Request for SC ruling on LRA selection timing

[Delia Lake]

The SC is addressing this request for a ruling from Cindy Ecksol via this SC Discussion section of the Forum. The format for this ruling will follow the No Discussion(ND) rule for SC procedures as follows:

a "no discussion" item members of the SC will only be asked for their preference in relation to the alternatives outlined and a brief justification for prefering this alternative. Members will be asked in an order chosen by the Dean and all statements and votes will be recorded into the journal of the meeting.

To the SC, please review the Request below then post your preference as a reply. The alternative rulings are 1) the first day of business for the 13th RA will be June 1 when this RA assumes office as specified in the CDS Constitution, or 2) the RA may meet previous to assuming office for the purpose of selecting a new LRA.

To: Dean of the SC
From: Cindy Ecksol
Subject: Request for immediate ruling on timing of LRA selection process

The CDS Constitution specifies that the new RA takes office on June 1. It also specifies per amendment in the 11th term that the LRA is to be elected by members of the new RA. It also specifies that nominations for Chancellor are open when the new RA is announced (May 23) and close at the first RA meeting of the term (to be announced).

The Constitution is silent on the timing of LRA selection. In past terms, that selection was concurrent with the announcement of members of the new RA -- well before the date that the RA officially took office. As a consequence, the new LRA announced and organized the first meeting and the solicitation of Chancellor candidates before officially taking office.

Some believe that it would be improper for the new RA to meet for the purpose of selecting a new LRA before June 1 on the grounds that they have not yet taken office. Others, myself included, believe that if the new RA does NOT meet before June 1 to organize itself and appoint the LRA Constitutional provisions regarding selection of the Chancellor will certainly be violated.

I request that the SC issue a formal ruling on this matter, specifying a reading of the Constitution that will enable the new RA to move forward as expeditiously as possible to perform its mandate duties for the 13th term.

[Delia Lake]

I, Delia Lake, prefer and cast my vote for alternative 1).

The Constitution of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators states in Article I, Section 2 that

New RAs shall take office on 1 December* and 1 June.*

and that

* Dates recently changed by RA, and these take effect after the next general election. The first RA elections where candidates are not required to be a member of any faction will be for the term starting June 1, 2010.

Furthermore Section 3 states

The Leader of the RA (“LRA”) is elected by the members of the RA at the first meeting after every semi-anuual general election, and at any other time when the office is vacant.

http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 125#p14125

This latest version of the CDS Constitution was amended by the 11th RA and posted on Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:52 pm by Gwyneth Llewelyn.

The summary of the RA meeting on 4 October 2009 posted by Cindy Ecksol,

3. Election Date Revision Act was approved 8 in favor, none opposed, no abstentions as amended:
========
Whereas there seems to be general agreement that the current election schedule forces campaigning into times of the year when most citizens are more distracted by their real lives than usual, we propose the following:

Amend Article I, Section 2 of the CDS Constitution to read:

"New RAs shall take office on 1 June and 1 December."

This amendment will take place take effect after the conclusion of the current term.

http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2578

It is now in excess of 7 months since this amendment was passed and two consecutive RA's have had ample opportunity to address the issue of the election of the LRA of the 13th RA as well as the process for handling declarations of parties interested in the position of next CDS Chancellor absent an elected LRA. Neither RA addressed these issues. The fact that neither RA did so may be an inconvenience but does not In my opinion constitute grounds for changing the commencement date of the of the new RA as specified in the Constitution.

Since the LRA for the 13th RA will not be elected until the period for declaration for Chancellor is ending, citizens may declare their interest in becoming the next CDS Chancellor by giving their notecards stating their interest to each of the 13 incoming RA members and as a courtesy by posting in the Forum, as has become customary.

[Claude Desmoulins]

I believe the 13th RA should begin on June 1.

Cindy says,

Others, myself included, believe that if the new RA does NOT meet before June 1 to organize itself and appoint the LRA Constitutional provisions regarding selection of the Chancellor will certainly be violated.

Looking at these provisions we find:

Article II Section 5 - Chancellor Selection Process
The Chancellor of the CDS shall be selected by the Representative Assembly from among any CDS citizen who shall make application to the RA.
The application period shall begin when the membership of a new RA is named and end the first day of the new RA term. This provision shall come into force with the next RA election following passage and ratification of this amendment. (ed. note: the Seventh RA)
The chancellor will serve a term ending with the election of the next chancellor by the incoming RA.
The Chancellor may not be elected to or serve on the Representative Assembly, nor serve on the Scientific Council. The Chancellor may hold a position in the Artisanal Collective but may not vote therein.

( my emphasis)

We have traditionally understood this section to mean that would be Chancellors would express their intent to the incoming LRA. Cindy points out that we don't know who that is, since the LRA selection process in Article I has changed, and proposes that we adjust the start of term to move the LRA selection up so candidates will have someone to whom to declare. However, "the incoming LRA" is not in the constitution, while the date June 1 is. Article II, section 5 says only that candidates "shall make application to the RA".

There are several possible interpretations of "the RA" here. Delia proposes that the communication be made to all incoming RA members, since we know who these avatars are. If you wish to be more stringent, you can argue that since the new RA has not yet been sworn in, "The RA" refers to the present RA, whose term ends on June 1. In such a scenario, among the last acts of the outgoing RA would be to convey the list of Chancellor candidates to the new RA. However the SC is not here asked to determine what "the RA" in Article II Section 5 means, only to determine whether its requirements trump the June 1 and December 1 dates in Article I. I can't see that they do, since there are multiple ways to allow candidates for Chancellor to "make application to the RA" while leaving the June 1 and December 1 dates intact.

[Aliasi Stonebender]

Option 1. The RA takes office on June 1. The details of the Chancellorship are not the SC's problem; we must rule on the law that exists ever since that function of the SC was altered. We can't help the RA if they have made the law incoherent. (As a practical matter, I would suggest the old RA enact a slight modification permitting the announcement of candidacy to be made to the entire incoming RA, and electing a Chancellor be the second official order of business after an LRA... but that's their dog to tame.)

[Danton Sideways]

Option 1. I agree that the first session of the new RA must fall on the date of June 1st, for the reasons that have been well explained above. I also think it is within the scope of the SC's mandate to specify the exceptional procedure, this one time, for how Chancellor candidates will communicate to the RA their desire to run. The existing legislation has left this loop-hole, and Cindy has correctly asked the SC to provide an expedient solution. In other words, in addition to assessing whether legislation is constitutional, the CDS SC also has historically developed this function of providing guidance when action must be taken but the legislation is unclear.

Delia has suggested that Chancellor candidates should communicate their intent to all incoming RA members. This seems alright as an expedient and one-time-only measure. However, it is also very cumbersome. I would expect that the new RA will pass legislation setting some procedure whereby Chancellor candidates can transmit their intent to a single person.

[Delia Lake]

The unanimous (4 to 0) ruling of the SC is alternative 1), that

1) the first day of business for the 13th RA will be June 1 when this RA assumes office as specified in the CDS Constitution