Noncumulation of Mandates Act (citizen proposal)

[Jamie Palisades]

Please note that we have received a proposed bill, under our RA rules permitting citizens to propose legislation, from PMRobert Walpole, as follows:
---
1. No citizen shall occupy an office in the Representative Assembly, Scientific Council, New Guild, as Chancellor or as Estate Owner for more than two terms in total.

2. All citizens who occupy an office in the Representative Assembly, Scientific Council, New Guild, as Chancellor or as Estate Owner must spend at least one "cool-off term" before taking a seat in another of the offices named above from the one they currently occupy.

3. This Act shall enter into force immediately upon ratification by the Representative Assembly.
---
The foregoing text was transmitted to me for the RA's consideration. I also note that there has been some related discussion on the Forums at: http://forums.slcds.info//viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1766

Regards JP
===

[Beathan]

As I have said elsewhere, I am uncertain about the wisdom of term limits, but I also acknowledge the benefits of turn-over of roles in a community of our size.

However, I oppose the act insofar as it would come into effect immediately and therefore disqualify all of the announced CSDF candidates for the by-election. I also think that this could disqualify Dnate (last term's Chancellor) and FR (who -- although I may be mistaken -- served on the SC last term). In short, immediate effectiveness of this measure, if passed before the by-election, could disqualify all candidates except Cindy. I think this is a bad result -- especially as we would be left with one candidate for two RA positions.

Beathan

[Gwyneth Llewelyn]

I'll patiently await the RA's transcript of yesterday's session to know what was decided. As someone very likely to be affected by this bill, but also as a running candidate for the special elections, I feel it's inappropriate to comment on it before I know what the RA has effectively approved it (or not).

[Jamie Palisades]

Note that this legislation was discussed at length in the 12 April RA meeting. Some suggested that it be re-factored into two or more distinct proposals.
There's also a considerable discussson of these proposals in the Legislative Discussion forum here: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1766