Proposal to alter the way in which citizens sell their land.

[Sudane Erato]

Proposal to alter the manner in which citizens may sell their land in the CDS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed: That the option be set on our Estate Settings to allow citizens to individually set their parcels for sale, and transact the sale directly and completely with the buyer, whether the buyer be a new citizen or an existing citizen.

Explanation:

Throughout most of SL, the owner of a parcel who decides to sell can simply set that parcel for sale in their "About Land" settings. When they do so, that parcel appears in yellow in the Map, and it also appears on the Search list of parcels for sale.

We have not allowed that, for a very important reason. Ownership of land in the CDS involves commitments to our community "rule of law" which is uncommon in the rest of SL. It has been felt that the additional layer of personal contact with the Estate Owner would better enable the new citien to understand the level of commitment involved in membership in our community.

However, several things have changed. About a year or so ago, LL introduced the parcel Covenant feature (a feature I am convinced was inspired by the April 2005 introduction of that idea, and name, by our own community). This feature places the terms of the covenant directly into the parameters of the parcel, and explicitly requires the purchaser of any parcel to agree to those terms.

Further, we have grown in numbers, and increasingly I find that the process of introducing a new citizen into the community involves a more and more superficial involvement of Rudeen (your lovely Estate Owner). Indeed, at this stage, it is probable that an emphasis by us on the terms of the Covenant attached to each land parcel will probably have more impact on the new citizen than anything that Rudeen might convey verbally to them.

Further, it has always been the case that owners are at a significant disadvantage in the process of selling their land, which surely has an impact on its value. Since their intent to sell has up to now appeared only on our own website, few people know that a particular parcel is available. By allowing participation in the wider land market, owners property will inevitably increase in value, even *with* the complicating factor of a "different" sort of covenant.

Further, the land information on the website is no longer accurate. Since the imposition of a new payment system, the tables for parcel ownership have changed. While this problem could certainly be fixed by some new coding, it might make far more sense at this time to consider this on the more fundamental issue that I'm pointing at.

All these changes lead me to propose this policy alteration. Should it be accepted, the most important concern will be to manage the transition dynamics when a parcel is sold. If the buying citizen is new, the wording and arrangement of the Covenant Terms will be of great importance. In particular, the most critical highlights of the Covenant must appear in the first few lines of text, so that they are visible without scrolling down the page. Many people, of course, do not read the Covenant when they buy a parcel of land, although they clearly must view at least the top of it when purchasing that land. Critically important information cannot be buried, at risk of avalanching the occurance of "I didn't see that rule.... it was buried way down in the fine print".

In addition, since Rudeen will no longer be manually involved in every transaction, it will become the absolute responsibility of the seller of the parcel to report the name of the new owner. Until that report is made to me, or to whoever is managing the land ownership and payment data, that parcel will continue to be the financial responsibility of the seller. If no payments are made owing to omission of this requirement, the land will be reclaimed by the community.

Below I have proposed in draft form some header wording for our Covenant to address the issue of awareness of the citizen's obligations.

I firmly believe that this change will positively impact the land values in our community, enable new people to find land more easily, and relieve a growth bottleneck which we have discovered in our system as we grow. Thank you for considering this proposal.

Sudane............................

***************Proposed Covenant Header changes *********************

By purchasing this parcel of land, the you, the owner, understand and agree that you become a voting citizen of the community of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators (CDS). As a member you agree to abide by the rules and laws of the community as displayed on the CDS website, http://neufreistadt.info, as well as the terms of use of this parcel of land, which follow below this notice. Your status as citizen in this community is dependent on your making regular payment of the monthly fee for this land, which will be reclaimed by the community if you do not make this payment. Should you decide to sell this land, you are responsible for the monthly fee until you inform the Treasurer of the name of the new owner.

[Gwyneth Llewelyn]

Interesting idea, Sudane Well, I like the idea of seeing the plots for sale on the map and similar places (ie. Search > Land etc.) and making them [i:1u3ab3ku]easier[/i:1u3ab3ku] to sell.

[Bromo Ivory]

I like it. Only thing I would like to figure out is the provision when someone sells the land and neglects to tell the treasurer as they run for the hills.

[Sudane Erato]

[quote="Bromo Ivory":wx0xpgsf]Only thing I would like to figure out is the provision when someone sells the land and neglects to tell the treasurer as they run for the hills.[/quote:wx0xpgsf]
As I consider this, I think a shared responsibility could be established. If a citizen left, and did not pay their bill, their land would be reclaimed. The attempt to do this would quickly establish the existence of a new owner. That new owner, once identified, would be held responsible for fees not paid by the old owner.

That system will work, I think if we move quickly to reclaim land not paid for, a policy we have not previously maintained, but which we will do if the citizens are inclined to support this.

