Reform of the CDS Land Use Commission (LUC)

Here you might discuss basically everything.

Moderator: SC Moderators

User avatar
Tanoujin Milestone
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Friedsee

Re: Reform of the CDS Land Use Commission (LUC)

Post by Tanoujin Milestone »

We are used to call that implementing ordinances „by-laws“. I see no reason to put the additional responsibilities in by-laws, but I am not in direct opposition either, as long as we use a language that is understood by the juridical lay person.

BTW, the LUC is not a Non Governmental Organization. It is traditionally and by concept a RA Committee or Commission.

Lets return to the discussion about „executive“ or not. I have a hard time to find any executive functions of the LUC *in reality*, could you name a few? I see the RA has delegated long term planning to the LUC. Because it is somewhat convenient, the LUC takes on tasks of region development as well and advises the Chancellor. We are adding now some documentation. How are theses activities executive?
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Ian Maclaren
User avatar
Almut Brunswick
Casual contributor
Casual contributor
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:49 pm
Location: Neufreistadt & Braunschweig/Germany
Contact:

Re: Reform of the CDS Land Use Commission (LUC)

Post by Almut Brunswick »

Tanoujin Milestone wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:04 am We are used to call that implementing ordinances „by-laws“. I see no reason to put the additional responsibilities in by-laws, but I am not in direct opposition either, as long as we use a language that is understood by the juridical lay person.
Agreed, then call it by-law. Once again: In my understanding, a law defines the frame of responsibilities like in the paragraphs referred to in the Additional Responses. This way, they are not really "additional", but just implementations of the namely paragraphs in all their detailed depth.

Furthermore, using by-laws allows to assign or also to remove tasks without the need to change the law again.
Tanoujin Milestone wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:04 am BTW, the LUC is not a Non Governmental Organization. It is traditionally and by concept a RA Committee or Commission.
BTW, have I ever doubt that in the draft? Under the given circumstances and to comply with the obviously *holy* tradition, I refrained to ask for converting the LUC in an orderly governmental department.
Tanoujin Milestone wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:04 am Lets return to the discussion about „executive“ or not. I have a hard time to find any executive functions of the LUC *in reality*, could you name a few? I see the RA has delegated long term planning to the LUC. Because it is somewhat convenient, the LUC takes on tasks of region development as well and advises the Chancellor. We are adding now some documentation. How are theses activities executive?
I'm completely confused. The LUC is *the* service body for retrieving and processing information in respect on land use for the CDS government - the RA and now also the Chancellor - and shall fulfill their requests, and you state seriously that this is not an executive role? What exactly is your understanding of "executive" then? Please enlighten me :D
User avatar
Tanoujin Milestone
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Friedsee

Re: Reform of the CDS Land Use Commission (LUC)

Post by Tanoujin Milestone »

Thanks for asking! Let us look at §1 Motivation and Purpose:
A) ...Citizens actively participate by proposing, discussing, deciding and implementing the three-dimensional environment and all its directly related topics and items...
Proposals and Discussions are surely not executive by nature, they are preliminary. The democratic decision-making process stands in-between, it is linking the options with the realization by defining an authoritative plan. While the main institutions for this purpose are the forums and the Representative Assembly, the task to prepare proposals for development of our regions is delegated to the LUC. This is not an executive task either.

The implementation (=realization, execution [sic]) is an executive task

Some are deemed executive every-day-business and maintenance that are left to the Chancellor and their executive team, assuming they execute this according to the Constitution and Code of Laws. As far as region development is concerned, this
includes replacement/upgrading/placement of individual trees, rocks, street-lights, and any other environmental decor and corrective/adaptive terraforming that fit the theme and ambiance of the area and don't interfere with any citizen's enjoyment of their land. (https://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?p=49955#p49955)
Changes of important structural elements (executive) are subject to public discussion on the forums (decision-making). They are presented to the Chancellor and to the RA. If the Chancellor agrees to the changes, the Chancellor assigns the work to a CDS Artisan Guild member, or a member of the Executive team. You see, it is not the LUC, but the Chancellor and the RA who make the decision, and the Chancellor and their executive team, who carries that out. We are adding two other groups with the LUC act in 1(G):
(G) Though the long-time experience has shown that the commissioned creators of public projects are often LUC members, the LUC as such must not serve as the actual building contractor in order to prevent conflicts of interest. Building contractors may be suggested by the LUC to the Chancellor who will contract the actual work to a qualified CDS Artisan Guild member, or a member of the Executive team or CDS citizen at large.
Here you have it explicitly stated that an executive role of the LUC would lead to conflicts of interest.

