Event:2023/12/21 Delegates

From Omni Commons
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Omni Delegates' Meeting - 12 21 2023 7pm-9pm

Meeting Details

Roles

  • Facilitator/s: jamal
  • Stacktaker:
  • Timekeeper:
  • Notetaker/s: paige
  • Next meeting's facilitator(s):

Delegates

  • BOGSS:
  • CCL: Patrik
  • FNB: Toan/Josh
  • LL: John/Anka absent?
  • SB:
  • SM:
  • SR: Jemma
  • Quorum (2/3 of active groups):

intros

BRIEF INTROS MAY INCLUDE: name, pronouns, groups you're in, land you're on, if you're a delegate, unmet access needs, meeting roles you'd like to help with, discussion topics or proposals to add to agenda, announcements/updates/report-backs from your groups, safe space issues or updates PROMPT people to share contact info in the chat, so we can stay in touch

  • jamal - notes not taken. dont speak for black people if youre not black. if your not gay dont speak for gay people, etc. speak from your lived experience
  • yar - she/her omni
  • patrik - he/hi
  • kim - she/her pp
  • pallavi
  • thai - pp
  • darius pp
  • abbas pp
  • culture pp
  • ?
  • brittany pp
  • becca pp
  • niallah pbo lead
  • dave pp
  • jenna pp
  • av they/them pp
  • eric sr
  • sequoia and/or taylor she/her sr
  • alex - sr
  • carlos - tanc
  • jemma - sr delegate
  • tamal - oakland resident
  • toan - fnb delegate
  • philib - events wg
  • romy - sr
  • carl - sr
  • kale - ccl
  • G- marketing support
  • silver -fnb omni operations

remote members

  • yemi pp she/her
  • josh he/him fnb. want to mention hard to hear ppl who are farther away
  • rebecca skinner - ccl

