Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

[Jamie Palisades]

As previously posted, CDS has offered and Al-Andalus has accepted a proposal to merge the two estates.

The RA has decided to hold a special meeting (http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2451) which may take up, among other things, any further actions needed to implement this merger.

I recommend that the RA adopt an enabling constitutional amendment, as described below, which is somewhat different (and shorter) than the one proposed by Patroklus Murakami (http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 292#p13292), but with essentially the same goals and direction. See below.

For convenience, first let me summarize the parts of the enacted legislation (http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2445) that affect integration of the two electorates.

** Someone must calculate the number of new citizens who are to be treated as additions to CDS, which is used to calculate the total number of new RA members. (It's my belief that this number will be proposed by the Chancellor, who will have the roster, and will be confirmed or modified by the SC acting as our election authority.)
** Each land owning resident of AA (see Section 1 of the bill) who is not presently a CDS citizen will be counted as a new citizen.
** In addition, the Chancellor will ask if any dual citizens (other than CDS RA members) wish to designate AA's sims as their primary residence within CDS, and that additional number of persons, if any, will also be added to the count of new citizens.
** The RA will be increased in size by applying CDS's usual rule for RA count in Article 1, Sec. 2 of the constitution: "The number of representative seats in the RA is equal to the odd whole number nearest to 10% of the population, rounded down, with a minimum of five seats and a maximum of forty seats." http://portal.slcds.info/index.php?id=135. The number of new seats will equal that newly calculated RA size minus 7, but with a minimum of 2.
** The merger legislation states that the new RA seats will be filled by a process designated by AA management, consistent with AA law, from among persons who either are new CDS citizens from AA, or dual citizens who elected AA as their primary residence as noted above.
** The estimated election calendar for the upcoming 11th RA term has been posted here: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 281#p13281. Specifically:
. * Last day to declare RA candidacy and qualify factions: 26 June
. * Polls open: 11 July
. * Polls close: 25 July
. * 11th RA is seated: 1 August
As they will be selected "less than one month prior to the closing date for RA candidacy in the next RA general election", the bill provides that they will serve for the remainder of the current term plus the next (11th) term.
(* So, unless the RA changes the law, the next regular CDS election will elect 7 RA members. It seems likely that this election, which does *not* affect the RA representatives of the incoming Al Andalus citizens, should only be determined by the vote of the other (e.g. pre-merger) CDS citizens.
** To conform to the laws that establish the faction system currently in use, the new RA members selected by AA must each join a CDS faction (though they could create their own if they wish).

Now, there have been a number of suggestions that the foregoing method, which the RA has enacted, has uncertain effects under our CDS constitution. Personally, it is my belief that the constitution does not bar these reasonable adaptations of our RA rules to the novel case of a merger of two electorates. However, to protect the Al Andalus estate from the risk of any claim to the contrary, I suggest that the RA adopt a fairly short constitutional amendment, making these procedures explicitly constitutionally appropriate.

Patroklus was kind enough to develop and post a proposed amendment. While I agree with its spirit, I do not think we would be well served by a detailed list that requires detailed obedience, restates the entire bill and even added a few requirements. Therefore, I recommend that the RA enact a constitutional amendment that would potentially work for future cases as well, and give the RA some reasonable flexibility to craft a merger, subject to the SC's supervision. I have altered Pat's useful draft as follows, to achieve that goal:

Article VII - Merger with other Communities

Section 1. Merger

The RA may invite other communities to merge with the CDS or consider an application for merger. The community will be deemed to have joined the CDS when a merger agreement is approved by both communities. The CDS will show approval by a majority vote in the RA. The community joining will show approval by agreement of their Estate Owner(s). The EO(s) must be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the RA that merger with the CDS has majority support.

The agreement approved by both communities will state the terms on which the merger is to take place, and must include (a) any payments to be made as part of the transaction; (b) any required or requested arrangements regarding ownership of the sims in question; (c) the method by which the sims will be physically located, adjacent to CDS or otherwise; and (d) all of the information that the RA would require in order to approve a new CDS sim purchase (e.g., theme, map, covenant, rents, tier and pricing.)

Upon completion of the merger transaction, which shall occur on the date specified in the approved merger agreement or, if none is specified, when designated by the CDS Chancellor, all of the sims of both estates will merge as one territory with the CDS. All land owning residents of the new community will become CDS citizens and land, rentals and administration will become the responsibility of the CDS government. At the RA's discretion, the merger agreement may provide for a mutual or reciprocal right to terminate or unwind the combination of the two estates, after a fixed period of time not to exceed one year.

