Fwd: [NovaRoma-Announce] Results from Senate Session

[L. Livia Plauta]

---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
Da: "Robert Woolwine robert....@gmail.com [NovaRoma-Announce]" <NovaRoma-Ann...@yahoogroups.com>
Data: 26/gen/2016 06:48
Oggetto: [NovaRoma-Announce] Results from Senate Session
A: <NovaRoma...@yahoogroups.com>
Cc:

 

Avete Omnes,

Since we have no Tribunes of the Plebs,as Princeps Senatus, I wanted to inform the public with the results of the recent Senate deliberations.

There was one late vote which I am included in the record though not in the numeric total.  81% of the Board participated and voted in total.  Marcus Cornelius vote was cast after the deadline.  His vote is included in the comment section but NOT in the vote tally for each item.  13 votes were cast - 12 were counted.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Princeps Senatus 

Item 1 - PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (12 Yes - 0 No - 0 abstain)

I.    Discussion and endorsement of Dictatorship and actions so far taken.

Proposed Senatus Consultum: 

"Do we, the Senate of Nova Roma, by vote of simple  majority, support the issuance of the Senatus consulta ultima of November 16th, and the appointments of Gnaeus Iulius Caesar to the office of Dictator, and Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix to the office of Magister Equitum, operating within the office of the Dictatura, and while recognizing this vote does not compromise the right of ratification by the Senate of Nova Roma upon the termination of the Dictatura, support the Dictatorial Edicts issued so far?"

Sulla: - Yes 

Comments:  I believe we have made the case to support the actions taken by Consul Caninus, Dictator Gn. Iulius Caesar and myself.  This crises was entirely preventable.  We warned the former citizens that their actions had consequences that went far beyond the immediate issues.  They chose to ignore the situation they precipitated.  They must have assumed that we had no recourse or remedies.  They were wrong.  Dictator Caesar and I are just barely in the beginning phases of reforming Nova Roma and unlike any other faction in NR we have published and continually promoted discussions as to the core of our plan, Nova Roma Reborn.  An endorsement of our actions and our offices that we currently hold is an endorsement that the Senate is the supreme policy making body of Nova Roma and more importantly that Nova Roma is not governed by wannabe Gracchi demagogues.  I urge every Senator to vote yes in supporting the efforts of Gn. Iulius and myself in reforming Nova Roma. 

Palladius:  Yes

Gn. Iulius Caesar:  

ITEM I. Uti rogas. The situation that led to the installation of the Dictatura was nothing less than an outright assault by the tribunes on the internal laws of Nova Roma, and the rights of the Senate/Board of Directors. Had this been permitted to pass unchecked the Senate/Board would have been emasculated. This I believe was the goal of the tribunes and their supporters all along. That simply cannot happen, not least because of our obligations as a Board of Directors of a non-profit. We, here in this House, are the ones who carry the responsibility and allowing ourselves to be stripped of any means of effective governance would have been a total surrender of that responsibility. Demagoguery cannot be allowed to triumph. The senate voted for the Executive Committee, and it acted with the consent of Caninus consul. The expulsions were limited, but very necessary. Changes will be made to Nova Roma as we work in close concert with the corporation's Registered Agent. We will fix these long standing festering sores that have plagued Nova Roma, ever since it was first incorporated, and in some ways from its very inception. 

Sabinus:  ITEM I: Uti rogas. I fully support the current course of action. If it doesn't happen, we will witness the same Nova Roma's lethargy for years. Caesar came with good plan. Sulla live for Nova Roma. What else?

Fabius:  ITEM I: Uti rogas. The Tribunes became out of hand. I have always been against a greater number of Tribunes than 2. It is sad to see my prediction vindicated. As for a dictatorship here in NR, a strict dictatorship I would be against. However, unlike Rome this is more like an executive steering committee, and not a totalitarian regime. I fully support the current course of action.

