A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

The social and political heart of the respublica community

Moderators: Publius Iunius Brutus, Caeso Cispius Laevus, Titus Flavius Severus, Marcus Flavius Celsus, Lucius Aurelius Curio, Lucius Curtius Philo

A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Caeso Cispius Laevus » Mon May 15, 2017 9:32 pm

Sal.

This is a letter in relation the flurry of vetoes issued by Consul Minor L. Aurelius Curio. These vetoes do not help the Republic. I will explain why.

I never intended to run for praetor. I was going to focus on improving our collegia. But it quickly became apparent that our collegia in late 2016 were deeply flawed. Mainly because of poor bylaws and odd understandings as to what these groups should be. So I contacted a man I deeply respect, L. Curtius Philo. At the time he was a Praetor, and he expressed his dismay with the collegia. He explained his plan for reforming the collegia into a system that would become the cultural center of our republic. I loved his plan, it spoke to me. I told him this and he asked for my help in making it a reality. I agreed and ran for praetor. Both Consul L. Curtius Philo and I campaigned on the promise to reform the collegia. All the edicts vetoed by Consul L. Aurelius Curio were the framework which allowed senatorially directed reform.

Back in 2016, future Consul L. Curtius Philo explained the many successes the founders of our Republic had. I recognize that most of what the first set of consules and praetores did were excellent. The leadership of former Consules, T. Flavius Severus and P. Iunius Brutus and former Praetores, L. Curtius Philo and C. Curtius Philo makes them fathers of our Republic in my eyes. But nothing ever goes exactly as planned. The first cluster of collegia founded had deeply flawed bylaws and set a poor precedence.

Many of these collegia should never have been approved. Unfortunately, former Plebeian Aedile L. Aurelius Curio and his colleague approved many groups in direct conflict with our lex governing the collegia. Several of these groups gave near dictatorial powers to founders and other such concerning stipulations. Because of this many of these collegia has stunted growth. Members felt excluded. Development occurred slowly or not at all. The bar was set very low for the approval of collegia. Any solitary person could pretty much found a collegia and get hugely flawed bylaws passed. Not good. It is no surprise the collegia system could be better.

The edicts from myself and Consul L. Curtius Philo, the ones vetoed today, set the stage for correcting these mistakes. Did it temporarily limit the independence of some Collegia? Maybe very mildly. But this temporary concession was to repair administrative mistakes on the side of our Republic and to set the stage for a truly independent future. It also was to bring many groups into compliance with the lex governing collegia. Most collegia are illegal right now due to the flawed bylaws. The solution for these problems was going to be discussed in the Senate and then forwarded to the Comitia Tributa. In other words back to the people.

The recent vetoes have undone all this. Many collegia are leaderless and with bylaws that cannot allow repair. Many collegia are unintentionally illegal due to bylaws that conflict the founding Declaration of the Republic. In one fell swoop Consul L. Aurelius Curio, and to a lesser extent, Censor T. Flavius Severus have erased all our framework for reform and left us with a more broken system than we started with. I'm further dismayed that neither of these gentlemen ever contacted me about their concerns. Was prudence shown here?

I want to work with Consul L. Aurelius Curio, but these vetoes without discussion make it tough. I have spent considerable effort in trying to implement the vision outlined by Consul L. Curtius Philo while he is away. It is clear that the Consul Minor does not support the means by which this vision is to be implemented. Maybe he does not even support the vision? I do not know as he does not communicate his concerns.

Due to these many points, I, therefore, resign from further efforts at collegia reform. As praetor, I am powerless to overrule the will of a consul. I now leave it in the hands of Consul L. Aurelius Curio who appears to like the status quo or has a different plan for implementation that he has not shared. I also ask the Tribunes to review these vetoes. The grounds for this is that they effectively allow illegally operating collegia to continue running without any realistic means of repairing their bylaws.
User avatar
Caeso Cispius Laevus
Praetor Peregrinus
Praetor Peregrinus
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 9:37 am
Location: Britannia

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Gaius Curtius Philo » Mon May 15, 2017 11:09 pm

Salve Laeve,

You are a good man amice, and a pillar of our community. I have to disagree on you here but I hope that this does not make you feel I respect you less for it. I believe you are just mistaken in your judgement, and are so in good will.

Your edicts were done with the best of intentions, but they were flawed. I will explain categorically why:

I) You wanted to make them a framework for future Senatorial deliberation, but there has been nothing in it to show that this was a necessary step towards that. Why not, instead of making a flurry of edicts making the Senate take control of these collegia, you did not simply open a private discussion on the issue in the Senate and prepared an amendment proposal for debate in the next Senate meeting? It was an unnecessary violation of the Collegia's self governance.