Section 2. Electoral Representation

In the merger agreement, the RA may provide for a reasonable transition plan for representation of additional citizens added by reason of the merger. At the RA's discretion, that plan may provide for (a) the special election or selection of additional RA representatives from the newly joining estate, by that estate, using its own pre-existing laws and methods for the selection of governmental representatives, separate from the regular CDS election; (b) a full term or shorter or longer transition term for those representatives; and (c) reasonable methods for estimating the number of RA members to be added, consistent with this Constitution's provisions for the size of the CDS RA. However, any such special transition terms, estimates or representatives must revert to standard CDS election procedures, in all respects, no later than 9 months after the merger is completed.

-end-

Regards JP

[Patroklus Murakami]

It's fantastic news to see that Al Andalus has accepted the proposal to merge the two estates. This is a really positive development that I know many people have worked hard to achieve over several months. I am a strong supporter of the merger which I think will bring benefits to both communities. (I already have a few ideas for joint cultural activities which I plan to start talking to people in both communities about shortly). This is very, very exciting! We must work collaboratively, and in good faith, to make any necessary changes to the Constitution to implement the merger. Jamie has struck a very positive and constructive tone throughout this process and this has been echoed by others who have participated in the discussions to date.

I am grateful to Jamie for reworking the constitutional amendment I submitted last week. I agree that it should be a shorter, enabling amendment with flexibility to cover both the Al Andalus merger and future possible mergers. Jamie's redraft takes us a long way there so I hope we can find a solution we can all sign up to either this week or next week.

That said, I have a couple of questions regarding the proposal outlined above. It seems to me that it does involve 'double-counting' of some citizens which I'm sure can't be the intention.

If, as was outlined in a post elsewhere, Al Andalus joins us after the 26 June census deadline then the size of the next RA will be based on the current citizen roll of about 70 in the CDS and we will have 7 'CDS' RA members once more. Now, some of these citizens are also citizens of Al Andalus but all CDS citizens (CDS-only or dual) will be eligible to vote for these 7 seats in the 11th RA. If I understand the proposal above correctly, the dual citizens may then decide to designate the AA sims as their primary residence within the CDS when the two estates merge. They would then count towards the total of AA citizens joining the CDS but, due to the timing, would count twice - once towards the total of 'CDS' RA members and once again for the additional seats joining from AA. Please explain if I have interpreted the proposal incorrectly. It is (necessarily) a bit complicated but this seems to be what is being proposed.

If I'm right this would then mean that dual citizens get to influence the makeup of the RA twice - once by voting in the CDS election and then, if designating the AA sims as their primary residence, once again when the AA reps are selected. We do not yet know how the AA reps will be chosen but, if it involves some form of election in AA (perhaps through acclamation at a Citizens' Council meeting?) then some people would effectively get to vote twice. Again, if I've missed something here please correct me. I'm only going on what I have seen posted so far.

I'm pretty sure that this is not the intention of the Chancellor, RA or Al Andalus: no one would defend giving some people, effectively, two votes.

An alternative would be for those designating the AA sims as their primary residence not to participate in the election for the CDS portion of the next RA and for these CDS citizens not to count towards the census. Is that what was intended?

[Patroklus Murakami]

The RA discussed this matter today. We revised my original proposal to get the following version but decided it needed further input.

-----------------------------------------------------
PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Article VII - Merger with other Communities

Section 1. Addition

The RA may invite other communities to merge with the CDS or consider an application for merger. The community will be deemed to have joined the CDS when a merger agreement is approved by both communities. The CDS will show approval by a majority vote in the RA. The community joining will show approval by agreement of their Estate Owner(s). The EO(s) must be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the RA that merger with the CDS has majority support.

The agreement approved by both communities will state the terms on which the merger is to take place. This may include, inter alia:
a) the price the CDS will pay to the EO(s) of the new community for the purchase of the sims and all assets of the new community
b) any special arrangements regarding non-profit (or other) status of the sims being transferred
c) any special arrangements regarding, for example, rents, tier and pricing
d) preservation and treatment of public land and buildings
e) arrangements for relocation of sims if necessary

Section 2. Sim Management

The community joining the CDS will retain their own EO(s) for a year to 18 months after merger. The EO(s) will report to and take direction from the CDS government under the same terms as any other CDS EO. Any sims owned by the community will merge as one territory with the CDS. All land owning residents of the new community will become CDS citizens and land, rentals and administration will become the responsibility of the CDS government.