1st half discussion

  • jamal - options on table LLC, land trust, PP. i want to make space for people to that feel like they own the other options, to talk about proposals they submitted
  • abbas - PP ill start and pass to yemi. i think its important for us, to give an overview of how we got here. there was the boycott on the building with allegations of racism and zionism. we then got together to create a proposal to put in black ppls hands. we want to transform omni into black community space bc historically black neighborhood. this space since 2014 hasnt been a safe space for the black community. some of you came to the tales of the town film, in the film my uncle talking about his grandfather fleeing jim crow racism from louisiana. now we see black pop gentrificated out of oakland. north oakland in particular. historical content important. based off lack of black ppl. av grew up right on the corner. we put a proposal around becoming owners of the space. we know we say black community space, but we do not mean exclude. we believe in liberation of all humanity. i thought we had a great discussion with delegates initially, tentative yes from them when presented. a week after that it turned into a lot of character assasinations. i think they were islamophobic, saying that i am an iranian state agent. extreme consequences from that language for me and family in BLA. they could be very damaging to me and my organization. also a lot of racism that came up after proposal, questioning our ability. i understand questioning but we think its racism. i believe there are good actors in this space. yar came forward and apologized. i also believe there are negative actors in this space that want to stand firm in racism. but we want to work with positive forces in this space. is anyone here in Liberated Lens here? i was on youtube and they have a lot of good stuff on there. i scroll all the way down, video on quilombo. he was talking about how they transformed the space as a white anarchist anti authoritarian. they wanted to transform. he brought up some points that are very similar. obvious differences but in that situation he talked about people using and weaponizing anarchism for european americans to horde space. was an anti authorian white space that doesnt serve community. omni was started in 2014. post oscar grant, post gentrification. how do we move forward and create black community center in oakland. we consider this to be genocide. a lot of us dont have family out here anymore. we came here in good faith. since then i dont think good faith given back. before they said no interest in ownership, but after we said black community having it then they wanted it. we feel like we are the afterlife trying to bring up that support. that doesnt mean we are anti yall, we want to move in a positive way to serve community, pending foreclosure of 875k. so we want to move forward positively but want to call elephant in the room. words are violent racism is violent. we want to move positively but asking why cant black people get control
  • jamal - 30 mins already, yemi can you sum up proposal.
  • yemi - to add on, someone in the chat said why not donate to grant good faith (?) suggestions like that have come to the table in good faith. negotiations imply two sides. we have come forward multiple times, i want to reiterate we said we would not kick anyone out of the space. we said we would like to negotiate with everyone who wants it to be a community space. what we are offering is admin, financial support and operational support, which is beneficial to all members of community. important to not bastardize our proposal. we have been really clear about those things, when we talk about education and negotiation, we... what org has said they will donate $870k without improving space? dont focus on characteristics of our ppl, or race, we need to talk about what would all yall would like. clearly, the racism is you putting us on trial and not talking about material work we would do in space for community, and also the current members of omni. if we are talking about proposal...
  • josh - i think to that point in the hopes that we can move forward with authentic discussion, ask what we really want. im presenting for fnb. fnb had a meeting and agreed they would not block any proposal. we would stand aside meaning we would accept proposal as of now. some questions to move FNB to strongly favor - want clarification between fnb and clp and how they would address the reintroduction of clp into omni if they were to., 2. want delineation of decision making power between delegates and the owners of the building. i also think we should remove some ppl from google meet
  • jamal - theyre gone. points well taken. on way to go forward, i think thats part of contract discussion. thats for discussion if delegates want to go forwards.
  • silver - i want to respond to yemi, about what we want. we are collective of collectives, not unified in that way. i tried to speak to each collective. each is in their silos. some are closer like sudo room and counter culture labs. but as an entire entity we do not know. that requires work . that is fault of omni.
  • jamal - anyone who is delegate who has different thing to add?
  • sequoia - thank you PP for being here. glad you are here. my biggest question. i would love it to be a black community center. my q is omni commons has put equity into the space. if we have a $3m building hypothetically, and we owed $800k then we have $2m. if PP wants to do $1m then tenancy in commons. 2/3 share and PP would have 1/3. my concern has been if PP spends $800k to get $3m asset, omni commons as an entity, if we cant afford building, the omni commons collectives agree, we could sell building, or work with your trust, we could take our equity and go to a smaller community space. i learned about history of black panthers. i think that stuff is vital. when i first learned about PP, one of dreams is to feed people on scale. and so it would be incredible to have that in this space. but what is the admin legal structure that can facilitate an agreement between these groups.
  • jamal - on that same pt, the decision has to be - what program do delegates want to do. it is a contract negotiation. PP is hearing you right. at what ever point decision is made, negotiation is made after. attorneys can help you navigate that, i dont want to give legal response