————

I will give you some examples of activities I reckon as executive to give you an idea:

The work of the Treasurer (collecting tier, pay out, accounting, reporting etc)
The work of the Estate Managers (set parcels for sale, operate the Tier-Box-System, personal service, monitoring etc)
The work of the Estate Owner (maintenance of the Tier-Box-System etc)
The work of the Public Information Officer (organizing events, advertising, serving as Vice-Chancellor etc.)
The work of the Chancellor (supervising their team, writing late notices etc)

————

I hope I made my point clear. The LUC is on the side of proposing, discussing, and has a voice in deciding by its advisory role, but it is explicitly barred from executive activities as far as I understand it.

There is something else I would like to add for your consideration: if we add the word "executive" in 1(C), we limit the public control to exacly that. All other powers and permissions would be excluded by this specification. If we on the other hand omit to use that adjective, *any* powers and permissions of the LUC would be covered and the discussion moot.
I understand that you would prefer to fall back to your initial suggestion for (C) and state "that the LUC is an executive organ of the CDS". You told me you would like to see the CDS as a free town instead of a republic. This is an interesting idea, and we can discuss that as a constitutional question. But, see, you won't change anything by planting such a statement on the code-level. I have a lot of intersting ideas too, but I abstain from trying to make them real in CDS.
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Ian Maclaren
User avatar
Almut Brunswick
Casual contributor
Casual contributor
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:49 pm
Location: Neufreistadt & Braunschweig/Germany
Contact:

Re: Reform of the CDS Land Use Commission (LUC)

Post by Almut Brunswick »

Tanoujin Milestone wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 5:20 am §1 Motivation and Purpose:
A) ...Citizens actively participate by proposing, discussing, deciding and implementing the three-dimensional environment and all its directly related topics and items...
Proposals and Discussions are surely not executive by nature, they are preliminary. The democratic decision-making process stands in-between, it is linking the options with the realization by defining an authoritative plan. While the main institutions for this purpose are the forums and the Representative Assembly, the task to prepare proposals for development of our regions is delegated to the LUC. This is not an executive task either.
Once again I disagree! The difference between proposals and discussions stated by citizens in the Forum and formal requests to the LUC to take action for developing plans, performing surveys etc. is that this is an active demand of either the legislative (the RA) or the executive (the Chancellor) towards the LUC. And nobody who participates on forum discussions is obliged to report to the RA or the Chancellor. The LUC, however, is.
The implementation (=realization, execution [sic]) is an executive task
Agreed. But creating and presenting plans, performing a survey, creating maps, examining more modern alternatives for existing solutions are acts of implementation, too. All these tasks are eventually executive tasks in my eyes.
Some are deemed executive every-day-business and maintenance that are left to the Chancellor and their executive team, assuming they execute this according to the Constitution and Code of Laws. As far as region development is concerned, this
includes replacement/upgrading/placement of individual trees, rocks, street-lights, and any other environmental decor and corrective/adaptive terraforming that fit the theme and ambiance of the area and don't interfere with any citizen's enjoyment of their land. (https://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?p=49955#p49955)
Changes of important structural elements (executive) are subject to public discussion on the forums (decision-making). They are presented to the Chancellor and to the RA. If the Chancellor agrees to the changes, the Chancellor assigns the work to a CDS Artisan Guild member, or a member of the Executive team. You see, it is not the LUC, but the Chancellor and the RA who make the decision, and the Chancellor and their executive team, who carries that out.
I even do not disagree, because it is not the task of the LUC to make decisions this way or to compete with the Chancellor's competencies. That is clearly stated in the draft. But for me, it looks like the legal nature of the LUC shall be just a sort of informal coffee party somewhere in a twilight zone between private and political life. Such a weak legal position within the CDS, however, does not meet the (even yet extended) scope of LUC responsibilities. Please read this word carefully: Responsibilities! Who of the discussion participants in the Forum can claim to have a fixed role profile like this? Nobody.
We are adding two other groups with the LUC act in 1(G):
(G) Though the long-time experience has shown that the commissioned creators of public projects are often LUC members, the LUC as such must not serve as the actual building contractor in order to prevent conflicts of interest. Building contractors may be suggested by the LUC to the Chancellor who will contract the actual work to a qualified CDS Artisan Guild member, or a member of the Executive team or CDS citizen at large.
Here you have it explicitly stated that an executive role of the LUC would lead to conflicts of interest.
And one more once: It is nowhere stated in the draft that the LUC claims for itself to act as a building contractor or as a syndicate of creators. Yes, it underlines the actual tasks of the LUC as defined in the LUC Act. The executive acting of the LUC, however, is not bound to the fact that it is building houses or changing landscape or planting bushes or not. It is bound to the fact that the RA as legislative organ has the right to demand services from the LUC and also to expect rendered accounts - like it would do with any other executive organ in the RA meetings.
————

