Senate Vote Januarius MMDCCLXI (Nova Roma)

From NovaRoma
Revision as of 11:37, 5 February 2010 by Publius Memmius Albucius (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Tribuna Plebis Lucia Livia Plauta Quiritibus SPD

The Senate has finished its latest session and the votes have been tallied as follows.

Formal debate ended on January 21 2761 at 17:00 Roman time. Voting began at 06.45 hrs CET on Weds. 23 Jan. 2761 and ended at 17.00 hrs CET on Sat. 26 Jan. 2761.

The following 30 Senators cast votes in time. They are referred to below by their initials, in the order in which they cast their votes:

  • [TIS] Titus Iulius Sabinus
  • [MMPH] Marcus Moravius Piscinus Horatianus
  • [KFBQ] Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
  • [KFBM] Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus
  • [ISM] Iulilla Sempronia Magna
  • [MLA] Marcus Lucretius Agricola
  • [GEM] Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
  • [MOG] Marcus Octavius Gracchus
  • [CCS] Caius Curius Saturninus
  • [FAC] Franciscus Apulus Caesar
  • [MCC] Marcus Curiatius Complutensis
  • [MMA] Marcus Minucius Audens
  • [MIS] Marcus Iulius Severus
  • [FGA] Flavius Galerius Aurelianus
  • [MHM] Marca Hortensia Maior
  • [FVG] Flavius Vedius Germanicus
  • [ATS] Aula Tullia Scholastica
  • [TGP] Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
  • [QSP] Quintus Suetonius Paulinus
  • [ECF] Emilia Curia Finnica
  • [CFD] Caius Flavius Diocletianus
  • [QFM] Quintus Fabius Maximus
  • [MIP] Marcus Iulius Perusianus
  • [LECA] Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur
  • [MAM] Marcus Arminius Maior
  • [AMA] Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
  • [TOPA] Titus Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus
  • [DIPI] Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus
  • [GPL] Gaius Popillius Laenas
  • [PMA] Publius Memmius Albucius

The following 7 Senators did not cast a vote (their absence was not announced or justified):

  • [MCJ] Marcus Cassius Iulianus
  • [GEC] Gaius Equitius Cato
  • [PC] Patricia Cassia
  • [GMM] Gaius Marius Merullus
  • [GSA] Gnaeus Salvius Astur
  • [MBA] Marcus Bianchius Antonius
  • [ATMC] Ap. Tullius Marcellus Cato

Senatrix Pompeia Minucia Strabo [PMS] is on leave.

The necessary majority for a Senatus consultum was therefore 16 votes in favor. "UTI ROGAS" indicates a vote in favor of an item, "ANTIQUO" is a vote against, and "ABSTINEO" is an open abstention.

The Senate was called to vote on the following agenda:


ITEM I - The Consul shall consult with the Collegium Pontificum on preserving the Pax Deorum and act on the advice of the Pontifices wherever the Pax Deorum is in need of repair


Our Ancestors placed the Gods as their starting point in every important matter, and thus it was that when Varro advised Pompeius Magnus on the proper ways of convening the Senate, he pointed out that questions related to the Gods ought to be brought before the Senate before any other matters. Therefore:

The Senate instructs the Consul to consult with the Collegium Pontificum on preserving the Pax Deorum and to act on the advice of the Pontifices wherever the Pax Deorum is in need of repair.


UR: 27 ; ABS: 3 (FAC, MIP, PMA) ; ANT: 0 : the item has passed.

Votes and discussions

The following senators have issued the following commentaries:

  • MMPH: Adsentior UR : Reestablishing and maintaining the Pax Deorum for Nova Roma should be a priority for all Senatores and Senatrices, indeed for all Novi Romani.
  • KFBQ: UR : I am very interested to see if the new active role of the Consuls and Senate will break the present deadlock in the Collegium Pontificum and the Religio.
  • CCS: UR : I thank the Consules for their wish to take action in this matter.
  • FAC: ABS : I didn't follow this matter and I have not enough data to decide.
  • MIS: UR: I am in favor of this proposal. We need Pax et Concordia, above all…
  • ECF: UR : This is a move to the right direction.
  • LECA: UR : I have said since the beginning that all Pontifices should be fully ranked Senatores. That there are Pontifices who are not Senatores speaks of nova Roma politics and nova Roma's strong tendency to pick and choose which things to do as the Romans did based on personal


  • TOPA: UR : I am a bit hesitant at the word "instructs", but seeing as how it is the Consul himself who has put this suggestion forward, I will support it.
  • DIPI: UR : I applaud the consul for taking an active role ensuring The Pax Deorum is maintained and repaired if necessary.
  • PMA: ABS : there is no need reaffirming a role that the consuls already have.

