Citizenship Fee Poll

[Bromo Ivory]

[quote="Salzie Sachertorte":adz3fr8n]I believe you are looking at these fees in the wrong manner. If you are proposing to [i:adz3fr8n]not[/i:adz3fr8n] tie citizenship to land ownership – then the cost of citizenship should [i:adz3fr8n]not[/i:adz3fr8n] be tied to land ownership as well. Rather all citizens should pay a user fee, which would be determined within the budget process, not a set amount pulled out of the air.[/quote:adz3fr8n]

Oh! Wow - yes - would be completely disconnected in that manner. Now the questions would remain from that - would *anyone* be able to become a citizen by this?

Would you care to elaborate a little bit (anyone) on this idea?

[michelmanen]

I totally agree with you! The amount I proposed is entirely artificial. Your proposal outlines the correct approach. Thank you so much for your input!

[Dnate Mars]

I do not want to be taxed any more then what I pay already.

[michelmanen]

You won't necessarily be. It's simply a new way of acounting and budgeting and deterimining tier fees for everyone. This will also help with integrating the costs of the new sims and the tier fees of new citizens.

I don not see this as meaning that the tier fees will cover exclusively the items Salzie mentioned. When the budget is made up, I think we should take into account all intems considered as "essential services", plus decide what amount of "spending money" we require for the next six months. Based on this, tier fees and citizenship fees should be determined, and the budget put to a vote.

The LRA should be elected by Parliament and command a majority in the RA. The Budget vote should be a Confidence Vote in the LRA, and if the Budget is not approved, the LRA will have to resign and a new LRA elected. This is the entire meaning of responsible government.

Over six months, we will see how many new landed and landless citizens we get and the next RA will then put together a new budget based on the new information.

[Salzie Sachertorte]

[quote="Dnate Mars":24giz6re]I do not want to be taxed any more then what I pay already.[/quote:24giz6re]

I'm not saying you should - what I propose is having landowners pay "tier" on their land, based on what LL charges that particular sim. I would keep tier payments localized to that particular sim. NFSers would pay a bit more, as they are supporting more public land. But, they knew that when they bought into the sim. Owners in the new sim would pay more, but they are receiving the added features of a new sim.

I would finance new sims via bonds, thus not obligating citizens to pay for expansion if they aren't in favor of it.

Anything beyond the actual "tier" costs would go into the CDS tax - or user fee- category.

The current land fees include the basic tier charges plus the overhead of running the CDS. This would merely separate the basic tier costs from the overhead rate.

Thinking further, but not foreseeing all of possible ramifications, this might make franchulates much more appealing to others, including land barons. They would not give up ownership of their baronies and, more importantly, their profits, yet they could offer their citizens the "above and beyond" benefits of membership in the CDS.

Or course, that would mean the CDS would have to be a confederation in more than just its name.

[michelmanen]

Salzie.

A few comments on your ideas:

[quote:1ylmr1fg]...what I propose is having landowners pay "tier" on their land, based on what LL charges that particular sim. I would keep tier payments localized to that particular sim. NFSers would pay a bit more, as they are supporting more public land. But, they knew that when they bought into the sim. Owners in the new sim would pay more, but they are receiving the added features of a new sim.[/quote:1ylmr1fg]

In RL, this would make perfect sense. However, due to compression of time and space and easr of movement and communication in SL, place of residence is by far not as important here. We all spend time in all sims, so we all benefit of NFS public spaces and new sim features. There is a very strong argument that all citizens should pay the same level of tier fees independent of actual sim residence...
[quote:1ylmr1fg]
I would finance new sims via bonds, thus not obligating citizens to pay for expansion if they aren't in favor of it.[/quote:1ylmr1fg]

Expansion could be decided via the referendum format CARE proposed. In this manner, every citize could have a voice - and we could require an approval level of 60 per cent of votes cast, for example, to make the outcome clear.
[quote:1ylmr1fg]
Anything beyond the actual "tier" costs would go into the CDS tax - or user fee- category.

The current land fees include the basic tier charges plus the overhead of running the CDS. This would merely separate the basic tier costs from the overhead rate.[/quote:1ylmr1fg]

This is a question that must be debated. Should we include "essential serivices" in tier fees? If so what are these? Or should we keep tier fees as low as possible and be entirely transparent with all other expenditures and include them in the citizenship fee? Or perhaps a mixture of both- essential service and public officials' salaries included in tier fees, but entertainment and web portal budget in citizenship fees? This is a debate we should all have. But I believe we are now on the right path

[quote:1ylmr1fg]Thinking further, but not foreseeing all of possible ramifications, this might make franchulates much more appealing to others, including land barons. They would not give up ownership of their baronies and, more importantly, their profits, yet they could offer their citizens the "above and beyond" benefits of membership in the CDS.[/quote:1ylmr1fg]

Agreed. I am not convinced we can be a confederation when we only have 76 citizens. However, should we expand via frnachulation, as you mention, this will indeed become a necessity and the new system of citizenship separated from land ownership will facilitate this, as you rightly point out..