II) You say there are illegal elements to the Collegia. I agree, and therefore you should issue an edict eliminating the SPECIFIC violations and adding the SPECIFICLY required elements to their bylaws so they may afterwards vote it in democratically and correctly. Instead you blocked the subfora of some of them and unilaterally appointed leaderships. I understand your good intentions, but I think it was handled wrongly.

III) You say that Curio did not consult you in any of this and deem that very bad communication on his part. I agree with you on that. But I also think you fail to acknowledge that in no moment did you include Curio in your plans to do so many changes on our Collegia. You did not consult our leader and feel bad that he disagreed with you and annulled what you did. I think that is illogical and you are an intelligent man to understand that. You do not act without being CERTAIN everyone that matters agrees with you. That, I believe, was your fault. My father himself had lectured me more than once on the importance of communication to the leadership of our Republic before acting. You should have done so.

IV) Curio does want to reform the Collegia system, it is just not in the same manner you chose. I ask you to have a bit of good faith here amice. Curio was already planning on starting a debate for the next senate meeting on hor to change the requirements for the formation of collegia that better express what we want from them. So I ask you to wait and see.

So my suggestion to you is that if you do want to help the Collegia (and I know you do) as Praetor you identify the elements in the bylaws od the collegia that are illegal and eliminate them SPECIFICALLY through edict. Also that you add missing SPECIFIC elements. That goes in accordance with the good customs suggested in Severus' edictum. But that you refrain from unilaterally working without prior senatorial discussion and consular approval.
"Ignis aurum probat" - Seneca
C. Curtius L. f. Vot. Philo Aurelianus
User avatar
Gaius Curtius Philo
Propraetor
Propraetor
Senator
Senator
Feroniae Sacerdos
Feroniae Sacerdos
Lictor Curiatus Magister
Lictor Curiatus Magister
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:56 pm
Location: Praia Grande, São Paulo, Brazil

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Caeso Cispius Laevus » Mon May 15, 2017 11:18 pm

Gaius Curtius Philo wrote:Salve Laeve,

You are a good man amice, and a pillar of our community. I have to disagree on you here but I hope that this does not make you feel I respect you less for it. I believe you are just mistaken in your judgement, and are so in good will.

Your edicts were done with the best of intentions, but they were flawed. I will explain categorically why:

I) You wanted to make them a framework for future Senatorial deliberation, but there has been nothing in it to show that this was a necessary step towards that. Why not, instead of making a flurry of edicts making the Senate take control of these collegia, you did not simply open a private discussion on the issue in the Senate and prepared an amendment proposal for debate in the next Senate meeting? It was an unnecessary violation of the Collegia's self governance.

II) You say there are illegal elements to the Collegia. I agree, and therefore you should issue an edict eliminating the SPECIFIC violations and adding the SPECIFICLY required elements to their bylaws so they may afterwards vote it in democratically and correctly. Instead you blocked the subfora of some of them and unilaterally appointed leaderships. I understand your good intentions, but I think it was handled wrongly.

III) You say that Curio did not consult you in any of this and deem that very bad communication on his part. I agree with you on that. But I also think you fail to acknowledge that in no moment did you include Curio in your plans to do so many changes on our Collegia. You did not consult our leader and feel bad that he disagreed with you and annulled what you did. I think that is illogical and you are an intelligent man to understand that. You do not act without being CERTAIN everyone that matters agrees with you. That, I believe, was your fault. My father himself had lectured me more than once on the importance of communication to the leadership of our Republic before acting. You should have done so.

IV) Curio does want to reform the Collegia system, it is just not in the same manner you chose. I ask you to have a bit of good faith here amice. Curio was already planning on starting a debate for the next senate meeting on hor to change the requirements for the formation of collegia that better express what we want from them. So I ask you to wait and see.

So my suggestion to you is that if you do want to help the Collegia (and I know you do) as Praetor you identify the elements in the bylaws od the collegia that are illegal and eliminate them SPECIFICALLY through edict. Also that you add missing SPECIFIC elements. That goes in accordance with the good customs suggested in Severus' edictum. But that you refrain from unilaterally working without prior senatorial discussion and consular approval.



Sal.

There was a custom in place before Censor Severus changed it.

I did consult our leader. I consulted Consul Maior Philo. I was implementing his plan. While he is away he tasked me with solving this problem. A problem Consul Minor Curio has not initiated a solution on.