ITEM II - The Senate approves the tax rates for MMDCCLXI auc


The Senate gives its assent to the tax rates for MMDCCLXI as provided by the presiding Consul.


UR: 30 ; ABS: 0 ; ANT: 0 : the item has passed.

Votes and discussions

The following senators have issued the following commentaries:

  • MMPH: Adsentior UR: The Consules have jointly decided this year to use the formula without any adjustments in any of the provinciae. While the base rate has slightly risen in most provinces, without a 20% adjustment the tax rates in some provinciae will be lower this year than last. Where no adjustment was made last year, the slight rise in base rate will be reflected as a small increase in the tax rate in some provinciae.
  • MLA: UR: I hope that the rate, nearly unchanged from last year, is found by all to be reasonable. Let us, Senators, work with all diligence to ensure that all taxpaying citizens enjoy the greatest possible benefit in return for their trust.
  • MIS: UR: I'd propose in a future occasion to revise the rates, because I believe that we the citizens could afford to give more. Or maybe, we should promote a permanent campaign of special contributions.
  • TGP: UR: The rate should be set higher and the Consul does not need the consent of the Senate to set this years tax rate.
  • TOPA: UR: I would support a change from 1/3000 to 1/2000 of GDP, as well as some other changes I mentioned in the discussion.

ITEM III - Special thanks are given to M. Octavius Gracchus for his many years of service as Magister Aranearius and in assisting the Magister Aranearius


The Senate extends its special thanks to Senator Marcus Octavius Gracchus for his many years of service as Magister Aranearius and in assisting the Magister Aranearius, providing Nova Roma with a server, restoring the website, archiving our records, and often single handily providing technical support for our magistrates and Citizens alike.


UR: 27 ; ABS: 3 (MOG, FVG, QFM) ; ANT: 0 : the item has passed.

Votes and discussions

The following senators have issued the following commentaries:

  • MMPH: Over the years many of our Citizens have contributed in their own unique ways to noster Res Publica Libera. Senator Marcus Octavius has done moreso than others in preserving Nova Roma, through some of its most difficult times, often single handily, consistently, diligently, and without the recognition he justly deserves. I happy to give this opportunity to the Senate to voice its gratitude to Senator Marcus Octavius Gracchus.
  • KFBQ: There is no doubt that deserves this honor and I would be prepared to add even more honors to this one.
  • KFBM: I think we should be extending more than just a thanks to Marcus Octavius Gracchus. He has done much to build up Nova Roma and deserves more than a thank you.
  • JSM: It is difficult to estimate the value of the years of service rendered by Senator Marcus Octavius Gracchus other than to say that it is beyond price. It is such a privilege to have served with him.
  • MLA: I have had the pleasure and honor of working with M. Octavius Gracchus I can say that both his dedication to Nova Roma and his technical skills are of the very first rate. He deserves more than thanks.
  • MOG: ABS: Thanks to all for their comments.
  • CCS: He has had his ups and downs, but the value of his contributions is not diminished by that.
  • FAC: Senator Gracchus has my personal gratitude.
  • MCC: Octavius Gracchus has worked hard to Nova Roma and his work is worthy of admiration and thanks.
  • MMA: Most heartily and most deservedly.
  • MIS: M. Octavius Gracchus deserves our gratitude.
  • MHM: Marcus Octavius has given us a great resource with the NRwiki. I am very grateful to him. It not only will be a scholarly resource but it permits us to inform and help cultores with articles and photographs; activities that the CP has abandoned.
  • ATS: The innumerable contributions of Senator Gracchus deserve more than thanks from us.
  • TGP: He has my sincere thanks, my profound respect and admiration for all that he has done for Nova Roma.
  • QSP: he did a terrific job and his work is greatly appreciated.
  • QFM: ABS. I thank the Senator for his service, but this was not phrased as a yes or no item.
  • LECA: Consul Piscinus; `Great idea, Cincinnatus!' Cincinnatus Augur; "You're welcome, Consul! I've always thought highly of my friend Marcus, even when we had disagreed."
  • MAM: Marcus Octavius is one of the crucial citizens of Nova Roma.
  • TOPA: Thank you!
  • DIPI: He deserves our thanks and much, much more. He is a gentleman, who has put countless hours and dollars into Nova Roma. Thank you Marcus Octavius Gracchus!
  • PMA: I recognize Octavius' true dedication in his technical missions.

