Open decisions — Floyd's desk

2026-07-19 · wave 36 · Every item below is staged, evidenced, and blocked only on a ruling. The loop's standing rule: execution details get decided and logged; naming, scope, publication, outreach, and money get surfaced. This is the surface. Each entry: the question, the working position the documents currently carry, the evidence, and what your ruling unblocks.

① The container — national, or national-with-layered-roadmap?

Question. Does the lead presentation stay purely national ("Canada's ground, every Canadian's share"), or does it name the layered endgame (resource rents provincial per s.109/s.92A; nature-layer national; agglomeration increments metro) as the stated destination?

Working position. National lead; layered analyzed as the endgame; site copy concedes provincial resource ownership.

Evidence. analysis/container-question.md — now with measured stakes (w31): city containers are an 11.7× lottery with boundary-gerrymander artifacts; provincial ≈5×; national compresses to zero. The recursion result (w16): every smaller container contains its own larger-amplitude inequality.

Unblocks. Final site framing; the federalism answer in every interview; mechanism.md §6 loses its [FLOYD] tag.

② The transition package — ratify or amend

Question. Ratify the drafted package: 20-year linear phase-in + recent-buyer credit (last ~5 years, scaled to price paid) + universal deferral?

Working position. Exactly that package, marked "working recommendation."

Evidence. analysis/transition-path.md (w10): all instruments priced; grandfather-until-sale rejected on Prop 13 lock-in evidence; wealth-conversion identity (most households gain on announcement); mortgage channel identified as the binding constraint ($2.41T against household land).

Unblocks. objections.md §1 moves from "partly conceded, pending" to "conceded and answered by design"; the campaign's what-happens-to-my-house answer becomes committable.

③ Who counts — residents, citizens, adults?

Question. Per-resident (current draft: every resident including children) vs per-adult vs citizens-only — and any residency tenure requirement.

Working position. Per-resident, all ages: a family of four holds four shares (strongest family protection; simplest moral line). NUMBERS #6–7 are computed on it.

Evidence. Priced (w37): analysis/who-counts.md. Per-adult pays singles +22% by cutting the family of four −39%; citizens-only excludes the most land-poor 14% (≈5.8M residents) who keep paying rent through landlords while receiving nothing; Alaska's PFD — the continent's only durable rent dividend — uses residency, all ages. Recommendation: keep per-resident; if a boundary concession is ever needed, a 12-month residency rule beats a citizenship test (<3% effect on per-share flow).

Unblocks. Freezes the arithmetic the Q2 microsimulation should run on (the commission in ⑥ ideally follows this ruling, though Q2 can price both).

④ The yard-sign line

Question. Pick the lead line (or reorder). Current candidates (narrative-kit.md):

  1. The ground is ours before it's mine.
  2. Nobody made the land. Everybody made it valuable.
  3. You have a share. You always did.
  4. Settle the oldest account.
  5. What you build is yours. The ground is ours.

Working position. #1 carries the hero section; #5 is the site's moral-case close. No data can settle this one — it's voice.

Unblocks. Merch-ready framing; consistency across future materials.

⑤ Indigenous engagement — when and with whom

Question. Green-light approaching Indigenous collaborators (scholars/ organizations) to co-develop the title interaction section — or hold.

Working position. Hold. The moral case carries the honest placeholder ("settler title and Indigenous title are different questions; Groundshare addresses the first and stands ready to be shaped by the second"); an internal groundwork note exists (outreach/indigenous-engagement-groundwork.md, deliberately unrendered); the loop never initiates contact.

Unblocks. The moral case's one deliberately open section; credibility with audiences for whom this is the first question.

⑥ Commissioning and outreach — money and sending

Question. Three sub-decisions: (a) commission the Q2 SPSM incidence microsimulation (the single highest-value study; standard tooling; modest cost through the SPSM ecosystem — Vivic has done CWC's SPSM work before); (b) send the academic brief (outreach/academic-brief.md — now leads with the nine-roll dataset and the two-sided T1 result); (c) send the farm brief (outreach/farm-brief.md).

Working position. All prepared, none sent, per the standing rule.

Evidence. academic-path.md (questions, standards, candidates, venues); the T1 pilots (w33–34) strengthen the brief's "we test ourselves" pitch.

Unblocks. (a) converts the strongest talking point into a defensible number; (b)/(c) start the external-credibility clock.

⑦ BC Assessment data license — buy, partner, or skip

Question. BCA's province-wide per-property products (Data Advice) are licensed, "named users" (w29). License directly (cost + agreement), get it via a university partner (folds into ⑥a/⑥b — researchers already hold BCA extracts), or stay on open municipal data?

Working position. Stay on open data; the academic route acquires it for free if ⑥ proceeds. Direct licensing only makes sense if you want province-wide parcel work before any academic partnership exists.


Ruling on any item: say the word in any session — the loop applies it, updates the affected documents, and logs the ruling in the wave log. Items ①–③ change published numbers or framing; ④ is voice; ⑤–⑦ start clocks outside the repo.

Groundshare — a proposal in open development. Every number traces to a cited public source with its retrieval date; corrections are published, not erased. Rebuilt 2026-07-19 from the repo's research files.