I will give you some examples of activities I reckon as executive to give you an idea:

The work of the Treasurer (collecting tier, pay out, accounting, reporting etc)
The work of the Estate Managers (set parcels for sale, operate the Tier-Box-System, personal service, monitoring etc)
The work of the Estate Owner (maintenance of the Tier-Box-System etc)
The work of the Public Information Officer (organizing events, advertising, serving as Vice-Chancellor etc.)
The work of the Chancellor (supervising their team, writing late notices etc)
The work of the LUC (creating plans, performing surveys, drawing maps, retrieving land information etc.)

————
I hope I made my point clear. The LUC is on the side of proposing, discussing, and has a voice in deciding by its advisory role, but it is explicitly barred from executive activities as far as I understand it.
I'm sorry, but none of your arguments has really convinced me. I see the main issue is that you see executive powers exclusively in the hands of the Chancellor and their assigned officers while I understand executive as an acting to fulfill tasks based on a vote and order of a constitutional power.
There is something else I would like to add for your consideration: if we add the word "executive" in 1(C), we limit the public control to exacly that. All other powers and permissions would be excluded by this specification. If we on the other hand omit to use that adjective, *any* powers and permissions of the LUC would be covered and the discussion moot.
Proposal for a compromise: When the LUC is a legal body which shall not be official part of the CDS executive in this narrow sense, would it then at least be possible to call the LUC a corporation under public law (German: Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts) acting as an order management for the legislative and the executive? Let me rephrase the paragraph accordingly:
I (C) The LUC is a corporation under public law of the citizenship of the CDS under direct supervision and control of the RA for the purposes outlined in (B). Its powers and permissions are directly tied to public discussions in the CDS Discussion Forums and to the votes of the RA. The LUC shall perform order management for the legislative and executive powers of the CDS. It thus shall be responsive to requests from the RA and the Chancellor, but may set its own agenda.
That omits the word "executive" now, but shows between the lines that executive tasks may be performed by the LUC under control of the RA etc.
I understand that you would prefer to fall back to your initial suggestion for (C) and state "that the LUC is an executive organ of the CDS". You told me you would like to see the CDS as a free town instead of a republic.
A free town *is* also a republic, just as a side note. But also the curent Republic of the CDS should have an effective government especially when you have so few people willing to run it (and having the same people in multiple functions). I'm not fond of traditional "common law" constructions with NGOs in positions which actually require something different. Anyway - we will have to talk about this act in the next RA while we are still anxiously hoping for two by-elected further colleagues.
User avatar
Tanoujin Milestone
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Friedsee

Re: Reform of the CDS Land Use Commission (LUC)

Post by Tanoujin Milestone »

Thank you for explaining. I see your point and am undecided now - thanks for offering a compromise! I would like to know Rosie‘s opinion now, while I look up the implications of defining the LUC as „corporation under public law“
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Ian Maclaren
User avatar
Tanoujin Milestone
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Friedsee

Re: Reform of the CDS Land Use Commission (LUC)

Post by Tanoujin Milestone »

Okay, I looked it up now.

I see a problem with using juristic language that is specific for Germany, Austria, Liechtenstein and Switzerland for two reasons:

1. The average citizen (e.g. me) will be overcharged with understanding concepts from national juristic RL contexts. Consequences to the political system of the CDS are opaque and not assessable. In the tradition of Dean Gwyneth Llewelyn I admonish the legislator to keep the texts of our laws in an educating format. That means we have to explain the concepts we use in simple words.