ITEM IV - Appointment of E. Iunia Laeca as Curatrix Aerarii (Financial Officer) for a 2 years term, from the Kalendae Februariae MMDCCLXI AUC (1 Feb. 2008) until Kal. Mar. MMDCCLXIII AUC (1 March 2010 cc)


The Senate appoints Quaestrix consularis Equestria Iunia Laeca Curatrix Aerarii (Financial Officer) for a term lasting two years from the kalendae Februariae MMDCCLXI AUC (1 Feb. 2008) until the kalendae Martiae MMDCCLXIII AUC (1 March 2010CE). In the event that the Senate does not appoint another Curator Aerarii before Kal. Martis 2762 AUC, Equestria Iunia Laeca shall be eligible to act in the capacity of Chief Financial Officer of Nova Roma Inc. under the direction of the Consuls until the Senate reconfirms her in office or replaces her. This appointment may be superceded by senatus consultus or enactment of legislation that establish financial officers for Nova Roma, Inc. by other means.


UR: 26 ; ABS: 3 (CFD, MIP, PMA) ; ANT: 1 (FVG): the item has passed.

Votes and discussions

The following senators have issued the following commentaries:

  • MMPH: Adsentior UR: I shall paraphrase some words written to me by Quaestrix Iunia Laeca: it is time for us to set a pattern of behavior in place, through policies and procedures, that ensures transparency and order in our financial arrangements by means of oversight and management, which needs to be effected at the administration level. Reform of Nova Roma's financial system, structure and function, is in the beginning stages. Even the internal controls are still being identified and developed. At this time I not only reccomend that the Senate approve Quaestrix Iunia Laeca as Curatrix Aerarii, I believe that it has becoome necessary for Nova Roma's future.
  • MLA: Although I do not personally know this citizen, there is ample evidence that she is fully qualified for this post. May the immortal gods assist her in these important duties.
  • CCS: Although I would have liked to see more historical solution.
  • FAC: I don't know her but I'm sure the Consules are acting in the right way.
  • MIS: For what I know, she is the best candidate for this position.
  • MHM: Until we can find a more historical solution.
  • ATS: Assentior; UR: I have had some personal communication with Equestria Iunia Laeca, who

is a former student of mine from the AT. She is a fine person, and I am sure she will do a good job for Nova Roma. I hope that this appointment will lead to an improvement in the transparency and other matters concerning our financial situation.

  • TOPA: I go by the recommendation of other senators, as I don't know her myself.
  • DIPI: With pleasure do I cast a vote a vote for Equestria Iunia Laeca for this position.
  • PMA: ABS: on one hand, it is time for NR to have a daily available, clear, precise and public information on its financial status. On the other, such an assignment looks illegal, for being contrary to the one-year term principle applicable to every of our ordinarii (except censors), and organized by our current laws.

ITEM V - C. Curius Saturninus is allowed to use the Nova Roma name and logo in the production of "official Nova Roma Calendars" for the years 2761 through 2766 (2008 - 2012 cc)


C. Curius Saturninus is allowed to use the Nova Roma name and logo in the production of "official Nova Roma Calendars" for the years 2761 through 2766 (2008 - 2012 cc).


UR: 29 ; ABS: 0  ; ANT: 1 (PMA): the item has passed.

