The Open Sesame Act

[Ian Plätschisch]

WHEREAS Closed provinces cause people to be assigned to a province different from where the catchment areas indicate they should, and

WHEREAS We work really hard on the catchment areas, so we should use them, and

WHEREAS If citizens are distributed without regard for their location, the provinces become solely "Senatorial Voting Clubs" without geographical meaning, and

WHEREAS What is a geographical division if it has no geographical meaning?

THEREFORE Lex.E.7.13, Lex.E.7.14, and Lex.E.7.15, which currently read;

7.13. All provincial citizenship assignments shall be made when the province to which the citizen is assigned is OPEN to nonresident immigration on the day prior to the naturalization of said citizen. A province shall be CLOSED if its population is equal to or greater than thrice the population of the smallest province (by population) on the day prior to the naturalization of said citizen.
7.14. For purposes of this title, provinces shall be listed in the following circular order: Cézembre, Florencia, Fiova, Atatürk, Vuode, Maritiimi-Maxhestic, Maricopa, Benito.
7.15. No citizen may be assigned to a "closed" province. In the event that a citizen's assignment may place him in a "closed" province, the citizen is assigned to the next province listed in E.7.14 which is not "closed."

Are hereby repealed.

FURTHERMORE Lex.E.10.7. which currently reads;

10.7. Whenever any Talossan wants to move his provincial assignment to the province in whose assigned area he actually lives, he may do so, provided that either a) the province to which he is moving is not closed to immigration, or b) both provinces are currently closed to immigration.

shall be amended to read;

10.7. Whenever any Talossan wants to move his provincial assignment to the province in whose assigned area he actually lives, he may do so by notifying the Chancery.  The move will be officially recognised once the Chancery has validated the request.

Noi Urent q'estadra så;

Ian Plätschisch (MC-MRPT)

C. Carlüs Xheraltescù (MC-FDA)

Munditenens Tresplet (Senator-Maricopa)

[Ian Plätschisch]

Such lack of discussion must surely indicate unanimous approval! Or perhaps it is just a boring bill to comment on...

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Honestly, this is just such a big thing I haven't had time to think much about it!

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

This is an interesting one; I'm going to have to give this some thought before I commit either way.

[Ian Plätschisch]

Oct 20, 2015 16:18:02 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

This is an interesting one; I'm going to have to give this some thought before I commit either way.

From the coalition agreement;

Remove the closed provinces rule

So, while you may find you need to ponder it, it shouldn't have come as a surprise, hopefully

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Oct 20, 2015 16:25:48 GMT -6 Ian Plätschisch said:

Oct 20, 2015 16:18:02 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

This is an interesting one; I'm going to have to give this some thought before I commit either way.

From the coalition agreement;

Remove the closed provinces rule

So, while you may find you need to ponder it, it shouldn't have come as a surprise, hopefully

You don't need to quote the agreement I wrote, don't you worry. The concern is over the language you use, and the more precise changes you want to bring about. As I said, I'll want to think about this further before commenting further.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

I like it.

[Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun]

Barring any idiotic oversights that I may have committed while reading through your proposal, I will say that I like it.

[Ian Plätschisch]

I don't think this proposal is overly complicated. Very simple, I would say. All I did was remove all references to "closed provinces"

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

I thought this was part of Lüc's provincial reform bill, but I must have been imagining things. I like it. I would suggest expanding on 10.7 to specify how you change provincial assignments (e.g. by informing the SoS that you want to change, and the SoS verifying that you live in the catchment area of the new province).

[Ian Plätschisch]

While that change sounds like a good idea, I would rather not deal with multiple issues in one bill (the last time I tried that, it didn't work so well). 10.7 was already there, all I did was eliminate references to closed provinces.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Oct 20, 2015 23:10:15 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

I thought this was part of Lüc's provincial reform bill, but I must have been imagining things. I like it. I would suggest expanding on 10.7 to specify how you change provincial assignments (e.g. by informing the SoS that you want to change, and the SoS verifying that you live in the catchment area of the new province).

I actually agree with Sir Cresti; this is what I was trying to work out what was missing the first time I read through this properly. It's probably legislatively prudent to include within this bill some indication as to the formal procedure, even in a vague form, as to how one might go about switching. Simply by adding 'by notifying the Chancery' to your amended 10.7, this would be solved. It makes it clear who's responsible for administering the change.

If you could make that change, I'd be happy to co-sponsor.

[Ian Plätschisch]

I added "by notifying the Chancery" and added you as a co-sponsor. I think I will be putting this on the November Clark, unless a major problem crops up.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Excellent, thank you. Might be wise to include something along the lines of 'The move will be officially recognised once the Chancery has validated the request' as well, come to think of it.

[Munditenens Tresplet]

I would be happy to co-sponsor as well.