 04, 2024 1:32 am

Tor Karlsvalt has declared as the only candidate for Chancellor, however

CDSL 13 - 05 states:
Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two terms in succession.

CDSK 13-04 states:
The Chancellor will serve a term ending with the election of the next Chancellor.

Some years ago term limits were removed from RA seats, but not from the position of Chancellor.

Technically Tor cannot stand as a candidate for Chancellor, but if no one else stands for office, Tor remains chancellor until such time as someone does. His declaration indicates that he is willing to continue as per the law and if no other candidate comes forward, Tor will remain Chancellor until such time as a byelection can be held.

viewtopic.php?t=10618

I do consider this as a legally appropriate but pragmatic solution.

Personally I am in a neutral position when it comes to term limits of the chancellor but I agree there are pros and cons to be discussed carefully.

Also I can't help wanting to remind you that I have during several terms in the past suggested the RA might discuss "worst case scenarios" were no candidate for chancellor (and enough for RA) can be found. Sadly no one was interested in this topic as long as we were not in trouble

"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."
Terry Pratchett
Anjoux Herbit
Passionate Protagonist
Passionate Protagonist
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 11:21 am

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Anjoux Herbit »

CDSL 13 - 05 states:
Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two terms in succession.

Taking note of the observations raised above by others, and also wanting to keep an open stance regarding the post of Chancellor. how about:

"Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two contested terms in succession."

...such a change keeps thw protection interested in serving as Chancellor, whilst also allowing an existing encumbent to contue to sit if uncontestrd.

edited to correct typos.

User avatar
Rosie Gray
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 2060
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:47 am

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Rosie Gray »

I like your wording and the idea behind it, Anj. The explanation behind it I would incorporate into the language as well. Something like this perhaps:

"Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two contested terms in succession. This preserves interest in serving as Chancellor, and allows an existing incumbent to continue to sit if uncontested."

"Courage, my friend, it's not too late to make the world a better place."
~ Tommy Douglas
User avatar
Almut Brunswick
LRA
LRA
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:49 pm
Contact:

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Almut Brunswick »

I do support Anjoux's and Rosie's approach as really pragmatic solution. We should enact it accordingly to ease the unpleasant issue we have right now. It is, however, likely not the final solution of the potential "Chancellor candidate shortage" we have since a couple of terms.

"Tor will remain Chancellor until such time as a byelection can be held" can just be an interim solution when there will be eventually another candidate willing to serve. But what if this is not the case? The dilemma of the two-terms-in-succession remains, because Tor would still not be allowed to run for another term, so it will just postpone the issue.

Another idea we should discuss is whether we may invent a formal RA approval for candidating after two terms in succession when there isn't any other candidate. That would prevent a "hereditary monarchy" that a single individual becomes automatically Chancellor again and again simply because there isn't any other citizen willing to run for this office.

To reply to Lilith's objection the RAs of the past refrained to think of worst-case scenarios when there is nobody willing to fill the Chancellor role: I always have been eager to intercept this and other possible situations when the Chancellor is not available for longer. When we worked on the reform of the Constitution, I wanted to establish the formal role of a Vice Chancellor, but the majority of the RA was not in favor of it. Therefore, we still don't have indeed appropriate solutions how to fill that gap once it would occur.

I think that the structural problem behind the shortage of potential Chancellor candidates is that it is an office you need some prerequisites in executive matters like Estate Manager knowhow, but also some sense and engagement to work with social media. You need to know what to place in which media best, and to keep in touch with parties in and outside the CDS for advertising and public relations. That takes some efforts and time, and over the years, the role became more and more complex. For example, I personally wouldn't dare to run for this office because I'm lacking these things a Chancellor should have, and you know how reluctant I am to use platforms outside SL and this Forum. Everybody who has these traits and capabilites has already been Chancellor for one or more times in the past, so the group of candidates is not grown over the years.

We thus should be thankful to have citizens like Tor and take care for legal conditions that allow him to continue his admirable work as our Chancellor. On the other hand, we must also think of winning and qualifying further citizens for the Chancellor role in the future, and also simultanously ponder how this office could be cut back to something that is not a full-time "Jack-of-all-Trades" job anymore.

Almut

User avatar
Almut Brunswick
LRA
LRA
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:49 pm
Contact:

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Almut Brunswick »

Dear CDS citizens and especially dear RA colleagues,

it seems that the discussion about changing CDSL 13-05 has come to a standstill. We need, however, something we can vote about on our coming RA meeting. So I'm going to take action and propose the following paragraphs that shall become subject to vote (changes in green):

1. Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two contested terms in succession without any further condition.

That follows Anjoux's proposal. The clause "without any further condition" refers to the new paragraph 9 (see below).

Following paragraph should be changed like this:

8. In the event that the elected Chancellor resigns after less than half the term, a citizen who fills in shall finish that term. After this term, this citizen is granted to become regular candidate for Chancellorship under the same conditions like any other citizen in good standing.