Caeca:  Item 1: Uti Rogas. What was done was necessary, and while the actions were

taken swiftly and decisively, they were also taken with thought and care.
The Tribunes created a situation that could have either endangered the
entire organization or set a precedent by which our organization would
ultimately be managed not by its board of directors but by some of our most
junior and inexperienced members, who, in addition, have no macronational
legal or fiduciary responsibility, and this would be absolutely and entirely
unacceptable. I will not pretend to be happy about some of the removals
from all offices, but I certainly *do* understand why doing so was
necessary, and, had I been in the same position may well have done the same
thing. I have seen no tendency in the Dictatura to viciousness or
vengefulness, and, in fact, although it is not required, both the dictator
and the Magister Equum have sought, listened to, and seriously considered
the opinions of citizens throughout this entire process. I also think that
the Dictatura will allow us to restructure our organization so that it is
stronger, works more smoothly, and will allow us to actually grow and
prosper.

Crispus:  Uti Rogas

Aeternia:  Uti Rogas

Consul Caninus:  Item I:  Uti rogas.

The tribunes, who are neither directors nor officers of Nova Roma, Inc., endangered the corporation by attempting to apply their interpretation of bylaws to overturn a decision made by the Board of Directors. If the the tribunes were allowed to successfully impose a veto and that veto was allowed to stand, the Board of Directors of Nova Roma, Inc. would have every decision made subject to the approval of the tribunes, not just in the future, as the tribunes could impose a veto on decisions made in the past. The Board of Directors of Nova Roma, Inc. would thus be incapacitated and completely ineffective. The dictatorship was the only option available to repair the constitution, bylaws and articles of incorporation. The plan to separate the nonprofit corporation, Nova Roma, Inc., from the res publica - the social organization that simulates a Roman Republican government - is the only viable means to prevent future conflicts between our recreation of Rome and our corporate compliance requirements. The removal of a few individuals from the Board of Directors was necessary to ensure the board would not be crippled by members who did not understand threat and the compliance requirements. The voluntary resignations of a couple of other board members were understandable but unfortunate. The expulsions of individuals from Nova Roma membership were shocking and hopefully some of these individuals will be permitted to return to the res publica. But the Board of Directors of Nova Roma, Inc. has a lot of work to do, a lot of restructuring and planning for the future. We cannot be sidetracked by individuals who want to make Nova Roma, Inc. operate more like a Roman Republican ideal. We must ensure the nonprofit corporation is safe from the politics of the res publica. I support the actions of the Executive Committee and the dictatorship as the means to restructure Nova Roma, Inc.

Consul Laenas:  Uti Rogas

Agrippa:  Uti Rogas

Paulinus:  Uti Rogas

___________________________________________

Item 2 - PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (12 Yes - 0 No - 0 Abstain)

II.   Approval of up to $500.00 USD for legal consultation. 

Proposed Senatus Consultum - 

"The Senate of Nova Roma approves the expenditure, by the Chief Financial Officer, of up to $500.00 USD for legal consultation regarding the recent letter of demand, potential civil litigation, potential changes to corporate structure and corporate compliance in general."

Sulla - Yes

Comments:  From the beginning of the receipt of the demand letter I have been the person to deal with our attorney.  Let me take a brief diversion to note the irony that for someone who is so despised by some of those members who filed the demand letter that they seem to have no problem taking the very same steps I took when I filed my demand letter.  I guess I am despised since I blazed the trial, just like my namesake..  Anyway, dry humor set aside, while I am not at all panicked by the demand letter NR should be responsible in defending any legal fees considering that none of us draw any salary from the corporation.  Secondly, all of our actions were taken on behalf of the corporation.   $500.00 is a respectable amount in that should no complaint be filed we would be able to use the funds to get legal advise to ensure our restructuring is Maine complaint from the top of the organizational structure to the very bottom.  This is something that has never been done since NR was founded and such action will ensure and minimize any potential legal issues in the future - thus it will be a win - win whether a complaint is filed or not.

