Request: Covenant Amendment

[Tanoujin Milestone]

I would like to prepare a request to amend the General CDS Covenant
(http://portal.slcds.info/index.php/cds- ... convenant/)
to adress private land sales from land owners in arrears of their monthly payment.

Your opinion is very welcome. Those in favor, please help to improve the wording and clarify the intention. I will put this forward as a citizen concern if needed, but I would prefer an executive or representative to adopt the topic after discussion.

Full text with suggested amendment:

General CDS Covenants (These covenants apply to all CDS sims)

By purchasing this parcel of land, you, the owner, understand and agree that you become a voting citizen of the community of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators (C.D.S).
As a member you agree to abide by the rules and laws of the community as displayed on the C.D.S web portal, http://www.slcds.info, as well as by the terms of use for this parcel of land.
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. Tier fees for each CDS parcel are listed here. Responsibility for monthly fees continues until a new owner claims or you officially abandon the property.

Your right to sell land privately expires as soon as you are in arrears of your monthly fees for the parcel in question. The community may reclaim such a property without notice at the first opportunity.

It is your responsibility to inform the treasurer of changes in ownership. Tier fees are paid to C.D.S. and not to Linden Labs. The two tier systems are totally separate. You do not need a Premium account to become a citizen in C.D.S. and your land allowance from Linden Labs Premium status does not apply to and is not credited towards ownership of land within C.D.S.

Thank you for your attention

[Sudane Erato]

I suggest also removing the sentence:

"It is your responsibility to inform the treasurer of changes in ownership."

as this no longer serves any function. All changes of ownership are now detected automatically and the information sent to the land management group of the executive.

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

[Rosie Gray]

Covenant amendment makes sense to me Tan, and with Sudane's amendment to the amendment!

Rosie

[Shep]

Hi Tan .... I was preparing to act on your suggestion at the RA meeting tomorrow ( Sat 18th Aug) but I wondered why you felt ............".Your right to sell land privately expires as soon as you are in arrears of your monthly fees for the parcel in question. The community may reclaim such a property without notice at the first opportunity.." ................ needed to be added when the covenant already says ..... "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. "??

I have shelved bringing it up this meeting .. but will of course listen to your reasons if you wish to persue this further ..

[Tanoujin Milestone]

Thanks for the question. The sentence which is already there

"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."

refers to the CDS standard procedure if a citizen is in arrears of her/his monthly fees for a certain parcel: our land managers will observe this case until the grace period is over, contact our fellow by IM or notecard several times, (and even email and phone if available), ask around and try to find out what is going on.

It could be a new citizen who needs a hand, a long time member who simply forgot to pay for one of her many parcels, someone we want to happily embrace in about 6 weeks because she got hit by a car on RL and went to hospital, someone we need to grandfather because he runs our voting machines and will pay a huge amount sometimes, an orphaned resource parcel held by the old New Guild pending for a political solution and so on.

So the land management keeps people and their parcels and belongings in a hopeful state as long as possible and tries to find intelligent solutions. The executive acts most scrupulously friendly. To reclaim a parcel is the last resort here. And that is perfectly right in a self governed community.

But there is this case when we should show our teeth and follow another procedure: if a parcel is set for private sale and the citizen is in arrears. We will lose the tier, and we will lose the purchase price as well. Why should we go after a person who takes advantage of our loss as if it were a sick dog? Let us be realistic: in most cases the owner is not malicious, but just careless. She missed to abandon the parcel and refund herself via the tier box options. To reclaim the parcel in this case could be seen as a special personal service then.

Nevertheless it can always be interpreted as an unfriendly act to dispossess such a parcel. We had this case some time ago, and our executives refrained from immediately chucking that fellow out. If you reclaim a parcel on the countryside you might blow up a connected city parcel. But that is not the main issue. The issue is: our executives do not have an explicite democratically legitimated mandate to repossess parcels without notice at the first opportunity.

Hence the sentence:
"Your right to sell land privately expires as soon as you are in arrears of your monthly fees for the parcel in question. The community may reclaim such a property without notice at the first opportunity."

Without notice at the first opportunity: if, and only if you are in arrears and the parcel set for private sale. May, but does not have to: because of possible side effects.

The executives, namely Lilith, Trebor and Sudane are asking for a mandate to act unfriendly in this well defined case after thorough discussion. They are no bullies who just hit the buttons as they see fit. Because they are quite busy I tried to find an easy way to discuss and implement that new procedure, which is a standard throughout the grid, but a new approach within CDS.

Does this answer your question, Shep? Are we in agreement Sudane's suggestion to remove the sentence "It is your responsibility to inform the treasurer of changes in ownership." is a good idea btw?

I will not put this forward to RA today because I feel the discussion here on the forum is not finished.

[Pip Torok]

I suppose it does no harm to leave this issue for a fortnight, just in case a Devil's Advocate might arise and contest this suggested amendment. For the record, like Rosie, I accept it fully, as further amended by Sudane.

But let's make this the first item of new Business on the Agenda of the next RA meeting.