Furthermore, I propose to add the following paragraph:

9. In the event that there is only one declared candidate for Chancellor who has already served more than two terms in succession, this candidate is allowed to run for office again

  1. when a by-election has not resulted in (an)other candidate(s) to be elected or acclaimed, and

  2. when the majority of the Representative Assembly formally approves this further candidacy.

Please share your thoughts and correct my non-native English wording, if necessary.

Almut Brunswick
LRA of the 40th Term

User avatar
Lilith Ivory
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Lilith Ivory »

Those are my thoughts as a concerned citizen - who happened to be pondering about this issue a lot lately :D

I really like Anj’s proposal as if the RA votes on it on Saturday Tor will be permitted to declare as „legal“ candidate in the by-election we have right now.

Still I see a problem with „without further condition“ as we might still want the candidate to be a CDS citizen with at least one parcel in good standing and being named on the matching census list.

8. In the event that the elected Chancellor resigns after less than half the term, a citizen who fills in shall finish that term. After this term, this citizen is granted to become regular candidate for Chancellorship under the same conditions like any other citizen in good standing.

Sounds good

9. In the event that there is only one declared candidate for Chancellor who has already served more than two terms in succession, this candidate is allowed to run for hold office again
1.) when a by-election has not resulted in (an)other candidate(s) to be elected or acclaimed, and
2.) when the majority of the Representative Assembly formally approves this further candidacy.

In my opinion paragraph 9 takes paragraph 1 back and makes things unnecessarily complicated.

For me paragraph 1 sounds like a chancellor can serve as many uncontested terms as he is willing to do. - Without the SC having to call a by-election - while paragraph 9 says something different.
I read here that a chancellor candidate can only serve three terms in succession (contested or not) without the SC having to call a by-election.

1. when a by-election has not resulted in (an)other candidate(s) to be elected or acclaimed

This is already covered by :

CDSL 13-04 Chancellor Direct Election Constitutional Amendment Act
https://cdsdemocracy.org/governance/law ... dment-act/

  1. The Chancellor will serve a term ending with the election of the next Chancellor.

Since the by-election failed to find another candidate and since the SC holds only one by-election per vacancy the acting chancellor will stay in office automatically till the new term ends - provided she/he is willing.

2. when the majority of the Representative Assembly formally approves this further candidacy.

At the first glance this seems to be a formality but it also involves a risk for our community.
What if some future RA does not approve? In case we have to work with a minimum RA of only three members one vote would be enough to have CDS face one term without chancellor.
Needless to say a disapproval like this would not be very encouraging for a candidate who is willing to serve for more than three terms in succession. We might loose a good chancellor for good.

"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."
Terry Pratchett
User avatar
Almut Brunswick
LRA
LRA
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:49 pm
Contact:

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Almut Brunswick »

Hello Lilith, CDS citizens and RA colleagues,

considering the feedback given, I propose to vote at least for these undisputed changes and amendments of the namely act tomorrow:

1. Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two contested terms in succession.

8. In the event that the elected Chancellor resigns after less than half the term, a citizen who fills in shall finish that term. After this term, this citizen is granted to become regular candidate for Chancellorship under the same conditions like any other citizen in good standing.

Apparently my arguments for paragraph 9 could not convince or were discarded as not relevant. This is quite disappointing, because it should be emphasized that any further term after two terms in succession (not just the third!) is an exception to the rule, and thus it should receive additional legitimation by the RA in order not to become a custom habit. Anyway, I don't want to argue here anymore in the current situation, because we need a solid legal solution to allow Tor continuing as Chancellor in a third term in succession.

We may continue this discussion in the new term, and then again we can touch the "hot iron" of creating a worst-case solution when really nobody is willing to play the Chancellor role.

Almut

User avatar
Almut Brunswick
LRA
LRA
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:49 pm
Contact:

Re: Review of the CDSL 13-05 Chancellor Election Act

Post by Almut Brunswick »

Advance Notice

On its Ninth RA Meeting of the 40th Term held on May 18, 2024, the Representative Assembly has approved unanimously following changes and amendments of CDSL 13.05 (changes highlighted in green):

1. Chancellors are elected for a 6-month term and can hold at most two contested terms in succession. This preserves interest in serving as Chancellor, and allows an existing incumbent to continue to sit if uncontested.

8. In the event that the elected Chancellor resigns after less than half the term, A NEW CHANCELLOR who fills in shall finish that term. This new Chancellor can be either the candidate with the second most votes or a by-elected citizen. After this term, this citizen is granted to become regular candidate for Chancellorship under the same conditions like any other citizen in good standing.

Therefore, the legal basis for Tor Karlsvalt's third candidacy is created.

This advance notice is not intended to replace the formal publication of the changed CDSL 13-05 in the Code of Laws.

Almut Brunswick
LRA of the 40th Term

Post Reply

Return to “Legislative Discussion”