Palladius:  Yes

Caesar:  ITEM II. Uti rogas. This legal challenge has come at a very challenging time for me personally, coming as it did shortly before the death of my mother and a serious medical issue for myself. That said anyone can at anytime threaten to sue. If we worried about that we might as well not be here, or get up in the morning, and instead just hide from life under the covers. Naturally I find it ironic that some of those that have bleated the loudest about how little we are like a res publica recently have now decided to hire a lawyer. Their personal circumstances obviously overcame their Romanitas, and how easily they shoved that in the closet when it suited them to do so, turning instead to the modern equivalent of Punic mercenaries to aid them. Obviously they finally found a use for the corporation, but it is sad it was only to benefit themselves. Regardless of the outcome of this issue, one positive thing has transpired; both lawyers state that Nova Roma cannot govern itself as a res publica under its current structure, which is EXACTLY what I have been saying since 2009. We need to continue to work closely with Nova Roma's attorney, not just concerning the complaint, but in the long-term also so we can re-structure the corporation to prevent these constant conflicts. This is money well spent. 

Sabinus:  ITEM II: Uti rogas. There is a time when we must react. And we need professional reaction.

Fabius:  ITEM II: Uti rogas. Of course since we did it, now they do it. We showed them the way. I do not believe 500 will be enough. 2. we seem to have a leak. Has anyone thought that we should go to executive meetings and suspend reports until this crisis is solved? Frankly I don't see us winning this, unless we can prove their presence was devaluing our corporation's assets which will be very hard to do. We likely will be forced to reinstate removed board members. 

Caeca:  Item II: Uti Rogas. It would be irresponsible to either not seek the

assistance of our agent, or not to set aside funds to cover this situation.
If the funds we have set aside are not sufficient, we can approve the
expenditure of more money for this purpose, which I would also support.

Crispus:  Uti Rogas

Aeternia:  Uti Rogas

Consul Caninus:  

Item II:  Uti rogas.

The corporation was threatened and the Executive Committee responded to the threat. The corporation must bear the burden of any litigation as this is a matter of corporate survival. 

Consul Laenas:  Uti Rogas

Agrippa:  Uti Rogas

Paulinus:  Uti Rogas

__._,_.___

---

Posted by: Robert Woolwine <robert....@gmail.com>

---

Reply via web post

•

Reply to sender

•

Reply to group

•

Start a New Topic

•

Messages in this topic (1)

Visit Your Group

• New Members 1

• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___

[Publius Porcius Licinus]

Salve Plauta,

Just a few comments from "the other side".

"An endorsement of our actions and our offices that we currently hold is an endorsement that the Senate is the supreme policy making body of Nova Roma and more importantly that Nova Roma is not governed by wannabe Gracchi demagogues."

One slight problem. Endorsement of those actions includes actions that violate either Maine state law, or the Constitution, or both. Theoretically, the Constitution of Nova Roma grants the Senate the power to appoint a Dictator, and grants that Dictator the power to ignore the Constitution, but Maine state law does not recognize that bylaws can empower an officer of a company to ignore those bylaws. Sulla should know that, he's the one who threatened to sue if Marinus accepted the Senate's appointment as a Dictator in 2010. Nor does structuring the Dictatura as a form of Executive Committee serve as a loophole, since the Senate has no power to create an Executive Committee under both Maine law and the Nova Roma Constitution.

"The situation that led to the installation of the Dictatura was nothing less than an outright assault by the tribunes on the internal laws of Nova Roma, and the rights of the Senate/Board of Directors."

Perhaps Caesar should read the part of the Constitution that expressly gives the Tribunes the power to pronounce intercessio against Senatus Consulta. As I read Caesar, any veto of any SC that he does not agree with "is an assault on the internal laws of Nova Roma". Thus, he would save the SCs by destroying the Constitution, rather than follow the hierarchy of laws in the Constitution. Some way to uphold "the internal laws of Nova Roma".

"However, unlike Rome this is more like an executive steering committee, and not a totalitarian regime."

That would be an executive steering committee of two that has proscription lists, expels Senators it doesn't like, and censors discussion on the Main List. In all of Roman history, which Dictatorships had proscription lists? Oh, that's right, Sulla's. Some role model. Maybe we should first ask Caesar to banish Fabius from Nova Roma for life, and then ask him if the Dictatura is more like a steering committee or more like a totalitarian regime?

"The Tribunes created a situation that could have either endangered the
entire organization or set a precedent by which our organization would
ultimately be managed not by its board of directors but by some of our most
junior and inexperienced members, who, in addition, have no macronational
legal or fiduciary responsibility, and this would be absolutely and entirely
unacceptable."

