Towns are the backbone of Redmont. Some will argue that Oakridge and Aventura do almost nothing compared to the hustle and bustle of Revielle; some say the towns are rendered useless by government overreach. However, whether you’re an Aventuran or a proud Oakie like myself, most residents of these towns think differently.
Town governments are not only an incredibly important stepping stone for aspiring politicians, but also play a crucial role in allowing players both new and old to find what, arguably, is the most important aspect of DemocracyCraft; community.
Oakridge and Aventura provide a doorway for players entering both the government and the server as a whole, allowing them to make connections and friendships as they begin their journeys in Redmont.
This is why the information I recently discovered is concerning, to say the least. While researching an anonymous tip that RazNews received, I interviewed Sofia2750, Oakridge’s former Mayor and current Head of Residence. Here’s the relevant part of the conversation, transcribed from Discord:
J: In your opinion, is the money received from eviction auctions a significant part of the town [of Oakridge]’s treasury – that is, does the town rely in any capacity on those profits?
S: They very much are a big part of the towns revenue, I initially proposed the economic growth plan to try and diversify our revenue which is 99% auctions. Our only revenues outside of auctions are like 1 or 2 chestshop purchases of Oakridge flags
[emphasis added]
The apparent fact that Oakridge relies almost entirely on auction revenue to function is certainly worrying. It’s even more so when you consider that at least forty eviction notices have been sent regarding Oakridge plots as of April 9, and most if not all of those plots will be auctioned off. According to Sofia, the town government will then receive 100% of the auction profits.
This begs the question; can the Oakridgian Office of Residence be trusted to evict plots fairly, based on the town’s building regulations and nothing else? Or, will the number of evictions increase whenever the town treasury’s a little low? Are property inspectors encouraged to report plots on technicalities or ambiguity?
This isn’t only a problem for Oakies, either. Here’s a similar exchange made when I interviewed KattoDE, the Aventuran Head of Development:
J: In your opinion, is the money received from eviction auctions a significant part of the town [of Aventura]’s treasury – that is, does the town rely in any capacity on those profits?
K: Without eviction auctions, Aventura would indubitably constantly be in deficit and lose money, as our other ways of generating income are too small to matter. Whether we rely on them is a different question – in the long term absolutely, but since the town balance is well over 2 Million at this moment, we could last a few months without them.
[emphasis added]
Katto also confirmed that, like Oakridge, the Town of Aventura usually receives 100% of the proceeds from its auctions, excluding individual private deals. The main difference between the two towns is that, according to the #transactions channel on Aventura’s Discord server, only one plot has been auctioned off in the last 40 days, whereas Oakridge has recently been auctioning a flurry of real estate – probably due to the changes in leadership and revitalization of its Office of Residence.
Katto’s answer is slightly less alarming than Sofia’s, claiming that Aventura has enough funds stored that they could get by for a while even without the auctions. However, he still holds that eviction auctions are a crucial source of revenue for the town.
As a resident of and property inspector for Oakridge myself, I don’t believe that either town government can, therefore, be a reliably impartial evictor of plots. Because plots are transferred to the
Mayor’s ownership upon the expiration of eviction notices, it’s in the direct interests of the Mayors themselves, the Heads and Offices of Development and Residence, and all of the towns’ other governing branches to evict and auction as many plots as they can, possibly regardless of players’ rights or building regulations.
This information is also worrying for another reason; if evictions succeeded in encouraging players to comply with regulations fully, Oakridge and Aventura would lose the vast majority of their
income – no evictions means no auctions, and as Sofia and Katto have confirmed, no auctions means no money.
Sofia did not comment on Oakridge’s actual treasury balance, but if we make the assumption that it’s similar to Aventura’s, this would mean that both towns could subsist on what they have for “a few months”. But after that, their only significant source of funds would be federal grants, which the government can only afford so many of.
I think all this illustrates not only a conflict of interest in the way town evictions are made, but also an unsustainable and potentially fatal flaw in the existence of Redmont’s towns. Oakridge and Aventura need more ways to source funds, whether through rerouting taxpayer dollars or another drastic change.
All in all, we rely on our towns; Redmont wouldn’t be the same without them. This issue should not be neglected, not if we want to keep the same sense of safety and community that many Oakies and Aventurans have felt since taking up residence in their respective towns.
LONG LIVE OAKRIDGE, and LONG LIVE AVENTURA!
Jae A. Faewood