Votes and discussions

The following senators have issued the following commentaries:

  • MMPH: This authorization is placed in proven capable hands to one who

provides a special service to all Novi Romani. The period of authorization for five years offers the Senate one element in forming longer range financial plans as will, I think, become more necessary in the future.

  • KFBQ: Placing this task in the hands of Caius Curius for 5 years is in line with what the Censores did with public works, some that the calender may be compared to. There is no better person to deal with this task.
  • JSM: He does a fine, fine job.
  • MLA: I have full confidence that Senator Saturninus will bring honor to himself as he continues to provide a top-quality, beautiful and useful product.
  • CCS: I thank the Consules and the Senate for their trust.
  • FAC: the roman calendar by Saturninus is a wonderful product.
  • MIS: Saturninus deserves our support. I also agree with some colleague who suggested that this august body should encourage our citizens to purchase this calendar.
  • MHM: With Saturninus we know and can expect 5 more years of a beautiful and useful calendar. I am grateful to him.
  • ATS: Senator Saturninus has done a fine job with the calendar, which is both very beautiful and very useful to all citizens of Nova Roma, especially her magistrates.
  • ECF: Sincere thanks to the consuls for bringing up this issue.
  • PMA ANTIQUO: With no surprise, I am opposed as senator to a granting that I have opposed as aedile, for this time the 7 main following reasons :

- The Senate has never, in ancient Rome tradition, ruled in the ordinary commercial field which falls in the aediles curules competency; - Our constitution has not given our Senate such a right; - The previous granting by the Senate 2 years ago must not be seen as a legal precedence, but an error that the Senate would be eager to correct, this year as last year. - No argument, presented to support Curius's extraordinary privilege, is legally good. The one which states that the Senate as the board of NR Inc. would be directly competent for trademarks is a wrong one, for it would generally deprive our assemblies and all the magistrates (except consuls) and priests from their role, and the Senate rule everything. On the contrary, we must remind that NR Inc. board has, explicitly or implicitly, accepted our constitution as the general rule binding NR Inc. members, and must thus accept to respect the competency of other powers. - Independantly of the qualities of both product and seller, the Senate will not be able preventing our citizens to think that a special privilege has been granted to Sen. Curius just because he is senator and a friend of some ones, and that he has not been confident enough in his product and in our ordinary laws to accept the common commercial aedilician competency. - The 5 years granting gives Curius an extraordinary status which prevent any fair competition between our Equites who would be interested in proposing, also, "NR official" calendars. Why not also, last, allow every Macellum seller such a status ? - Eq. Curius and sposa have cast a vote as senators for this item, though personally concerned.

ITEM VI - The reprimands once issued by the Senate against L. Cornelius Sulla Felix and to L. Maria Fimbria shall be lift on a. d. XI Kal. Sept. 2761 auc (22 July 2008 CE)


The Senate, recognizing the amount of time that has elapsed since their transgressions, has added an expiration date to the reprimands that were previously issued to L. Cornelius Sulla Felix and to L. Maria Fimbria. The expiration date shall be set as the anniversary of the dedication of the Temple of Concordia, a. d. XI Kal. Sept. MMDCCLXI AUC [22 July 2008 CE]. After this date their past transgressions are considered expiated.


UR: 19 ; ABS: 7 (ATS, MCC, MIP, LECA, TOPA, GPL, PMA) ; ANT: 4 (FVG, TGP, QSP, QFM ): the item has passed.

Votes and discussions

The following senators have issued the following commentaries:

  • TIS: UR: I present separately my vote to this item to point out that my decision is based by Marcus Moravius words:" I shall reiterate that Item VI is not about the past but rather about the future"
  • MMPH: Adsentior UR: Through his many services following the incident that brought him a justified reprimand, Lucius Cornelius redeemed himself in the eyes of members of that earlier Senate. As many of those Senators recall, Lucius Cornelius and I were fiercely opposed to one another on several issues. Those disputes and the divisions they led to should be put aside in this the Tenth Anniversary of Nova Roma, and all members of the Senate should especially commit ourself to the spirit of Concordia.