Sudane.......................

[Sleazy_Writer]

Freely traded land also means easy access for people who trade it for profit and don't actually use it for living, running a value adding business or for a non profit activity. I would immediately admit that price following demand and supply is very natural, but do we want to have the full, unregulated effect of this on our territory?

We cannot 'make' new land as easily or as profitable as the Lindens can, our land is scarce like iRL and we have to invest our own money and months of real time to create it. Our government also aims to make sure land (housing) is available to citizens (and likeminded) on good terms.

Capitalism usually also benefits the government that facilitates it because that government can levy taxes (or call it institutionalized stealing if you want ). That government then spends the money where the electorate thinks it's most needed. Our own CDS government on the other hand, is not collecting any taxes, and is unlikely to do so in the foreseeable future. Sudane has outlined several benefits, but it is my first impression that where any such land speculators make profits from [i:3q6l7nwt]creating[/i:3q6l7nwt] scarcity, the government (the people) get nothing in return. My impression is also that charging a small sales tax is hard, because a land speculator would in many cases already have left because the land is sold.

So,

how should we react to any traders who trade our scarce living space as a pure commodity?

Here's some inspiration:
[quote="SL History Wiki":3q6l7nwt]Upon her return, Ulrika proposed the second phase of the Neualtenburg Projekt to the remaining group on the 1 Mar 2005. Created to solve the problem of declining participation and to create a truly binding governmental system, it was proposed that the city would move to a private sim and sell plots of land similar to the methods used by land barons. The fundamental difference would be that the group would operate as a nonprofit cooperative, with all members sharing in the reduced land-use fee without an overhead going to a single individual.

On the 21 March 2005 the group then consisting of just four individuals took possession of the then-new private sim, named Neualtenburg, an exact duplicate of the sim of Anzere. (...)[/quote:3q6l7nwt]

[Sleazy_Writer]

That being said, everything that makes the Treasurer's job and land sales easier is great.

[Rose Springvale]

I'm in favor of freely transferrable land, subject to restrictive covenant. I don't like it when we have land for sale that isnt' for sale to "anyone".. and we've had a couple of notable cases of this in the past year. Land that isn't used per covenants (is that this sim?) should be reclaimed. I can't tell you the number of times people have said to me, gee, it's nice but where are the people?

I like people.

I, too, am all for making the treasurer's job easier.

[Sudane Erato]

The RA has decided today to postpone decision on this proposal for further consideration and discussion. This is fine and reasonable.

I should like to suggest that for those who suggest the possibility of negative consequence from this proposed change, I feel the burden is on them to show how any of those consequences might impact differently than under the current system. It is very important, considering the potential benefits this may bring, to be under no illusion about the process as it stands now.

I've mentioned that Rudeen has very little contact with new citizens. Transition to the proposed system will not alter that situation... new citizen contact should be improved regardless.

Sudane.....

[Tanoujin Milestone]

Sudane, please correct me if i got it wrong - the proposal has 2 aspects, one is to technically enable the citizens to sell their land on their own, i think this is not only making Rudeens life easier, but it improves accessability in general.
The other aspect is to join the open market, and isn't this an independent political decision?
I support the technical aspect at once, and i would appreciate if all political options were discussed: a) just open market, b) fixed prices (=sharing costs in coop style), c) something inbetween (like: splitting the price into the coop list price that represents the investment of the new citizen into the server setup price + the seller's provision). Don't we have the c) solution atm?
To me it would be interesting how the current system could be changed on a technical level only (ie individualize the transaction procedure), and how this can be kept transparent... call me a control freak, but i am very curious: what does this land in this zone cost per se (not tier, but setup) ... and what value has it on the free market? Atm i can ask Rudeen to learn about this... how can we keep track what happens after the change?
If, for example, the individualized procedure ends up in an agreement that is stored open to the public (w sells plot x to y on <insert date> for z L$, signatures) - and why not on a forum thread - we could watch and see. Politics need data to decide upon. Let the citizens do it, and let them type a few lines to shed light on what is going on. Nonsense?

P.S. Yes, i know it is up to the RA. I just ask. Thanks for your patience

[Sleazy_Writer]

[quote="Tanoujin Milestone":7k0mvio5]Don't we have the c) solution atm?[/quote:7k0mvio5]Yes

[quote:7k0mvio5]how can we keep track what happens after the change?[/quote:7k0mvio5]I don't think we can.

[quote:7k0mvio5]If, for example, the individualized procedure ends up in an agreement that is stored open to the public (w sells plot x to y...) - and why not on a forum thread[/quote:7k0mvio5]It will provide some data, and is not too much asked for, but I think people will forget this.