  • pallavi - i am development consultant. i had a convo with a prev stakeholder in omni who addressed similar concerns. and thats where the idea of having a counterproposal comes into play. of what you want to see. in that spirit, in having discussion about equity, have to talk about cultural and racial equity. you are talking about what people have paid into building, but what about cultural equity poc have put into this community. we need to be able relinquish power sometimes to right the wrongs of the past. thats not me saying giving up everything but like in the negotiation, in the conversation, we need to be keeping that in mind. my understanding specifically as development professional for POC nonprofits, ive seen how with nonprofits inequitable distribution of funds, poc hurdles have faced. to even have an opportunity like this,, we have to consider all of the historical cultural context and how poc have been treated in this space. lets look at facts historically in this space.
  • jamal - llc, foreclosure, land trust, i want ppl to speak to those. then 15 minutes break with the delegates.
  • G - i want to voice the purpose of this meeting is to make a decision, but accountability is a stain on this convo and this building. if stain not addressed. ppl thinking about how to save building but not any action but omni im seeing to adress it. i think we need a racism 101, workshop on antiracist. i dont see that happening, i think that needs to be prioritized.
  • jamal - im not skipping people. im letting ppl who have not spoken go first
  • yar - equity thing is hard for me. i want to establish that nobody here wants building to be sold. colonizer logic, i want no part in it. in terms of liquidizing, in terms of equity, we dont know each other right now, we need time to build trust. whoever owns the building, there is a sense that, the other group will be vulnerable to retaliation from that. we want legal structure to address that vulnerability for both PP and omni. for PP to commit this amount of labor and money and resources, and not have that same guarantee, that's too much to ask. if we want to accept this generous offer, to renew omni commons, then we need to give them something material, a real stake in the building. and that means a real share. not because that means we want to sell it on the market, but for power balance
  • kale - i really dont understand the code language. but i perceive of omni commons, is that we are all owners. and that as owners, we need to collab, work together for common goal of keeping omni available to everyone. the community is diverse, should remain diverse. this is solstice. night where year turns and goes back into light. spiral upwards. i dont see that we have worked hard enough to recognize our each individual groups, to realize that we are all part owners. and we make an owners decision. i think we can find a solution within ourselves
  • community member - what is current racial makeup of orgs of omnis. why is omni refusing to give it to black community?
  • silver - makeup of board. right now all white. plan to do a small retreat. there were also groups
  • paige - question? current delegates are not all white
  • david - point of clarification. i dont think it is true every group is stakeholder. i think it is the current members who have a stake on the board.
  • patrik - also racial makeup of board is not necessarily racial makeup of the orgs they are representing. they are a small sampling of those orgs
  • jamal - board are the decision members. historically been majority white
  • yemi - i want to bring us back to the options on table. 1. is foreclosure and that would happen between 1-90 days from jan. 2. option about microloans. somehow paying off debt. where was that support before black org stepped in? that was only brought in to block PP. that has to be assessed and understood. this has been an issue for many years, why is that coming up now. there is a flag there. to g's point. we have to address that. 3. last proposal about the community land trust. idk what that is, but for omni to keep going, will that let them keep doing what theyre doing? today you know about PP, that our proposal will let every collective here stay in omni commons and keep doing what they are doing. we are not landlords, we are community org committed to serving the community. we exist already without omni commons. we see omni commons as opportunity to leverage space to do more work. concern about you selling building, we see selling the land as a crime. for you to casually throw idea of selling building, and taking that money and giving out to white collectives. no shade to you, bc not on table, but losing space like that in black community. that is dangerous option, has real consequences for the black community in omni commons
  • G - clarifying q, the board is decision making entity. and they rotate?
  • yar - should rotate, but
  • silver - most have been same for 10 years. only til this year said we should change
  • G - in few weeks ive been here, decision making is so convoluted. wondering how are we are going to decide if we dont know what decision making process is
  • jemma - few things to address, most of the delegates are new. im new i came in oct. patrik and john have been here longer. rotates pretty often in my experience.
  • silver -not true
  • jemma - some ppl said they would step down. some ppl have taken leadership here when they were not asked to. I think PP is really great. a black community space, but damaged trust. first meeting - i want to see how we work past that. support you, work, like the amount of food you are giving out. i am sorry that you are feeling like you are under tough scrutiny . sudo room was talking about microloans before your proposal came to the table, but not in specific legal language of an LLC. really dont want you to feel targeted, want to find a way to work together. if we dont do your proposal, still hope you become active in this space. there are points of conflict and those are things, people are scared because of some internal emails - in those there is this language of "do this or you are racist or petty" and it is concerning. those are things we have been trying to combat while talking about your proposal, given reactions we have had in discussing. i was not here during CLP , i did not have first hand experience. so i wont go there. but i want to encourage cooperation, grow either as separate entities, or... lot of pushback on proposal with how ppl in our org are acting as leaders when they are not supposed to be involved in decision making
  • jamal - a lot said there. i see a lot of hands. i want to take 10 minutes. im going to say the following thing. as a facilitator, i have experienced micro aggressions in this process. i think people need to mindful of how they speak to black/brown ppl. ppl have questioned me about being facilitator. and i should not be questioned there given my background, 3 degrees. so i have experienced that microaggression here. want us to be very mindful about how we navigate here

