[Draft] Omnibus State Code Amendment Act

[Koth]

Thirded.

[shetef]

Brought to vote here.

[Cormac]

Since this apparently isn't self-evident...

Voting for the Procedure amendment while voting against the State Code amendment doesn't make any sense. The Procedure amendment is specifically designed to bring the Procedure in line with the State Code amendment. Passing the Procedure amendment, but failing to pass the State Code amendment, will make the Procedure contradict the State Code.

I'm not saying don't vote against the State Code amendment. I mean, obviously, I'd prefer people vote for it, but that's up to each Councilor. But for the love of Ra, whatever you do, do not vote down the State Code amendment and then pass the complementary Procedure amendment.

[Cormac]

Bump, because there are inexplicably still two Councilors voting for the Procedure amendment but against the State Code amendment. Let me explain here, in depth, what will happen if the Procedure amendment passes but the State Code amendment does not:

• Section 3.2 of the Procedure amendment, mandating that an election period begins "ten days before the expiration of an elected official's term or as soon as practical after an elected office is vacated" directly contradicts Section 3 of the current State Code, because the State Code amendment eliminates challenge elections but if it fails challenge elections will be retained.
• The Procedure amendment does not address who presides over elections, because that is addressed in the State Code amendment which mandates that the Pharaoh presides over Keeper elections and the Keeper presides over all other elections. If we pass the Procedure amendment without the State Code amendment, we will have no one legally empowered to preside over elections.
• Run-off provisions and tie-breaking vote provisions were removed in the Procedure amendment, because the State Code amendment shifts from majority to plurality vote for elections, and because the State Code amendment mandates that tie-breaking votes will be cast by the electoral administrator for that election who can't vote except in the event of a tie. If the Procedure amendment passes and the State Code amendment fails, we will still be required to have majority votes to elect someone but no provision for run-offs, and we will have no mechanism for breaking electoral ties.

It's not an exaggeration to say if the Procedure amendment passes, and the State Code amendment fails, and then we have an election before we can fix the Procedure -- which is entirely possible, as we are about two weeks away from the next Keeper election -- this could be the most catastrophic legal mess in the history of the Osiris Fraternal Order. Please, do not pass the Procedure amendment without passing the State Code amendment.

[Cormac]

As a further note, this has become a mess. I encourage Councilors to vote against both the State Code amendment and the Procedure amendment, so that they can be returned to the drafting stage.

Treize Dreizehn will be handling re-drafting, as I've spent weeks on this already and am not inclined to draft provisions with which I disagree.

[Quadrimmina]

It seems that we could always do a point of order where passage of the State Code amendment constitutes passage of the Procedural amendment?

Edit: It'd probably require a vote on a resolution to agree to that, though.