This is simple. Most collegia were approved with bylaws that violate our lex. Therefore, they do not have bylaws. I was just formalizing this. Second, many collegia have no leaders. I was punting these questions back to the senate where they belong before going to the people in an assembly.

These vetoes made a huge mess. You will find this out soon.
User avatar
Caeso Cispius Laevus
Praetor Peregrinus
Praetor Peregrinus
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 9:37 am
Location: Britannia

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Gaius Curtius Philo » Mon May 15, 2017 11:22 pm

You consuled One leader. That isnt good enough. There are two heads of the Republic amice... No matter how we look at this, this was a big oversight on communication on your part, Im sorry...

And your unilateral interpretation on how this should be delt with is not good enough. You should have talked to others before acting.
"Ignis aurum probat" - Seneca
C. Curtius L. f. Vot. Philo Aurelianus
User avatar
Gaius Curtius Philo
Propraetor
Propraetor
Senator
Senator
Feroniae Sacerdos
Feroniae Sacerdos
Lictor Curiatus Magister
Lictor Curiatus Magister
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:56 pm
Location: Praia Grande, São Paulo, Brazil

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Caeso Cispius Laevus » Mon May 15, 2017 11:26 pm

Gaius Curtius Philo wrote:You consuled One leader. That isnt good enough. There are two heads of the Republic amice... No matter how we look at this, this was a big oversight on communication on your part, Im sorry...

And your unilateral interpretation on how this should be delt with is not good enough. You should have talked to others before acting.



Sal.

Like how Consul Curio consulted with others? Consul Cuiro appeared utterly disinterested in the collegia question until he issued a bunch of vetoes.

I did consult with others. I consulted with Consul Philo, Censor Brutus, and Aedile Horatius throughout the reform process.
User avatar
Caeso Cispius Laevus
Praetor Peregrinus
Praetor Peregrinus
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 9:37 am
Location: Britannia

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Gaius Curtius Philo » Mon May 15, 2017 11:28 pm

Caeso Cispius Laevus wrote:
Gaius Curtius Philo wrote:You consuled One leader. That isnt good enough. There are two heads of the Republic amice... No matter how we look at this, this was a big oversight on communication on your part, Im sorry...

And your unilateral interpretation on how this should be delt with is not good enough. You should have talked to others before acting.



Sal.

Like how Consul Curio consulted with others?

I did consult with others. I consulted with Consul Philo, Censor Brutus, and Aedile Horatius throughout the reform process.


My father unilaterally vetoed many things while Praetor And Consul. Do you think he was wrong? Unilaterally stopping what one considers a bad action and unilaterally forcing a bad action onto people are two seperate things. You brought this upon yourself amice the moment you did not publically discussed this in the Senate Curia Magistratuum nor (more importantly) with Curio.
"Ignis aurum probat" - Seneca
C. Curtius L. f. Vot. Philo Aurelianus
User avatar
Gaius Curtius Philo
Propraetor
Propraetor
Senator
Senator
Feroniae Sacerdos
Feroniae Sacerdos
Lictor Curiatus Magister
Lictor Curiatus Magister
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:56 pm
Location: Praia Grande, São Paulo, Brazil

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Caeso Cispius Laevus » Mon May 15, 2017 11:30 pm

Gaius Curtius Philo wrote:
Caeso Cispius Laevus wrote:
Gaius Curtius Philo wrote:You consuled One leader. That isnt good enough. There are two heads of the Republic amice... No matter how we look at this, this was a big oversight on communication on your part, Im sorry...

And your unilateral interpretation on how this should be delt with is not good enough. You should have talked to others before acting.



Sal.

Like how Consul Curio consulted with others?

I did consult with others. I consulted with Consul Philo, Censor Brutus, and Aedile Horatius throughout the reform process.


My father unilaterally vetoed many things while Praetor And Consul. Do you think he was wrong? Unilaterally stopping what one considers a bad action and unilaterally forcing a bad action onto people are two seperate things. You brought this upon yourself amice the moment you did not publically discussed this in the Senate Curia Magistratuum nor (more importantly) with Curio.


Consul Curio can veto. That is not up for dispute.

What is up for dispute is if it was a stupid idea.

The system went from flawed to totally broken due to this veto. I watch with interest how you and Consul Curio intend to patch it together...

