10-01-2018, 01:14 AM
<p>The new text box has been causing issues which is why formatting has come out like that. I believe it has been resolved in the latest round of fixing by New Rogernomics.</p>
<p>
<p>I will talk to the Delegate about whether an amendment should be made to the Mandate in order to allow the VD a greater role in their capacity as chairperson of the CLS.</p>
<p>
<p>The intention of the poll was to ascertain whether a waiver should be allowed in the first place as people have expressed an opposition to a waiver and others support it. The excerpt which mentioned the Delegate was included as a point of reference. </p>
<p>What makes you state with such certainty that he will not be able to get a waiver? I believe he will as he's a relatively well-liked member. </p>
<p>
<p>In 2017, Funkadelia was able to push his agenda through a reluctant Assembly by stacking the citizenship roll with his supporters. He was able to do this as he was the sole authority. </p>
<p>This Assembly should have the authority to act as a counterbalance against this hypothetical abuse. </p>
<p>Your point on the constitutionality is quite valid though. I will seek an amendment which will allow for such a change.</p>
<p>
Quote:<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif;">Again, I believe this to be unconstitutional. Mandate 12 allows no role for the Vice Delegate or Council on Lazarene Security in admitting citizens; it's entirely the Delegate's prerogative to admit citizens or not, except that Mandate 12 allows for an appeals process in the event of rejection. So I really won't be able to vote for this given I believe it's unconstitutional.</span></p>
<p>I will talk to the Delegate about whether an amendment should be made to the Mandate in order to allow the VD a greater role in their capacity as chairperson of the CLS.</p>
<p>
Quote:<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif;">Why did you retain this when most people (7-5, ~54%) preferred letting the Delegate grant the waiver? Again, I think this might be unconstitutional, and moreover I think it's just a bad idea that will in all likelihood deprive us of active contributors to our community, like Milograd. There's no way he's going to get a 2/3 vote waiver to be here and I don't see any reason he should need one. I don't understand the fixation on an Assembly waiver but I'm against it.</span></p>
<p>The intention of the poll was to ascertain whether a waiver should be allowed in the first place as people have expressed an opposition to a waiver and others support it. The excerpt which mentioned the Delegate was included as a point of reference. </p>
<p>What makes you state with such certainty that he will not be able to get a waiver? I believe he will as he's a relatively well-liked member. </p>
<p>
Quote:<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif;">Again, the Assembly doesn't have the constitutional power to overturn a citizenship approval, only a rejection. We've covered this already, so I won't go into more detail.</span></p>
<p>In 2017, Funkadelia was able to push his agenda through a reluctant Assembly by stacking the citizenship roll with his supporters. He was able to do this as he was the sole authority. </p>
<p>This Assembly should have the authority to act as a counterbalance against this hypothetical abuse. </p>
<p>Your point on the constitutionality is quite valid though. I will seek an amendment which will allow for such a change.</p>