more power for mayors?

[disorganizer]

INFORMATIONAL POLL

Would it make sense to give mayors more powers and responsibilities?

This poll is to be used for getting public opinion on this issue. The details should be discussed after this and be based on the result.

My proposal could look as follows (of course up for discussion):

Mayors role:
* govern counties of 2-3 cities
* set up build queues
* set up citizen moods
* set up a county thread with informations on those cities
* open a discussion thread for the county
* if wanted hold open county-ballots
* if wanted set up enhanced rules for the county
* if wanted real-estate rpg enabling issues

Governors role:
* govern 5-6 counties
* collect mayors proposals for the 10-18 cities of the province
* bring those proposals to the turn thread
* veto right for any city matter (but he must state why he vetoed!)
* be part of the senate
* set up a province thread
* open a discussion thread for the province
* if wanted hold open province ballots
* if wanted setup up enhanced rules for province
* if wanted real-estate rpg enabling issues
* hold acceptance polls for mayors
* can open a retirement poll for any mayor after request of any citizen
* directly governs any city without mayor

Domestic Department role:
* veto right to any city matters (but he must state why!)
* directly governs any province without governor
...

of course, the county rules may not counter the province rules which may not counter any national rules

a retirement of a mayor can be requested by any citizen at any point of the game if a follow up mayor is there.
the governor will then set up a citizen poll for the whole nation about the retirement

the governor can appoint any mayor or the mayors can self-declare if no mayor is already there. they do this in the province thread. the governor then hold an acceptance citizen poll for the whole nation and if accepted the mayor starts in his job.

it is up to the governor to set up any rules how to hande change-of-office requests (another citizen wants to become mayor in a city which already has one), for example with a open ballot in the provice etc.

THIS POLL IS UP FOR 3 DAYS AND HAS YES, NO AND ABSTAIN.
if you dont comply to the details in here, they are just an example! Please vote yes if you comply in general to the idea behind it. Discussion will follow.

 

[Zarn]

Dis, I think that you are on to something. It could solve the mayor problem. The huge map takes alot of space to fill though.

 

[disorganizer]

i hope so. the numbers of course can be upped a bit. maybe with the large map we will use 4-5 cities per mayor or so.

but also, maybe we get only a small part of the lands on the huge map due to the circumstances... maybe we make a peaceful approach as germans? (this would be challenging! a german cultural or even better un victory!).

 

[eyrei]

We have enough trouble getting our governors to post build queues....

 

[Almightyjosh]

The roel of posting build ques is the primary role of Governors. In terms of affecting the game, it is the only real influence they have. The proposal you are making is basically to turn Mayors into Governors, ie, to make smaller provinces. We ahve enough trouble co-ordinating 12 provinces, let alone 30 counties!!! Can you imagine 30 different people posting build ques? The number of positions that would need to be filled is astronomical, even if we did, firstly there would NEVER be elections, as eveyone could just go and claim a city for themselves and thus the canidates would be of such poor quality (due to our desperation to fill positions) that build ques would be posted less often then now.

But the worst thing about this proposal is not the logistaic but the principal. From what you have outlined, Mayors would not have to run for election, merely declare that they are now mayor, and the 'governor' can hold a poll like Is this person Ok? if they feel like it. WHERE'S THE DEMOCRACY???

 

[Almightyjosh]

PLUS, WHO THE HELL IS GOING TO WANT TO BE A GOVERNOR????
Job description:
Prance around with no real power and make sure the unelected Mayors are all nice and happy and be completely incapable of enforcing the will of the people that voted for you?

Why would anyone be a governor if they could just 'declare' themselves a mayor and never have to relinquish the title????

This is a very bad idea for alot of reasons. Maybe you should run for Governor next time Dis, then all your problems would be solved.

 

[chiefpaco]

I voted no (you asked to say why...).

I like how it worked in term 1. It may be too much to have us also dependent on mayor's build queues. The dependency list for turn chats may start to get too large.

Also, I would not want someone mayor of a city - controlling the build queue - without electing them them. Additional elections may go beyond the limits of our forum. I also like how being a mayor is a volunteer job.

I think using governors to set build queues is healthier for the game. The fewer ppl we have controlling our production, the better scope we have in addressing our needs. If there were a few dozen ppl controlling production, I think it would be even more difficult to work together.

I also would not envy the task of a governor in this proposal. Perhaps it is just me, but it seems they may have no real game action.

Lastly, I don't think we'll all ever agree on what we should build in our cities. If someone doesn't like how it is being run, they should run, or at least not re-elect the current governor. I think we might be adding too much to the complexity here.

 

[Almightyjosh]

A man after me own heart, that exactly my thoughts.
(btw that just means we're thinking the same thing for all those now well versed in coloquialisms)

 

[disorganizer]

cp: thats why an acceptance poll was included in the proposal and why the governors still hold veto rights for the queues. not much change to their powers now except the fact that they govern more cities and that they have to talk to the people instead of proclaiming things ;-)

 

[Cyc]

Dis - I think it's too many changes at the start of a new game. In fact your whole plan wouldn't work at the start of the game. This is one of those ideas that the game evolves into with a lot of discussion and persuasion. It seems you're trying to yank power from positions that are tried and true. Revolting at game's end didn't help you any either. I voted no.

 

[Ehecatl Atzin]

I agree with Almightyjosh, for the most part, i like the county idea though, 3 cities being governed by a mayor could solve the "mayorless city" problem, but the governor should still be the one responsible for build queues, so I voted no.

Ehecatl Atzin

 

[Stuck_as_a_Mac]

I vote no, but you guys already said what i was going to say.



I wanted to say something!!!

Besides, im going to be much more efficent now that im getting a Win box.

 

[Eklektikos]

Originally posted by Stuck_As_a_Mac
I vote no, but you guys already said what i was going to say.



I wanted to say something!!!

Besides, im going to be much more efficent now that im getting a Win box.

Win box? Efficient?!?

*disappears in a puff of hilarity*

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

I also voted no. This proposal would put all effective power in the hands of non-elected, self-appointed, officials. Meanwhile, properly elected governors would lose most of their authority, and have to rely on tension building vetos to work coordinated building processes.

I wanted to see what a Mayorial process proposal would look like, but this one I cannot endorse.

Bill

 

[Octavian X]

Need I say why I voted no? Everyone else has said what I wanted to say, so I won't say it.

 

[disorganizer]

In fact i can only repeat:
The governors may face massive poll request next game >-)
They will not use any power with this proposal, as they still have uncountered veto right. They only have to explain why they veto. And no, the mayors of the proposal above are kind of elected because they will need approval by citizenry and can be retired at any time with a normal citizen poll. So if somebody goes rampant, we can be removed quick.
So where are your concerns?!?

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

i agree with both cp and josh that this is a bad idea. If a moyor wants something in the build queue he can ask the governor. Ive been asked twice to change things by my mayors once i took over as governor of ameri in my short term. With mayors and governors working together the provinces are better. Besides what happens when we have more cities than mayors?

 

[disorganizer]

thats why the proposal includes "counties"

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

I still say no way jose

 

[Danke]

I am voting no for the same oft-voiced reasons above, *however* I think that dis is on to something with some kind of expanded role for Mayors and the idea of a county as a real entity. I think there is consensus that mayors should not handle build queues, but there is a lot more that could be done, particularly as the RPG kicks in.

I agree with Cyc that this should be developed over time. We will likely have good examples to build on as the game evolves.

One of the reasons I like the overall concept of expanding roles and responsibilities is that we are likely to have many more citizens in the game this time around (just a hunch) and more opportunities to directly participate will be necessary in order to keep people interested and involved.