Section 3. Transitional Representation

If the agreement to merge takes place less than one month before the deadline for declaring candidates in the next scheduled RA election, the community joining the CDS may, using their own democratic methods, elect a number of representatives to fill Interim Added Seats in the RA.

If the agreement to merge takes place 30 days or more before the deadline for declaring candidates in the next scheduled RA election, the CDS RA elections will proceed as usual, taking into account the addition to the census. In the interim, the RA will be augmented by a number of representatives (equal to the number of Interim Added Seats) elected by the community joining using its own democratic methods.

These temporary seats last until the first RA term in which the new citizens participate in the election

Section 4. Interim Added Seats

The SC shall determine the number of added representatives to the RA - the Interim Added Seats - on the basis of the number of residents who will be joining as new citizens and the formula in the CDS Constitution.

Section 5. Option to Separate

One year after the agreement to merge/sim relocation and for seven calendar days thereafter:

The EO(s) of the community joining the CDS may decide, after consultation with the citizens of the new community, to separate from the CDS.

The RA may by simple majority vote, and posted notice of that vote to citizens in both communities, choose to separate the new community from the CDS.

Under receipt of either notice, the CDS will return the assets to the EO(s) of the departing community upon reimbursement of the purchase price. The CDS will have no further liability for the departing community's sims. The CDS government will work with the EO(s) in good faith to achieve a smooth transition.

If neither notice is received by the end of the seventh calendar day, this option to separate expires.

[Sonja Strom]

Jamie and Patroklus, thank you for all of this work!

I already knew this was a big project, but I really got an experience of that when I worked on making revisions. I even got some help with it.

Here are a few suggestions I have for changes. In each case I am giving the complete paragraph with brackets where my suggested changes appear. I am not including paragraphs where I have no suggested changes, except in Section 3 where I show the placement of a new paragraph to be included. Everything else would be the same as in Patroklus' post above.