2. The CDS has seen a judiciary crisis in 2006/2007, when RL experienced lawyers tried to professionalize the Judiciary Branch. What we learned from that was to keep it simple, stick to basic procedures without adding more complexity than necessary and protect citizens’ rights and the balance of power.
That does not mean I reject your obvious RL expertise in public administration, but I am trying to „translate“ it according to the knowledge we can expect from an average lay person.

----------

To the point:

1) A corporation under public law is a juristic person entrusted with public functions.
1A) Territorial corporations are the state, the federation itself, the federal states and the municipalities. Such s corporation holds control of sovereign public authority. It can raise taxes and employ personnel.

In this sense the CDS as a whole would be a territorial corporation. IMO this concept is too mighty to apply it to a sub-council of the government like the LUC.

1B) Self-governmental corporations deal with governmental tasks that are outsourced to the people concerned and transferred to legally responsible organizations. As part of the public authority they are bound to statute and law. They are subject to legal supervision by the government.

Looks like we *could* use this definition.
Examples are the Bavarian State Chamber of Physicians, bar association and the „Deutschlandradio“ (national German public radio broadcaster).

1C) Corporations with limited state influence: sometimes the government confers the status of a corporation under public law to organizations which do not deal with public functions, but are part of civil society. This is an act of appreciation that comes with certain privileges.

I think this is not applicable.

1D) Religious bodies recognized by law

not applicable.

————

Let us look deeper into 1B). Self-governmental corporations under public law deal with the affairs of the persons concerned. That means they have members. I believe the example of Deutschlandradio is the most interesting. Members and at the same time providers of the corporation are ARD, a radio broadcasting network composed of ten public service broadcasters and ZDF, the „second“ public radio broadcaster.

These subunits are not constituted as corporations under public law, but public-law institutions (German: Anstalten des öffentlichen Rechts).

Definition: A public-law institution is a juristic person of public law, entrusted with public functions which have been allocated to it by law or charter. In contrary to a corporation under public law the institution has no members, but users.

I think that is the crucial point: the LUC is not a guild of landscapers, but it helps producing an environment (like a radio broadcaster produces a program) that is commonly used by the CDS Citizenry. So I think public-law institution would be the term which is more to the point.

Now if you try to find a parallel in the anglo saxon world, the closest thing you can find is „The Public Institution“ (öffentliche Einrichtung):

A public institution is a juristic person in the United States which is backed through public funds and controlled by the state.[1][2] Typically a public institution will have a board of trustees who govern the institution and the members of the board are public officials who are appointed by the state. A public institution is required to conform to the same requirements as the state for constitutional questions. Court cases involving public institutions are within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Federal Court System.

Okay, based on this I suggest we agree on the term public-law institution. As no one will understand what that means, we have to explain.

Proposed:
1 (C) The LUC is a public institution of the CDS, entrusted with public functions outlined in (B). It is directly supervised and controlled by the RA. Its powers and permissions are directly tied to public discussions in the CDS Discussion Forums and to the votes of the RA. The LUC shall process orders on behalf of the legislative and executive branches of the CDS. It thus shall be responsive to requests from the RA and the Chancellor, but may set its own agenda.
I do not use the term public-law institution, because there are no entries in the english wikipedia or the Oxford Learner’s Dictionary. I do not want our Citizens groping in the dark. I see no reason to mention the legal person characteristic, the „board“ and the process of appointment are covered elsewhere, loyalty to the constitution and jurisdiction of the SC are self-evident in my opinion.

A bit tired, waiting for comments. Would be nice if you could add the traits you are missing instead of discarding the whole compromise, thank you.
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Ian Maclaren
User avatar
Almut Brunswick
Casual contributor
Casual contributor
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:49 pm
Location: Neufreistadt & Braunschweig/Germany
Contact:

Re: Reform of the CDS Land Use Commission (LUC)

Post by Almut Brunswick »

Dear Tan,

I can keep it simple: 100% agreed!

Thank you for the elaborate survey and pondering pros and cons. It seems you hit the nail and outlined the legal nature of the LUC very well. Now I'm curious what others will say.

Almut
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”