10 minute break, delegates of omni convened with Jamal

2nd half discussion

  • jamal: Had some conversation with delegates. Theres a need for smaller conversations between Omni and PP to negotiate specific aspects of PP proposal. Also wish to continue investigate other options. as a facilitator i found myself struck by the level of disagreement, inability to come to agreement. i think one of points made earlier was taken well about remedying harm that ppl think has been imparted. we dont have time to do that today. i hope that in individual conversations that ppl say their truth but i dont think there is a decision in principle ready, other than a collaboration with leaders of PP and the board. and there are some other proposals on the table, that some members are working. time and space will be made for more discussion with PP. david next. want to say again im not a decision maker, i am a facilitator. i want to name that openly and clearly. nor am i demanding that ppl make decisions. i echo what G said, there is some harm that people feel is real and it needs to be dealt with. if i had 2 days maybe we could go there. time to wrap up now
  • david - i am a community member, not a delegate. someone asked me to say something about land trusts. i work in community development, affordable housing. doing that for 7-8 yrs. 2 things, just observing options. 1st thing, there are orgs called community land trusts (CLT). their only option is to preserve land. when omni founded expected a CLT would be part. CLT owns land, group owns building. charged with things like upholding bylaws of the org. i.e. if u put a mcdonalds in here, that would violate use. during foreclosure process there would be multiple options to pursue. well known one is sogorea te. also sf land trust. east bay land trust. saying this generically, and without judgement of PP, that these should be pursued. 2nd. i dont think omni needs to decide tonight. 3 months is the LEAST amt of time they have (not until after 3 months can it be sold). And if they lose the building through foreclosure, probably leave with at least $1 mil, or $2mil. with $2mil, omni could buy a place to house everyone. This makes sense, bought years ago, so value increased. whatever omni decides, it should do carefully. take 3 weeks to a month to decide something like that
  • abbas - i will speak to contradictions. selling the building - equity in building, land trust, or... but this is supposed to be a community space. we are talking about land trust and affordable housing. what does that mean in this neighborhood? that is often a grift. $15 /hr mcdonalds down the street often cant afford what is considered "affordable housing". what do we mean by a CLT - some sponsored by chase, who made money off slaves. if we are talking equity omni earned - does that belong to omni or the community? is this about capitalism or communalism? should it get ravaged? or given to black community for control? some ppl said we want to see this as a black community space but dont trust us. but we still came in here, even after we heard allegations of racism. we want restoration to happen. theres ppl who deny racism and islamophobia in space. as a muslim, it has not been friendly here. i've experienced racism and islamophobia here. if theres good will here, why wont you let us take over? weve said we will guarantee tenants can stay in the space. but option is to just sell and move into the next neighborhood? but what is that next neighborhood? and your relation to the land there? if omni is about community and communalism, then why are ppl using hierarchy for saying we should buy new space
  • josh - 4 things. 1. im partially speaking as delegate but also as an individual. FNB will not approve any financial liquidation of the omni commons, transition to a new building, or money back to the collectives. i feel deep alignment with Abbas. selling off this building would be most direct form of gentrification we could do. i personally will see to it that not a single cent to a delegate pocket. 2. i am delegate, to understand nuances. decided moving forwards necessitates a lifting of the boycott by pp. this is what has been spoken to me. 3. i dont think its fair to demand that PP do the first step of good faith. so I would like to propose bringing PP in as a collective. 3. we are down to go forward with community land trust, but I prefer PP, want them to they know we are engaging in good faith and equally, and not as a last resort.
  • kale - land trust model was misinterpreted. i have some friends who are a community of gardeners. ashby gardners. two lots owned by different people. one group were very favorable to community garden. covid happened and they wanted to sell it to make apartments. land trust of the ohlone people were able to buy both pieces of property in two steps. two lot space of open space remains with fruit trees and plants growing. even though ashby garden people were told to find new space to work, ultimately we wanted land to stay undeveloped. land is now held in trust, not by any bank. lots of land trusts out there.