'Don't you come that stuff, Jim Garland! We always
were English, and we always will be English, an' just
because we _are_ English, we're sticking up for our
right to be Burgundians!'

-- 'Passport to Pimlico' 1949

Pip Torok

[Shep]

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.

Look maybe I'm being obtuse ... but can you please tell me what is wrong with the above statement .. it says the land WILL be reclaimed if tier is'nt paid ...

The issue is: our executives do not have an explicite democratically legitimated mandate to repossess parcels without notice at the first opportunity.

Sorry .. YES they do... in the first quote 'which will be reclaimed' .. does NOT say .. after weeks of handwringing and faffing about saying oh but they wear pretty pink fluffy bunny slippers so they must be a good person oh what shall I do!!! They have the mandate to reclaim land AS SOON AS it becomes in arrears, in fact it does'nt say 'may' reclaim as your amendment seeks .. but 'will' reclaim, and further if your land has been reclaimed its pretty obvious that you can't sell it!

In my view the amendment simply adds words .. it does NOT change anything .. the mandate already exists in law ...

[Tanoujin Milestone]

I see your point relating to the text. Do you see my point in reference to the facts? Two different procedures? At this point I note we consent that a parcel set for sale with monthly payment in arrears should be reclaimed without notice at the first opportunity. Sadly we have this again at LA P19. And if it is reclaimed as suggested because the citizenry represented by RA wants it, I would like to stress that I for one am exceedingly sorry we lost a citizen, a well designed plot and regular events there, and I wonder how we can make such people stay or return. The rest I leave to people brighter than me, thank you

[Shep]

Tan ... I have no idea why the gallery left ... I think I only spoke to her once .. she was very clear about how she wanted things to be .. I expect in all likelyhood that she found her sales too few .. I do remember her saying she needed to sell enough to pay tier .. sadly her subject was'nt one I was interested in .. So I bought nothing ... we're also in a bit of a Catch 22 situation .. we need more citizens to support our traders .. we need more traders to draw in more citizens ....

[Tanoujin Milestone]

You did not answer my question. If you do not accept there are two different procedures, do you want to see all citizens in arrears immediately expropriated? Again: I ask the RA to approve that no grace period should apply in a certain case: private sale / arrears. And it would be nice if that could be coded somewhere visible to people who sign a contract with our community so we do not have to discuss this again and again. Let us see what Beathan has to say at the next meeting...

[Shep]

Tan ... whatever law is adopted HAS to be applied to ALL citizens ... How do you propose to seperate them? If you are talking about P19 .. then as far as I'm aware she always paid tier ... so she would'nt be seen as delinquent .... and NO I am NOT saying we should reclaim every parcel as soon as it becomes inarrears .. I would have have lost my place by being a couple of days over once ... but we give our friends and known good neighbours the benefit of the doubt .. we HAVE to give all the same chances ... however if the parcel is set for sale it is obviously not required and if its out of tier then the law is in place to support it being reclaimed .. would you like me to do it?

[Sudane Erato]

I need to insert a comment here, regarding Tan's point of the need for 2 different procedures.

I think we all agree that discretion and judgement is needed in the case of people delinquent in their tier. That doesn't seem to be in dispute. In the vast majority of cases, delinquencies are resolved through communication with the residents and working out what the problem might be, and then solving the problem.

But this specific situation represents a special problem. A parcel set for sale can be sold at any moment. If the owner of that parcel is delinquent in their tier, the moment that parcel is sold, not only is the delinquent tier lost forever, but also the seller has benefited from the situation by receiving the sale money. The CDS is harmed with no recourse to discussion or to the option of a resolution whereby the CDS takes the parcel and recoups possible lost tier through sale of the parcel.

It might not be the intention of the selling resident to defraud the CDS, but that's exactly what's happening in this infrequent situation. Delinquency of tier on a parcel set for sale is a very different situation than delinquency of tier on a parcel not set for sale. I don't see a harm in making some arrangement (whether by law or by executive procedure) which reflects that difference.

To make one small note about this: as estate owner of SL New England, this situation has happened to me enough times to have learned how very different the events are. People often simply stop paying tier. I try to contact them and, in many ways, work with them to see if they wish to continue or not. But if the parcel is set for sale while delinquent, and then sold, I am robbed. It's as simple as that.

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

[Rosie Gray]

Thanks for clarifying this point Sudane, I was getting confused over this issue before you did so.

I'm in favour of preventing us from being robbed, and of course of being sensible about ensuring that forgetful citizens are given a chance, when they are forgetful.

[Tanoujin Milestone]

/me slaps her forehead, burns a toxic paper, writes "discretion" on her mirror, grabs her paintball gun and leaves the house

[Shep]

Maybe my problem with this change is that I'm What .. I don't know .. hard hearted .. uncaring .. cynical Brit!

We are agreed there is a full mandate in place to reclaim the parcel if it goes into arrears ...... what seems to be exercising some people is if the parcel is set for sale, I would simply use that as informing me that the parcel IS'NT in arrears by mistake and that the citizen is leaving .. if it is in arrears also that's it .. reclaimed .. using the law as it stands... I still feel it is covered by existing laws ...