With regard to Marius Fimbria, who is now known by the name Marius Peregrinus since he passed into self imposed exile, there remains a difference of opinion in the Senate over his reprimand. Justified at the time, it was so, but not as originally posed as though it were an act of witchcraft rather than a foolish prank as intended. Eight years is long enough to forgive a childish insult without looking childish yourself. In spite of past differences, Aulus Marius Peregrinus today still assists others who come to Nova Roma, just as he first introduced some of this Senate's oldest members to noster Res Publica. He remains a promotor, rather than a detractor of Nova Roma, and acts as a bridge between our Res Publica with others. It is time to set aside his Senate reprimand just our Censors last year set aside his past nota. In the name of Concordia I recommend the Senate put aside and forgive the past transgressions of both Lucius Cornelius and Marius Fimbria.

  • KFBQ: UR: I will freely and gladly support this item. Let us turn our eyes to the future development of the Res Publica, instead of turning our eyes towards our navels.
  • JSM: UR: To act in the spirit of Concordia is as good for nations as it is for individuals.
  • MLA: UR: Let this episode finally be closed. Let us look to the future.
  • GEM: UR, with particular thanks to the senators who worked out this language.
  • MOG: UR to both parts: I vote to revoke the reprimand against Aldus Marius Peregrinus, by whatever names he was known in the past, not for the reason cited, but because it was an act of vengeance that has done great harm to Nova Roma and the greater Roman community. I vote to expire the reprimand against my Consular colleague in the spirit of Concordia, even though he is no longer with us, in recognition of the great service he has rendered.
  • CCS: UR: It's a mature sign for organisation of any kind to be able to forgive.
  • FAC: UR: hoping they wouldn't repeat their errors.
  • MMA: UR: I would like to thank those Senators who have determined and carried through this idea. It is an excellent example, to me, of Concordance within the Senate.
  • MIS: UR: I really don't know very much about this matter, but from what has been posted here, I see no reason why this reprimand should not be revoked.
  • MHM: UR: An excellent way to honour Dea Concordia with deeds.
  • ATS: ABS: I would have preferred that these items be separated, especially since the matter the offense of former Senator Sulla which occasioned this reprimand was both a late addition to this item and one which was not discussed or clarified in curia. Based on my knowledge of the incident concerning Aldus Marius Peregrinus, formerly L. Maria Fimbria, it seems to me that this was a prank, not something malicious. It may indeed have offended its target, and perhaps others, but it seems to have had no such intent. If memory serves, I voted to remove the nota from him last year, and I therefore support removal of the reprimand from Aldus Marius Peregrinus. However, I do not know enough about the other issue to render a decision. If the matter concerning former Senator Sulla is what I think it is, however, I doubt that I could support a removal of that reprimand in any case.
  • TGP: ANT: With this vote I will not be popular with many Senators, possibly even with a majority of this house but I see things they way I see them. As William Shakespeare wrote in the Tempest:"What is Past is Prologue." During the discussion on the repeal of the rebuke to L. Marius Fimbria now know as Aldus Marius Peregrinus It has been stated that: "But what does it say about Nova Roma itself when the Senate imposes itself in a praetorian matter, over what was essentially a trivial incident, as though comedy is an act of sedition against the State and an attack on the religio Romana." Based on what has been written in the record Sulla was without a colleague and felt that he should not make the decision alone. That is why the Senate was asked to get involved. In addition to that if this was such a "trivial incident" why, after so many years are we rehashing it? I was asked last year, along with my colleague, to present this to the Senate I choose not to because the events were long over and safe within the confines of our annuals. I thought that we had enough new animosities to deal with and that revisiting the old ones seemed out of place. It still does. I would rather use our time to deal with those who are still here than to dwell on those who have left and who, by the Consuls own admission , has no intentions of reapplying for citizenship. It has also been stated that the Senate proceeding in this case had the appearance of a "star chamber" If the Senate had acted unconstitutionally or even extra constitutionally our Tribunes for the year, Gnaeus Tarquinius Caesar and Lucius Sergius Australicus would have acted to prevent it. The Censors of 2760 felt that the Nota had been in effect long enough and took steps to repeal it. It was their decision to make and they made it. Case closed on the Nota. If the Senate also removes the reprimand, which is in all actually a slap on the wrist, nothing will remain of the rebuke the Senate of the time issued for what it felt was un-Roman like behavior. It should also be noted that impersonation of ANYONE on our lists is a violation the yahoo TOS. If Aldus Marius Peregrinus and/or his supporters can not live with a strongly worded rebuke they are less Roman than they allege. We should be learning from history not rewriting it.
  • QSP: ANT: As I mentioned a few days back, I do not believe it is correct to second guess decisions made by others in the past. Leave the past in the past.
  • CFD: UR for both parts
  • QFM: ANT: She got off easy. She should have been tried for identity theft and violating Yahoo's TOS. You cannot rewrite history, though I notice you all seem to like to do that. It was said, it was done.
  • LECA: ABS: I'll not vote against this on account of my friend Sulla. As for (fill in whatever name is being used today), Censor Paulinus summed up my thoughts well…
  • TOPA: ABS: I agree completely with Aula Tullia Scholastica.
  • DIPI: UR: I hope this is the last time we hear of this issue. By putting an expiration date on the reprimand, the Senate admits both people have paid for their transgressions by having these on their records for so long. Despite what some people have said, the action by Fimbria was not a prank and was malicious in nature. I'll point out that not single senator who was in the senate at that time spoke in favor of revoking the reprimand. They were the ones best able to judge. As for the reprimand against Sulla, as I recall (and I'm frankly not sure I remember the issue in its entirety) it was a comparatively minor issue at least partially brought on by the way Nova Roma was structured. I wonder if we could even have found the text of the reprimand to discuss. In the spirit of Concordia, let these issues rest and let us all work to try and prevent new issues that will haunt us for years.
  • GPL: ABS: I have said I would follow the lead of the Senatores who were active at the time, especially the wishes of Lucius Equitius.
  • PMA: ABS, reminding that the Senate, here also, would be wiser to let our censors rule alone this field of competency, which is historically theirs.