  • abbas - im very familiar with CLTs and affordable land trusts. 2nd thing, around boycott. we are Peoples Programs. CLP called for boycott. we didnt. 2 different organizations. now theres been questions around CLP. we spoke about this in previous meetings. we have restorative and transformative justice skills. we are willing to bring CLP to the table. if they say yes, and y'all say yes, can discuss restoration. we arent CLP so im not sure how that question arose.
  • jamal - can somebody talk about, what ownership of this boycott are we saying belongs to PP
  • josh - are we allowed to call people out? im not the one saying this shit. im going to convey what people said to me. some ppl are drawing a hard line, can those ppl speak? many of us here. its just a twitter repost. that is the sticking point here. yar put it in the chat for people to see. people want to take down a tweet. insane to me
  • jamal - is it just a tweet? who called for the boycott? [CLP]
  • jamal - if theres a twitter post.. what's the request
  • silver - after CLP meeting in person. bullshit meeting. i hit up delency. there was something in their voice that made me feel they believe in accountability. and since then building that relationship. we are losing building, what does this look like to let black ppl from oakland run the space. obviously im one of the forefront of boycott, i was called out as zionist by group that didnt have a conversation about it. i get it whatever sells on social media... and those groups have a relationship. and we dont have one with PP. complicated. i am omni, also individual. i do not condone being called a zionist. and in their conversation they said thats not cool. they are willing to listen, PP, and thats something i can go forward with
  • jamal - if theres an issue in the room, i want to invite people and move on. i dont want to invite people to throw rocks and hide their hand. we are asking group of people who did not call for boycott, to take something down. not fair to ask someone to ask someone to take ownership for something they did not do. not fair that group of people to be... invite you to be grown ups. say the shit to them and move on. this is a collective room of adults.
  • PP, didnt get name - i spend a lot of time on the farm, so maybe i think in more simplistic terms. as far as i understand it. what is voted on is black resource center. for whatever reason i havent heard proposal issues, or character flaws. i want to put it back on minds and hearts of delegates to respond. lot of ppl talk about racism and gentrification. never been in a room where there was a yes/no decision on black community center treated like this except in a capitalistic world
  • jemma - one of sticking points. there has been a lot of attacks, not perpetrated by peoples programs. i want to be clear. but there is a relationship with this other org CLP. we want some assistance on that boycott. how are we going to work on this together? that is the kind of movement that we need to see to show that this is a proposal that will keep omni ppl here, here. The proposal for me, I think there are vague things. clarifying what does that internal structure look like. people are concerned and worried. That comes with how that first conversation went off (meeting in october). i really do appreciate your programs, think they are really awesome. but support youve shown for the boycott is hard on us, because you are popular. you could do a lot to help your space grow (?). that is the ask, less of financial one. can we start to develop those structures? its not that we dont trust, but theres a lack of trust. makes sense in calls for boycott. makes ppl uncomfortable here. want to find that middle ground, and that is to address is that boycott. biggest thing, is its hard to bring up these conversations because their are allusions to violence, and as someone who has been assaulted twice this year, i am scared of physical violence. it wasnt directed at me, but i am concerned when i see those kind of things happen. it makes me think, if i stand up and talk, is this something than can happen to me?
  • toan - what david brought up about land trust and equity. it was an option, its not a proposal or anything. good to make that clear. also i do see what mentioned, there is racism what is happened here. i think its systemic. we dont have a way to respond to that. people are not approving proposal because its not black led, but concern about non detail, and your political beliefs and ideals. to be saying that it is not being passed because its black. i dont know how to respond to that, i dont want to respond in a way that will hurt you.
  • eric - im excited about possibility of PP being part of the omni. lot that omni can learn through partnership. abbas i heard you say PP is not CLP, you are not origin, would you say that PP supported or amplified boycott by posting to social media. would you take responsibility of that degree of that?
  • People Program member - personally i think im very taken aback because i believe the boycott was about racism in the space, correct? so youre saying we take that down without addressing it? ill give the rest of my time to abbas, but it think its important to refocus our energy on how racism and islamaphobia have shown up in this space
