Gwyneth Llewelyn wrote:A lightbulb suddenly appeared on top of my head...
Ah! Now that's why there were so many people in the Land Verwaltung group! It's because they needed access to Government-owned land, which has been used by other groups for other purposes! Well, one mystery solved: the purpose of having 'more transparency' is exactly to figure out why certain things have 'traditionally' and 'historically' been set up in a specific way, but later remained set up in a way that is forbidden by law... well, just because it's 'tradition'.
The current administration is set to destroy the 'status quo' of such long-standing 'traditions' which are contrary to the law. You know that I support that as well, and will continue to support everything that turns the CDS back to comply with the law, even when it goes contrary to 'tradition'. So I view this as one step in the right direction.
This has absolutely nothing to do about the current Guild or the School. It has to do about setting things right according to the law. If the Executive finds that I have some of my objects in public land which was not approved, I expect it to be returned, no questions asked — there should be no exceptions. Similarly, if they find out that I had somehow been using land that I don't own, I'm sure that I will asked to stop doing that, no matter what my 'age' as a citizen is, or for how long I've been paying tier. Those things are irrelevant! And, yes, I seriously suspect that there might be some prims of mine, specially in Neufreistadt, dating back from 2006 when we had to rebuild most of the city due to the 'Ulrikaquake'. No matter how good the intentions were back then, if the Executive finds anything out of place, it should be returned.
Now, as some pointed out (and the Chancellor has addressed that on the Executive thread), there are obviously many cases where the law is stupid/does not apply/is outdated/needs clarification/needs fixing. In all those cases, the purpose of this RA is to fix those laws, and let the Executive apply the new laws. I'm not quite sure if this is the case of the Neufreistadt School — after all, we have NL 4-16 Public Prim Allotment Act to explain how it should work: it's a public space, owned by the Government, not to any group, but, however, specific groups are explicitly permitted to contribute tier to them in exchange for permanent usage of that public space.
You might ask why we have this strange arrangement. Why isn't the School simply 'given' to the Guild? It would become a group-owned building, set to that group, and there would be no more problems. Well, the reason behind NL 4-16 was more aimed at the other public buildings, like the Kirche and the MoCA, which had a succession of small groups that preserved them — each failing after some months of trying out to keep those buildings 'alive' with events, exhibits, and other forms of usage. Back then, we had two options: because NFS has so much public land, we could simply consider to privatize certain public buildings. That would mean selling the land to a group, and stop considering the building as being 'public'. This would mean, for instance, that the Biergarten, in prime location, could simply be taken down by a group who wished to use it as a megashop in the Marktplatz instead (so long as it remained Fachwerk-y, it would fully comply with existing Covenants for that area). We would continue to get tier, reduce the private/public land ration a bit, but we would lose a major landmark, which is iconic for NFS. The same, of course, could also happen to things like the Kirche, for instance.
The School is also part of that philosophy. The building itself is quite iconic, and we felt that it was a pity that it would be lost if it were privatized. On the other hand, merely wasting prims on a building that has no use would be stupid. Thus, the agreement is that buildings like the School remain public — it means that the Executive will preserve and maintain them to remain exactly like they are, with minor modifications if needed (reducing prim count, remodelling the interiors, etc.), but a private group can fully use it for their own activities, free from 'Government control', so long as they're willing to contribute tier.
It also gives those groups an entitlement to the usage (but not ownership) of those iconic landmarks. So, as long as a group is willing to contribute tier to a public landmark, Government is prevented to designate that particular landmark for other uses. This is exactly what is intended: in the case of the School, for as long as a group is willing to pay tier for it, that group — and nobody else! — is allowed to use it for their own purposes in exclusivity (and perpetuity, so long as tier is being contributed). It worked rather well so far for the School; less so for the MoCA, for instance, where groups proposing to use that space come and go.
Now of course nobody — much less the current Guild — is 'forced' to use the School or any other building. They obviously have the choice to go elsewhere, just like some people who originally supported the MoCA prefered to do their own art exhibitions and galleries elsewhere in the CDS.
Personally, of course, I would rather prefer to continue to have a group supporting the School (as I would like to have a group supporting the MoCA, the Biergarten, the Kirche, and even perhaps the Schloss...).
However, it's important to understand that there is a huge difference between 'having usage rights' to a public space, and 'becoming part of the group that maintains the totality of the CDS'. NL 4-16 is quite clear on this point!! This is what over the years has been blurred: because groups of people have somehow 'contributed' to the CDS — financially by paying tier, or through hard work to benefit the CDS — they have, over the years, accumulated 'benefits' and 'privileges'. Well, the CDS is not a meritocracy: you don't get 'special rights' above other citizens because you have been in the CDS for a longer period, contributed more tier, or contributed more voluntary work. You get special thanks and eventually an award, but not more rights. This is a mentality that we have to revert and combat!
Now I fully understand that many CDS residents, who think that the CDS would be better served if it were a meritocracy, will feel deeply offended by my words. That's not my intention — my point is just that we're not a meritocracy, or at least not yet: because we're still a democracy, people are more than welcome to establish a 'meritocracy faction' and elect, on the next term, RA members that change the laws to allow a meritocracy to be set up instead of a democracy where everybody has the same rights. That is certainly possible. I, for one, would be very sad to see that day coming, but I would obviously have no choice but to submit to the people's decision in an election.
In the mean time, I fully support the idea of correcting, clarifying, amending, or even superseding any law that is deemed stupid, inappropriate, or completely against our traditions. In this specific case, if the Guild feels that they should be 'entitled' to the plot holding the School, because they can demonstrate that it's perhaps the longest-standing building complying with NL 4-16, I, for one, don't see any problem in amending NL 4-16 and turning that landmark over to private use. In that case, a new group would be able to own the plot, and it would be a group-owned building like every other one. We would change appropriate laws to exclude the School from any laws requiring the Executive to maintain it as a public building. It would only need to supervise compliance with Covenants, but, otherwise, the School would become just another nice building in the CDS, subject to none except the group owners of the plot. I have absolutely no problem with that. If there is a strong motivation and belief that this is the right way to go ahead with the School, I, for one, have no objections, and I'm definitely available to support any bill to that effect.