Anyone may feel free *to suggest changes to my suggested changes.* The main thing I want is that this is a helpful addition.

~~~~~

Section 1. [Coordination for] Addition [of Existing Sims]

The [Representative Assembly] may invite [another community] to merge with the [Confederation of Democratic Sims]. [It may also] consider an application for merger [with all or part of another community]. [Sims of the other] community will be deemed to have joined the CDS when a merger agreement is approved by both [the CDS and the other community]. The CDS will show approval by a majority vote in the RA. The [sims] joining will show approval by agreement of their Estate Owner(s). The EO(s) must be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the RA that merger with the CDS has majority support [on those sims].

Section 2.

The [sims] joining the CDS will retain their own EO(s) for a year to 18 months after merger. The EO(s) will report to and take direction from the CDS government under the same terms as any other CDS EO. [These sims will become territory of the CDS whether or not there is mutual agreement that they will become geographically contiguous.] All land owning residents of [these sims] will become CDS citizens and land, rentals and administration will become the responsibility of the CDS government.

Section 3.

If the agreement to merge takes place 30 days or more before the deadline for declaring candidates in the next scheduled RA election, the CDS RA elections will proceed as usual, taking into account the addition to the census. In the interim, the RA will be augmented by a number of representatives (equal to the number of Interim Added Seats) elected by the community joining using its own democratic methods.

[If the agreement to merge takes place less than 30 days before the deadline for declaring candidates in the next scheduled RA election, in order to provide fairness and stability these representatives will remain in place for the remainder of the current term plus the next term. In this case, as the sims joining the CDS will already have representation in place all aspects of the next general election shall apply only to those sims in the CDS at the time the agreement was accepted.]

[In both cases] these temporary seats last until the first RA term in which the new citizens participate in the [CDS] election.

Section 5.

Under receipt of either notice, the CDS will return the assets to the EO(s) of the departing community upon reimbursement of the purchase price. The CDS will have no further liability for the departing [] sims. The CDS government will work with the EO(s) in good faith to achieve a smooth transition.

[Patroklus Murakami]

Sonja

Thanks for posting further suggested changes to the proposed constitutional amendment. Most of these look good to me and I largely agree with the helpful additions in square brackets.

I don't understand why some sections have been deleted though. For example, the latter half of Section 1 includes examples of the terms which would be included in the agreement to merge. I'm not insistent on keeping these in, they are just there to be helpful, but is there a good reason to take them out?

More importantly, section 4 in the version I posted includes a model by which the Interim Added Seats should be calculated and who should make the determination (the SC). This seems to be quite important to me and the kind of thing that ought to go in a constitutional amendment. Again, what benefit would there be from taking this out?

Hopefully we can get closer to a draft we can agree on Sunday.

[Claude Desmoulins]

Pat, note the following from Sonja's post:

I am not including paragraphs where I have no suggested changes, except in Section 3 where I show the placement of a new paragraph to be included. Everything else would be the same as in Patroklus' post above.

[Sonja Strom]

Thanks again to both of you for your clarification.

My intention was to make it easy to see where I was suggesting changes, by (mostly) only showing them in my post. Unfortunately this approach in itself caused confusion...

Now I have put together a version with the full text, showing my suggested changes in brackets. In bringing this together I saw a few more changes I would suggest in Section 3, so here it is a little bit different than in my post above. This new version follows. Naturally in the final version the brackets would be removed:

-----------------------------------------------------
PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Article VII - Merger with other Communities

Section 1. [Coordination for] Addition [of Existing Sims]

The [Representative Assembly] may invite [another community] to merge with the [Confederation of Democratic Sims]. [It may also] consider an application for merger [with all or part of another community]. [Sims of the other] community will be deemed to have joined the CDS when a merger agreement is approved by both [the CDS and the other community]. The CDS will show approval by a majority vote in the RA. The [sims] joining will show approval by agreement of their Estate Owner(s). The EO(s) must be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the RA that merger with the CDS has majority support [on those sims].

The agreement approved by both communities will state the terms on which the merger is to take place. This may include, inter alia:
a) the price the CDS will pay to the EO(s) of the new community for the purchase of the sims and all assets of the new community
b) any special arrangements regarding non-profit (or other) status of the sims being transferred
c) any special arrangements regarding, for example, rents, tier and pricing
d) preservation and treatment of public land and buildings
e) arrangements for relocation of sims if necessary

Section 2. Sim Management

The [sims] joining the CDS will retain their own EO(s) for a year to 18 months after merger. The EO(s) will report to and take direction from the CDS government under the same terms as any other CDS EO. [These sims will become territory of the CDS whether or not there is mutual agreement that they will become geographically contiguous.] All land owning residents of [these sims] will become CDS citizens and land, rentals and administration will become the responsibility of the CDS government.

Section 3. Transitional Representation

If the agreement to merge takes place 30 days or more before the deadline for declaring candidates in the next scheduled RA election, the CDS RA elections will proceed as usual, taking into account the addition to the census. In the interim, the RA will be augmented by a number of representatives (equal to the number of Interim Added Seats) elected by the [sims] joining using [their] own democratic methods.