  • G - i think that the question being proposed is misplaced energy. what has omni done to answer to calls for accountability? what is omni planning to do? i havent seen anything to repair harms being done. but as omni delegates, it is a collective responsibility that needs action, but nothing planned, no response. no action items. omni has to respond and make plans to be anti-racist. have to plan something. its not going to be one workshop or one meeting, but a commitment for your whole life
  • abbas - circles of (?). i will come back to history of what happened. we gave proposal, and we said we need to come together to figure it out. 2nd the tables were flipped in the space. called "patriarchal hierarchical people, scary n__". im a very peaceful person. i keep myself calm and i keep myself centered. we want peace for humanity. for people to say we are iranian agents or threaten violence? those are very racist tropes that go back to slavery. big black brutes, oversexualized. tropes that lead to OPD and CHPD in these streets, that get oscar grant killed. why does table keep getting spun on this. we are not CLP. we can have transformative justice discussions with CLP. i said this in past 3 meetings. feels like a record player, responding to claims that arent true. yes issues of racism brought up. olive branch, we are still here with racism being thrown at us. it just seems that you can say you want things to happen, but then... you need to talk about violence? space hoarding is violence. gentrification is violence. we have treated everyone here with respect. lets negotiate. ill bring pizza. i dont know many too many orgs that would hear about racism, and still extend olive branch, and give $870k to save this space. which side do you want to be on? we trying to move forward positively. willing to negotiate, put it into writing, so you feel like you are respected. if you believe you care about a black community space, let black people, new afrikan ppl, families of ousd, bpp, elmers church, generations in this, founded schools and resources... buut you dont trust us? i can show you what my grand auntie did. which side do you all want to be on. do you want to work with us?
  • yar - i want this to work, i want to make this happen. to me its just about the details. all the objections ive heard, that im trying to convince... details will convince them. i want to figure out what that contract looks like. to me thats within our grasp if we can focus on that.
  • yemi - thank yar for uplifting and to abbas' point - we have said we will provide $870k, which for a black community, is huge investment. this space was given to omni with good faith from a donor. asked to do good for community. in 15 years, pay that money back. that overall has failed. and my concern is, if we say we want to put forward money, there is a risk of us to working with you, and its you who cant come up with a decision? people cant even come up with a decision. i think its important to state the facts. $870k, without paying a cent of that debt, and you want to continue to have majority ownership of the land? im confused where that is, the money that was given to yall? i know you have done some work, but the biggest investment, the $870k you failed to pay. what is the good faith after that? after we pay, are you willing to say 51%, or saying something like if we put in more work we can get more equity? behind occupying the space, what are you willing to do to make this space better? we said clearly what we plan to do. what is that omni commons as a collective are going to do to make it more useful? as a resource? happy to hear from anyone.
  • josh - im sorry to derail from that point but i wanted to say, i want to drive forward convo about proposal. repeated from SR delegate. "perceived display of violence" at original meeting. i want to say how racist it is to say it was violence. the story was ian, white man, historically who is violent in communication style, directed at delency. delency responded "do you want to take this outside." please lets have that on the table explicitly to talk about. 2nd thing demanded from PP is still in terms of boycott. 1 concrete thing is take down tweet. and work back channels with clp to take down. SR needs to define that. but they only have power to facilitate conversation. if you dont have anything more concrete than that, then we need to stop wasting PP time. i wish i had answer to yemi, but i think all we can put in is the fact that people are still here and still fucking trying. also, to interpret what has been taken up. being are leveraging some assets, as you named this is gifted, and they are using that as leverage. thats my personal opinion
  • sequoia - i really appreciate you are here. you have a lot of energy and omni needs that. i do agree this is not a black community space, and would love to see that here going forwards, and want to come into agreement with PP. only reason i have felt reluctance 1. nebulous relationship with CLP and it has been told to me that the proposal amounted to total admin and legal control of the space, that makes me nervous as Omni, i want to see it continued. i agree what you say about racial equity, i dont think 33% number splitting makes sense. i would support 50/50 or if omni had less than 50. we have two orgs that dont know each other and dont trust each other. if we had legal structure set up that would help