Ah, this argument. I think the reasoning goes something like this: "If the tribunes are allowed to veto one SC, then they can veto any SC and will veto all SCs until the Senate is completely impotent and powerless. They will have taken over the government of Nova Roma completely."

May I point out that this is PRECISELY the power that the Tribunes had in ancient Rome, and never in its history did they ever become more powerful than the Senate? Even the Gracchi, whom Sulla is so fond of comparing us to, never got close to that point, and probably wouldn't have even if the Senate hadn't had them killed. (They undoubtedly would have succeeded in separating some Senators from their war booty.) One very crucial difference is that the Gracchi sometimes worked outside the law ("bending" or breaking it), while we exercised only those powers that Constitution and the Leges granted us. I am aware that there is a difference of opinion on whether or not we complied with the Lex Didia Gemina de potestate tribunicia, but consider this: If the Senate automatically won every dispute in which the Tribunes believed they had pronounced intercessio properly and the Senate contended that they didn't, then all the Senate would have to do to completely negate every single Trbunician veto of an SC was to claim the intercessio was not properly pronounced. The Senate doesn't have the power to negate the Constitution any more than the Tribunes do. So, obviously, negating a veto has to be more than just a Senator complaining that the veto isn't valid.

Perhaps it should be obvious that no tribune will be in office for more than a year, and that the Senate could just try again with a new set of Tribunes? Ah, but there is an even better remedy than that. Caninus has repeatedly bashed me for not presenting my solution to the impasse between tribunes who are clearly perverting the law with a nonsensical veto for purely political purposes, and Senators who are perverting the law with a nonsensical claim that the form of the veto is invalid. I think my reasons for not posting my solution there are obvious; I think I used the phrase "casting pearls before swine". But since this is neutral ground, let me present it here. What is the obvious and straightforward solution to competing claims of the Constitutional power of the tribunes vs. the Constitutional power of the Senate? A vote of the comitia. This is not something to be solved by law, since it is not the law that is in dispute, but the facts. Either the intercessio is pronounced properly, or it is not. Either way, the comitia can decide. Perhaps the Senate forgets what a Res Publica really is.

"The dictatorship was the only option available to repair the constitution, bylaws and articles of incorporation."

Would this be the same Caninus who wrote me about 5:00 pm my time to ask that I withdraw my veto to avoid a "Constitutional crisis"? The same Caninus whom I emailed back within minutes to tell him that I would be away from my computer for several hours, and would take no action to either uphold the veto or to withdraw it until I returned a few hours later? The same Caninus who I wrote to say, in as many words, "Just keep your shirt buttoned"? The same Caninus who asked Caesar and Sulla to form the Dictatura in sufficient time that my membership in Nova Roma and my access to the Main List was terminated before I even returned to my home? The same Caninus who couldn't or wouldn't do Figulus and Lupus the courtesy of waiting 24 hours for a reply before having them booted out as well?

The "only option available". Well, I would suggest that it was not "the only option available", but apparently it was "the only option that came to mind" and definitely was "the only option acted upon". I leave to the gentle reader the consideration of whether there might have been ANY less drastic option.

I find it amusing that this was the "only option available" to "repair the Constitution". Perhaps Caninus should read the section of Maine law that prevents an Executive Committee from altering the bylaws of a corporation. "Repairing the Constitution" was one of several things the "only option available" was forbidden to do by law!

There's another section of Maine law that forbids...no, I should let him find that out for himself. Maybe he should stop taking lessons in interpreting law from Caesar. In fact, our attorney sent Caesar a good reference for legal interpretation, and I know that Caninus was cc:ed on that email. Caninus, it's in the 2nd letter from our attorney, the one that was a response to Caesar and Sulla's 20-page long reply to his demand letter. Just go through it until you find the link about legal interpretation...it'll clear up a lot of your misconceptions.

None of the plaintiffs objected to the second agenda item, because it was clear to us that unless a real attorney started advising the Dictatura, they would be headed down a path that would only lead to worse and worse consequences for us, them, and everyone in Nova Roma. We underestimated what poor clients they would be, and that's saying something.

Vale optime!
Publius Porcius Licinus