[If the agreement to merge takes place less than 30 days before the deadline for declaring candidates in the next scheduled RA election, the representatives elected by the new sims to fill Interim Added Seats in the RA will remain in place for the remainder of the current term plus the next term. In this case, as the sims joining the CDS will already have representation in place all aspects of the next general election shall apply only to those sims in the CDS at the time the agreement was accepted.]

[In both cases] these temporary seats last until the first RA term in which the new citizens participate in the [CDS] election.

Section 4. Interim Added Seats

The SC shall determine the number of added representatives to the RA - the Interim Added Seats - on the basis of the number of residents who will be joining as new citizens and the formula in the CDS Constitution.

Section 5. Option to Separate

One year after the agreement to merge/sim relocation and for seven calendar days thereafter:

The EO(s) of the community joining the CDS may decide, after consultation with the citizens of the new community, to separate from the CDS.

The RA may by simple majority vote, and posted notice of that vote to citizens in both communities, choose to separate the new community from the CDS.

Under receipt of either notice, the CDS will return the assets to the EO(s) of the departing community upon reimbursement of the purchase price. The CDS will have no further liability for the departing [] sims. The CDS government will work with the EO(s) in good faith to achieve a smooth transition.

If neither notice is received by the end of the seventh calendar day, this option to separate expires.

[Patroklus Murakami]

Thank you to Claude and to Sonja for the clarification. Doh!

I think I did understand what you meant the first time I read it, but then my brain disengaged the next time!

[Sonja Strom]

Oh, I completely understand...

A lot of what makes this work difficult is that with so many details it is easy to become confused.

If anybody wants to discuss my suggested changes I would appreciate it if they would do so here, because I will not be able to attend the next RA meeting on Sunday.

[Rose Springvale]

With all due respect, it seems to me that you all are trying to legislate the terms of transactions yet to be presented. Why dont' you give your chancellor some guidelines, and a little credit, to operate. As an estate owner involved in a merger with CDS, I will tell you that these amendments were not part of the transactions contemplated, serve to disenfranchise your own citizens, and hold hostage people who one must presume want to do something other than manage sims.

Just look at it from the other side please, and perhaps you will see my point. I'm glad these aren't in place now, because we would not have a "deal" if they were.

best regards,

Rose

[Sonja Strom]

Rose, with all respect to you as one of our most distinguished citizens, are there particular aspects of this Amendment you find unacceptable, or simply the entire concept of having such a process defined in the Constitution?

After your post I carefully compared this proposed Amendment with the CDS/AA agreement, and there is only one part of the text I find incongruous with the agreements made between the CDS and AA. It is in the third sentence in Section 5 above, which says: "The RA may by simple majority vote, and posted notice of that vote to citizens in both communities, choose to separate the new community from the CDS." The CDS/AA agreement is different here, in the CDS merger offer at 8.b saying: "The CDS RA may by a 2/3rds majority vote, and posted notice of that vote to AA and CDS citizens, elect to re-separate the six AA sims from CDS, as a separate estate." I admit there is a fairly big difference between a simple majority in the RA and a 2/3 majority, and maybe we should reconsider this point. So far as I can see, everything else in the proposed Amendment is in accord with the CDS/AA merger.

To me it seems like it could be very helpful to build on the work that has been put into the AA agreement for the future, and create a well thought out system to have in place for possible agreements with other sims and communities.

Because of your suggestion I have thought about how my perspective would be if I were a sim owner, and I do not think for me personally it would be a problem to have this system in place in the CDS. Actually I believe I would like seeing a defined process in order to know what to expect. From taking on this perspective, the only part of the proposed text I think I might not like would be needing to demonstrate to the CDS that having my sim(s) join the confederation would be popular with the residents of my sim(s), as described in Section 1, since I was the owner of them. It might be good for us to think more about this requirement too, because at some unknown point in the future the CDS might want to add existing sims for their location, builds, or other reasons. At the same time, this would be an understandable request for the CDS to make if it fit the situation.

My intention here is to ask for further clarification and to describe my perspective. I want to be clear I am not attached to having this proposed Amendment go into the Constitution. It's just, at this point it seems to me like a good idea. Maybe how I am seeing it will change if I understand something better.

[Rose Springvale]

I'll send you a private note Sonja.

[Soro Dagostino]

Hopefully there can be an agreement as to what to do . . . the issue is simply one of attribution and allocation in the way the citizen chooses. Concern and care must be given to the nature of the order that is coming to CDS. We are a democracy, not a autocracy that gets its kick out of rule bashing citizens.

[Claude Desmoulins]

I'm going to step out on a limb and present a summary of what I think the two issues are here. This comes from my perceptions of what has been said in the May 29 SC meeting and the June 1 and June 7 RA meetings, as well as private conversations and public forum posts. (Note: Since I don't have posting privileges in RA Announce, I have sent the RA transcript of June 7 to Soro) Since I am uncertain what expectations of privacy those with whom I conversed had, I will not name names.

Question 1 = Does implementation of the Al Andalus merger agreement require a constitutional amendment?

Those who say yes point out that the constitution is explicit about how the number of seats in the RA is to be calculated and how the occupants of those seats are to be selected. They believe that any act creating additional seats (even if these are temporary) and/or allowing those seats to be filled by a method other than our usual election procedure requires a change to the constitution.

