Opinion Poll: Term Limits

Code of Laws said:

Section 6 Term Limits

A) Term Limits
I. Holder of Triumvirate and Cabinet offices are affected by term limits.

II. No one may be elected to the same Triumvirate or Cabinet office for more that two terms consecutively.

III. After serving two terms in the same Triumvirate or Cabinet office a Citizen must wait at least one term before running for the same office but may run for and hold any other office.

Click to expand...

Do we wish to continue setting a term limit for our Triumvirate and Cabinet officers?

If your answer is yes, than you wish to keep the two term limit allowed by our Code of Laws as posted above. Meaning no Triumvirate or Cabinet officer can hold any elected office more than two consecutive terms.

If your answer is no, than you wish to allow any officer to remain in the same office so long as the citizens continue electing him or her into that office. Meaning an officer could consecutively hold an elected office for more than two terms.

This opinion poll is based off the discussion located in the Citizens Proposal for a CoL Amendment: Mid-Term Officers.

Note: This poll is public as stipulated in our Constitution and Code of Laws under Section 3.A.II.

Request: I request this poll to be validated by the Censor.

Methos said:

Request: I request this poll to be validated by the Censor.

Click to expand...

As this is an Opinion poll, I cannot validate or invalidate this poll.

However, it does meet all requirements for validation, and so would be valid if it were an official poll.

Nicely done, Methos!

-- Ravensfire, Censor

Is it me or does II and III seem to say 2 different things. One says elected and one says serve.

If you are appointed then you arent elected as in section II but you do serve 2 terms. We need a wording change or JR clarification in addition to this poll.

This poll closes in a few hours so anyone else who would like to vote please do.

So since this opinion poll ended with "no " being the choice..should we consider putting this to a referendum/amendment vote before next term.

I think it would only effect Sigma and myself for next term.

robboo said:

So since this opinion poll ended with "no " being the choice..should we consider putting this to a referendum/amendment vote before next term.

I think it would only effect Sigma and myself for next term.

Click to expand...

Yes, I planned on doing this yesterday, but couldn't sleep. Spent the whole day either sleeping or trying to sleep so wasn't able to get anything done. Finally ended up taking a sleeping pill and luckily that worked. I'll do it later today after dinner.

Sorry for taking so long. I want to check the CoL to make sure I do everything legal.

No problem..I was just curious if you still wanted to go forward or not. It will be interesting to see if it still passes.

Methos said:

Sorry for taking so long. I want to check the CoL to make sure I do everything legal.

Click to expand...

There is no need to rush. I think you first have to start a discussion thread with the proposed amendment. Included in that thread (presumably after discussion has been started) must be a mock up of the proposed amendment poll. I think we came up with a template for these polls in term one. Then after that mock-up has been in the discussion thread for at least 24 hours the judiciary mut be notified to review the proposed amendment for conflicts with other existing laws.

So, anything happened on this subject?