ITEM VII - The Senate lends its support to the Consul to issue an edictum instructing list owners to approve without exception the requests of all Senatores and Senatrices to subscribe to any and all lists that are recognized as necessary in the administration of Nova Roma


The Senate lends its support to the Consul to issue an edictum instructing list owners to approve without exception the requests of all Senatores and Senatrices to subscribe to any and all lists that are recognized as necessary in the administration of Nova Roma. These lists shall include:

  • the "",
  • the "",
  • the "",
  • the web-based message board linked to,
  • the ""
  • the "",
  • the ""
  • the ""
  • the ""
  • the ""
  • the ""
  • the "" and all other Senate lists,
  • the "",
  • the "",
  • the "".

Where Senatores or Senatrices are not entitled to subscribe to a specific list by virtue of a magisterial or priestly office, list owners shall nonetheless be instructed to subscribe members of the Senate upon request, although the list owners may under such circumstances subscribe members of the Senate as moderated observers.

Not to be included in the edictum shall be any private lists of a semi-public nature, such as lists established by magistrates to hold discussions with their advisors and appointees.


UR: 23 ; ABS: 3 (DIPI, LECA, PMA) ; ANT: 4 (FVG, TGP, MOG, QFM ): the item has passed.

Votes and opinions

The following senators have issued the following commentaries:

  • MMPH: The Senate and its members are charged with overseeing all aspects of Nova Roma. Therefore it is only reasonable that all Senatores and Senatrices be allowed access to those lists which are necessary for the administration of Nova Roma.
  • KFBQ: I certainly support the stand point that the Senate and its members are charged with overseeing all aspects of Nova Roma. I have no problem with stating that "all Senatores and Senatrices be allowed access to those lists which are necessary for the administration of Nova Roma."
  • MLA: As a minimum, members of this body must be able to monitor the goings on of all groups that undertake public business.
  • MOG: ANT: This prevents listowners from denying admission to Senators who intend to be disruptive.
  • CCS: This is a wonderful step into direction of more clearly defined practises in the NR administration.
  • MIS: I am in favor of this item, but I also believe that moderation should

be enforced.

  • ATS: So long as we obey the law and keep sodality lists out of this, and

owners or other moderators have the option of removing or even barring those known to be disruptive, I support this.