I will have no part in this reform. I am overruled and five months of my efforts dismissed in a single day.
User avatar
Caeso Cispius Laevus
Praetor Peregrinus
Praetor Peregrinus
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 9:37 am
Location: Britannia

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Gaius Curtius Philo » Mon May 15, 2017 11:47 pm

I think yoy are being pretty unfair... You saybtour efforts were undone as if you had taken any time to actually consult Both our leaders on how this should be done, as if you had acted by the book and was shrugged off out of spite. Amice, you acted wrongly. You didnt do it maliciously but it is a fact. You did not consult everyone you had to consult and that resulted in disagreements not being hammered out before your action. You acted rashly and agressively took actions into your own hands. Im certain, completely so, that id you had went through the proper channels and acted in the correct form this could have been handled differently. This could have been a collective effort instead of an unilateral assault on your part... Again, even though you werent malicious you screwed up...

You are angry now and that is understandable. Sleep it off, try to relax and later you will see. This is a difference of Precedence that we need to establish firmly, on HOW the RR interacts with the collegia.
"Ignis aurum probat" - Seneca
C. Curtius L. f. Vot. Philo Aurelianus
User avatar
Gaius Curtius Philo
Propraetor
Propraetor
Senator
Senator
Feroniae Sacerdos
Feroniae Sacerdos
Lictor Curiatus Magister
Lictor Curiatus Magister
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:56 pm
Location: Praia Grande, São Paulo, Brazil

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Lucius Aurelius Curio » Mon May 15, 2017 11:48 pm

Curio Laeve Sal.

Perception is often skewed based upon our own personal views and feelings. You claim I was disinterested in the collegial reforms up until now? That is not true. I was working on this with Brutus and C. Curtius Philo since end of last year, when the issue was noted as needing fixing. I have done much of my works on this matter privately. Consul Philo never once mentioned anything to me about wanting to fix this situation. I found out when I woke up one morning and I found his edict, and more than a handful of complaints from private citizens and collegial leaders. My work on this was keeping things under control, convincing them we weren't trying to take over their collegia or step on their rights as leaders. That we were trying to fix a broken system. If I was so malicious, as your original post suggests, towards these reforms then why didn't I simply veto this edict from the beginning? To say that I was disinterested on this can also be disproven by the fact of the edict I issued allowing Exceptional Bylaw Changes to assist in these reforms. I consulted many times with Censor Severus, Censor Brutus, Consul Philo (after he issued the edict), and Praetor Celsus in this regard. I worked with these individuals to come up with the needed amendments to the edict that would make it workable for our citizens. My lack of public appearance regarding this has been two pronged. One, I was busy with my final year of school and taking care of my family. Regardless of that I still found time to see to my duties as Consul. I shall be taking a more proactive seat from here on though. Secondly, I respected Consul Philo's choice to let you handle this affair. I apologize that these vetoes undermined your work, and your anger is understandable. However, I couldn't simply ignore an edict on the Mos Maiorum as issued by our Censor Severus either, and that would be an even bigger mess, now wouldn't it?

Having multiple leaders did little to increase the activity of these collegia, truth be told. More so we were viewed as heavy handedly getting into how the collegia were run and formed. This can be seen in Censor Severus message, where he mentions the concerns of our largest province.

This edict was not the only way to fix this situation. As the saying goes, "There's more than one way to skin a cat".

Vale Bene!

L. Aurelius Curio
Vis per Unitatem Romanam
User avatar
Lucius Aurelius Curio
Consul
Consul
Governor of Transborealis Silva
Governor of Transborealis Silva
Lictor Curiatus
Lictor Curiatus
Fortunae Sacerdos
Fortunae Sacerdos
 
Posts: 646
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 10:04 pm

Re: A letter to the people on the recent collegia edict vetoes

Postby Publius Iunius Brutus » Tue May 16, 2017 12:03 am

Brutus Cen. Sal.

I've been asked to offer my input on this matter.

I agree with 90% of what Praetor Laevus has done regarding the Collegia. The system is not functioning well and his plan was sound. He did speak to me several times throughout.

I disagree with the veto. It was heavy handed and not helpful.

I think there was some minor flaws in the edicts issued by Praetor Laevus concerning bylaw suspension. But upon reviewing the disputed illegal aspects of some bylaws I think for select Collegium this was appropriate.

Overall these vetoes have set reform backwards. They should all be reversed and the Senste given control to discuss future reforms to improve the Collegia system IMHO. This is the most fair way to address the multiple concerns and strengthen the cultural activities of the RR.
User avatar
Publius Iunius Brutus
Censor
Censor
Senator
Senator
Martis et Minervae Sacerdos
Martis et Minervae Sacerdos
Lictor Curiatus Magister
Lictor Curiatus Magister
Augur
Augur
 
Posts: 1246
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 5:54 am
Location: Nova Gallia

Next

Return to Main Forum