Those who say no argue that a merger such as this is unprecedented and outside the scope of anything in our history to this point. Given its extraordinary nature a certain amount of flexibility is necessary.

Among those who answer yes to question 1 there is a further difference of opinion.

Question 2 - Should the constitutional amendment create a general framework for future mergers?

Those who say yes point out that creating the terms of each merger from whole cloth could create resentment if group A gets a "better deal" than group B and that working from a framework prevents needlessly reinventing the wheel.

Others support negotiating each merger separately. They point out that each situation is unique and we should be able to address these individually, unconstrained by a "merger playbook". They also note that using a "standard procedure" might cause the communities with which we were to merge to feel they were being forced to play by our rules rather than having their concerns and needs considered fully.

[Sonja Strom]

These points are helpful, Claude. I think what you said describes the overall debate quite well, and in a way I had not really perceived it.

One possible answer to these disputes might be to work toward an Amendment that would provide a general framework for mergers but not be so specific, allowing for more flexibility in individual situations. This could especially be true in the requirements we would have for the other communities and their sims.

In particular I think we should consider taking away this sentence from Section 1, Paragraph 1:
"The EO(s) must be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the RA that merger with the CDS has majority support."
Of course we would want a merger to be popular, but I think this requirement might make it seem like the CDS would be controlling the person turning their sim(s) over to the CDS.

In Section 2, Paragraph 1 I think we should change the wording of the first two sentences to be:
"The [sims] joining the CDS [may]* retain their own EO(s) for a year to 18 months after merger, in which case [their] EO(s) will report to and take direction from the CDS government under the same terms as any other CDS EO."
*This would change these terms from being a requirement to being a possibility.

If this change is made in Section 2, it should also be reflected in Section 5. When looking at Section 5 I also saw it has not included a removal of the terms. I suggest making a few small changes in Section 5 in order to have everything fit together.

Adding these changes to those I suggested earlier, the complete text would now be:

-----------------------------------------------------
PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Article VII - Merger with other Communities

Section 1. [Coordination for] Addition [of Existing Sims]

The [Representative Assembly] may invite [another community] to merge with the [Confederation of Democratic Sims]. [It may also] consider an application for merger [with all or part of another community]. [Sims of the other] community will be deemed to have joined the CDS when a merger agreement is approved by both [the CDS and the other community]. The CDS will show approval by a majority vote in the RA. The [sims] joining will show approval by agreement of their Estate Owner(s).

The agreement approved by both communities will state the terms on which the merger is to take place. This may include, inter alia:
a) the price the CDS will pay to the EO(s) of the new community for the purchase of the sims and all assets of the new community
b) any special arrangements regarding non-profit (or other) status of the sims being transferred
c) any special arrangements regarding, for example, rents, tier and pricing
d) preservation and treatment of public land and buildings
e) arrangements for relocation of sims if necessary

Section 2. Sim Management

The [sims] joining the CDS [may] retain their own EO(s) for a year to 18 months after merger, in which case [their] EO(s) will report to and take direction from the CDS government under the same terms as any other CDS EO. [These sims will become territory of the CDS whether or not there is mutual agreement that they will become geographically contiguous.] All land owning residents of [these sims] will become CDS citizens and land, rentals and administration will become the responsibility of the CDS government.

Section 3. Transitional Representation

If the agreement to merge takes place 30 days or more before the deadline for declaring candidates in the next scheduled RA election, the CDS RA elections will proceed as usual, taking into account the addition to the census. In the interim, the RA will be augmented by a number of representatives (equal to the number of Interim Added Seats) elected by the [sims] joining using [their] own democratic methods.

[If the agreement to merge takes place less than 30 days before the deadline for declaring candidates in the next scheduled RA election, the representatives elected by the new sims to fill Interim Added Seats in the RA will remain in place for the remainder of the current term plus the next term. In this case, as the sims joining the CDS will already have representation in place all aspects of the next general election shall apply only to those sims in the CDS at the time the agreement was accepted.]

[In both cases] these temporary seats last until the first RA term in which the new citizens participate in the [CDS] election.

Section 4. Interim Added Seats

The [Scientific Council] shall determine the number of added representatives to the RA - the Interim Added Seats - on the basis of the number of residents who will be joining as new citizens and the formula in the CDS Constitution.

Section 5. Option to Separate

One year after the agreement to merge[] and for seven calendar days thereafter:
The EO(s) of the [sim(s)] joining the CDS may decide, after consultation with the citizens of the new community, to separate from the CDS.
The RA may by simple majority vote, and posted notice of that vote to citizens in both communities, choose to separate the new [sim(s)] from the CDS.

Under receipt of either notice, the CDS will return the assets to the EO(s) of the departing [sim(s)] upon reimbursement of the purchase price. The CDS will have no further liability for the departing [] sims. The CDS government will work with the EO(s) in good faith to achieve a smooth transition. [All terms of the merger agreement will come to an end, including Interim Added Seats in the Representative Assembly and Scientific Council added from the agreement.]

If neither notice is received by the end of the seventh calendar day, this option to separate expires.