  • TGP: ANT: The Senate has the power to order the creation of any list/s we need and. to declare them "official fora" . This would place them under the jurisdiction of the Praetors. Yahoo sets the terms of who owns a yahoo list not us.
  • ECF: This is a considerable improvement.
  • QFM: ANT: It opens the door to abuse of power.
  • LECA: ABS (vote not stated, probably by mistake)
  • TOPA: Long overdue.
  • DIPI: ABS: It seems at least some of the lists listed were private lists that shouldn't have been included. I agree with the idea in theory, however.
  • PMA: ABS: This consuls do not need the preliminary authorization of the Senate to issue an edictum which enters in the frame of their imperium. They may just ask the Senate for an advice. The clause "where sen. etc." is thus unappropriate, for it let the Senate, once again, believe that the consuls are obliged to follow this previously accepted proceedings. Last, the text will let any of our cives understand that the SC mainly deals with problems faced by senators, and not by every citizen. I however abstain, in a good will mind, if it allows Nova Roma making a clearer difference between public and private fora.

ITEM VIII - Modification of the Aedilician Fund rules


The Aediles Curules have requested an amendment to the SC governing the Aedilician Fund. As it is currently written, the Aediles are given fiduciary responsibility for the fund, but hold no actual control or access to the funds, and must rely on others even for reports. The intent of this amendment to the SC is to clarify and define those relationships.

The current Senatus consultum issued in July 25th 2756, which created the Aedilician fund, can be found at: (ML 03/07/25).

It is the last section that the Aediles Curules wish changed from the following:

"IV. The Aedilician Fund is under the Aediles Curules' responsibility. A detailed record of all donations and their destinations will be kept by the Quaestores assigned to the Aediles Curules. The Curule Aedilician Quaestores will also provide the Consules with quarterly reports on the Aedilician Fund to be attached to the national budget of Nova Roma."

The proposed and expanded version is thus:

"IV.a The Aedilician Fund is under the Aediles Curules' responsibility. As such, the Aediles define, in a common edict and in the frame of the present senatus consultum, the rules concerning the management of this fund;

IV.b The Aediles Curules are assisted by one or more quaestors who shall be responsible for:

1. preparing all statements and reports of receipts and disbursements of the fund, based on the information they receive from the assigned consular quaestor(s) that concern donations to and disbursements from the Aedilician Fund;

2. reporting regularly and each time requested to the Aediles Curules on the status of the Aedilician Fund;

3. serving notice to the Aediles Curules immediately whenever difficulties arise in the performance of their duties;

4. upon request of officers of the Senate, preparing reports for the Senate, reviewed by the Aediles Curules, on the state of the Aedilician Fund;

IV.c: Upon request, the Aediles Curules shall inform the Consuls and every concerned magistrate on the state of the Aedilician Fund, based on the reports made to them by their assigned Quaestores Aediles.

IV.d: The Aediles Curules shall prepare the annual accounting of the Aedilician Fund, based on the records of their assigned Quaestors, and present this report in a timely fashion to the Consuls in order that it may be included as an attachment to the annual budget.

IV.e: In the case of an emergency concerning the Aedilician Fund, the Aediles Curules shall request and shall be granted permission by the presiding magistrate to address the Senate directly and respond to any questions made by its


UR: 23 ; ABS: 2 (MOG, DIPI) ; ANT: 5 (FVG, FGA, CFD, QFM, LECA): the item has passed.

Votes and discussions

The following senators have issued the following commentaries:

  • MMPH: The original wording of the senatusconsultus on the Aedilician Fund placed financial responsibilities on the Aediles Curules but did not stipulate procedures and policies on how they we to attain information that is necessary for them to make their reports to the Senate on the financial status of the Magna Mater Project. This amendment address some of the issues that were previously overlooked.
  • KFBQ: It was during my consulship the Aedilian fund was approved after a tough political compromise. I am happy to see that we now are ready to move forward allow the fund to develop to its natural position.
  • MLA: These changes seem useful, reasonable and well thought out. May the gods assist the Curule Aediles in the discharge of their duties with respect to this fund.
  • ATS: It is rather difficult to have oversight over something for which one lacks information or even access.
Personal tools