[Sudane Erato]

[quote="Tanoujin Milestone":zfemz5f2]Sudane, please correct me if i got it wrong - the proposal has 2 aspects, one is to technically enable the citizens to sell their land on their own, i think this is not only making Rudeens life easier, but it improves accessability in general.
The other aspect is to join the open market, and isn't this an independent political decision?[/quote:zfemz5f2]
Tan, the 2 aspects are connected in a single administrative action. If we decide to take that action, both things change... we cannot separate them.

If an Estate Manager today proceeds to the sim setup screens and checks the box called "Allow Parcel Sale" (or something like that), the consequence is this. If you want to sell your land, you would then be able to check a box called "Sell Land" on the About Land screen, and then set the price, set whether it is for sale to anyone or to a named individual, and set whether or not all the things that you own on that parcel are sold as well.

When you do that, another person looking at the Map, with their "Land For Sale" indicator checked, would see your parcel all in yellow. In addition, your land would show up in the list of Land For Sale in Search/Places, along with the price.

If a person decides they want to buy your land, they proceed to your parcel, open the About Land screen, and click on Buy Land. They will be asked to Agree with the Covenant which is attached to the land (which is set by us in the Estate settings... you the seller have no control over what the Covenant says). Then they pay their money, and the land is theirs. The paid money goes right to you, the Seller.

That's the whole process, which a single check box on our part enables.

Please remember that every transaction performed on our sims is under the authority of the Estate Owner, and therefore under the authority of us. We have the ability to nullify *any* action which we determine is not in compliance with our law. If we determine that some step outside the procedure that I have just described MUST be taken by a new resident, then we do have the authority and the ability to force compliance.

For example, if we stated prominently, in the first line of the Covenant, that the sale price of this transaction must be placed in the public record, we have the ability to enforce that rule because we have the ability to "take" the land away from the owner. Of course, we have no way of knowing whether a price which the new owner publishes is indeed the sale price. We have no way of knowing that now, and we would have no way of knowing that under the new proposed system.

Sudane.....................................

[Bromo Ivory]

Question: How would we handle people selling prim-lots?

[Sudane Erato]

[quote="Bromo Ivory":25jc3ws8]Question: How would we handle people selling prim-lots?[/quote:25jc3ws8]
I would suggest that we label them clearly in the description. If people buy them inappropriately, we bring their attention to the Covenant.

Sudane................

[Tanoujin Milestone]

Thank you, Sudane! So we *can* still set and enforce rules with the proposed system. Thats great.

I would like to see fixed official prices (if there are additional inofficial agreements between seller and buyer this is not my concern), based on self cost and a cap on profits, to avoid a memory effect on the average prices.

I see the land market is volatile, we had phantay prices in spring and now they dropped because of Casino ban and VAT (?). I hope the CDS will not be exposed to a market where prices are set without any rational base, building up bubbles that burst an leave the majority behind on their losses on a regular basis.

Not everyone is a saturated member of the middle class in a first world currency zone. Linden Lab *is* regulating the land market, the exchange and so on, the SL economy is artificial. I still believe in the boring story of emancipation. If even the gods regulate the market, we should do this as well on our level of influence.

I love the CDS, because it is an alternate way of life in SL. We will be judged by the policy we set. Lets improve the land sales system, fix the prices and cap the profits!

[Patroklus Murakami]

This proposal was passed by the RA on Sunday 21 October after amendment by Beathan Vale.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal to alter the manner in which citizens may sell their land in the CDS.

Proposed: That the option be set on our Estate Settings to allow citizens to individually set their parcels for sale, and transact the sale directly and completely with the buyer, whether the buyer be a new citizen or an existing citizen.

Procedure for Land Reclamation

The CDS retains the right to reclaim ownership of land if the fee for land ownership is not paid. This right is subject to the following procedure and has the following effects:

1. After a land payment is overdue, but prior to reclamation by the CDS, the Estate Owner or his or her agent shall inform the landowner of the arrearage, the amount of the arrearage, and that the land reclamation process has begun. This notice shall be provided to initiate the reclamation process.

2. After one month, the land shall be reclaimed, but shall not be resold for an additional two months. The prior landowner shall again be notified of the reclamation and shall have an opportunity to pay the arrearage and take back the land. This notice shall be provided twice, first at the start of the two-month period and second at the end, one week prior to the CDS taking possession of the land.

3. Thereafter, following this three month period, the land may be resold by the CDS without restriction and without the prior owner having any right to take back the property or participate in the proceeds of the sale.

4. During the three-month period of reclamation, the landowner shall not lose citizenship, but shall be a "provisional citizen." A provisional citizen shall not have the right to vote or hold office in the CDS.

5. All notices under this act shall be by inworld IM, by gift of inworld notecard, and by private message on the CDS forum (if the landowner is a member of the forum). This notice process may be automated by the Estate Manager.