  • PY? - i was here 8 years ago when they first got the space, or 10. 2014. i left and just 2 weeks ago moved back. point is this has been similar issue from beginning. POC come in here and say they want to come here, and it was shut down. i want to support this proposal and i havent even read it, but i support what PP does. what they are about, it would be an honor for all of these projects to be affiliated with that. toughest darkest work, trying to heal stuff they we dont know how to heal. if we are a part of something that is going to heal oakland. omni does need some ownership. black community space is community space. in my neighborhood we all thrived at MLK space. for it to be a black community center, it is a full community center. but when a black org can run it, thats when you will see what it really looks like.
  • david - this comment was a response to something said far back in conversation - the garden CLT mentioned, that was sogorea te. there are indigenous land trusts. not true every land trust is a force of gentrification. there are some that preserve space for marginalized groups
  • patrik - push back about what yemi said about omni being outright given building. negates all the hard work to find a donor for initial $1m, plus then weve put into $1m into mortgage payments, and what we bring to the table, we can continue to be in here to cover funds to pay building. we have been able to pay all of our mortgage payments. very unfair to say we were given this building
  • tye - as someone part of both PP and media lab, like its already been said. david you mentioned it could be a situation where equity is taken and put into a diff space, but now omni is already not for everyone. for black women, i am here weekly and i experience microaggression on a weekly basis. if money put into a new space - that is theoretics without logical standpoint. especially when ppl brought up someone who has harmed. not theoretical. ppl in omni need to take accountability. a lot of things after this, ppl are going to have their own individual conversations. ppl are not taking it to heart. those things need to happen even if ppl dont want to address it.
  • yar - thinking about money, its more about how to share space. what about 50/50, with contract that iincludes everything from initial proposal? since its not about the money, if its just about moving with legal protection. unless there was some other org who could be part of that, then 33% split. i am just putting that out
  • jamal - we are at 933. ton of convo that needs to continue. we are not going to get to it tonight
  • yemi - i want to say to patrik, in our proposal we said we understand all the hard work that has gone into omni. i have seen and sat with silver. i have a deep understanding of the amount of work it takes to run community space, i would never say that people havent worked hard. i never said that, and that would never come out of my mouth.
  • jamal - as we come to a close. black people dont owe you labor. so invitation to do restorative justice about CLP. if you think harm done, you need to go to CLP. but i hear from ppl programs that they dont mind involvement by their offer of mediation. theres an undercurrent of behind the scenes conversations. there are people pulling strings like puppeteers who are not present in the room. backdoor convos need to stop. they need to come to the table and talk. if you havent been able to pay the entirety of the loan back to the lender, you to have faults. to tell someone else to prove themselves after that? i havent heard disagreement. i am hearing people talk past each other. how are you engaging in racism and harm internally? more importantly i would invite people who have comments, to come and have their comments said. there are some folks that have engaged in harm. they need to be reflective about harm they are perpetuating in private. sharing harm and it is becoming more harmful. saying things that arent true. saying things that are untrue. whos messages are you carrying around? baffles me that we cannot come to a conclusion, but would risk losing a building because we are too proud, incapable of dealing with, or incapable of standing and dealing with our own face in the mirror. must ask, what and how have i contributed harm to others? when you can position yourself over a building because you feel harmed by a ?, and lose it instead of engaging with honest dialogue? i will offer to come back to facilitate a smaller conversation, because i think that needs to happen. but you arent going to come to a conclusion in a room with 100 ppl. not a board room, this is a classroom. but what i will not do is engage in games. other shit i can be doing with my life. i want to invite you all to be reflective. sorry im going to have last word.

End of Meeting

Retrieved from "https://omnicommons.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Event:2023/12/21_Delegates&oldid=6726"