Event:2024/01/11 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 - January 11, 2024 7pm-9pm

Meeting Details

Roles

  • Facilitator/s: john
  • Stacktaker:
  • Timekeeper: yar
  • Notetaker/s: paige, yar

Delegates

  • CCL: patrik
  • FNB: toan
  • LL: john
  • ML: pallavi
  • SB: nobody
  • SR: paige/eric
  • SM: juul, jenny (inactive)
  • Quorum (2/3 of active groups):

Other attendees

  • Gerald
  • Yar
  • jamal

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

Media Lab Proposal

  • john - has media lab presented to the board as a whole, are there any questions?
  • gerald - what is media lab?
  • pallavi - media lab is a collective of artists and activists who's mission is to educate and share decolonial production, hand work, slow making. cross cultural programming to the community. hosting different types of workshops within our own ecosystem of community members. also collaborating with other organizations. resources in textiles and different types of product production. we already have in our space multi use sewing studio with industrial sewing machines, and a screen printing lab next to us. storage for different items related to sewing and screen printing. just got a floor loom.
  • gerald - you talking about CC and them?
  • pallavi - yes
  • vote: YES (sudo/paige patrik/ccl john/LL toan/FNB); ABSTAIN (none); BLOCK (none)


Executive Director contract

  • john - who would like to speak to it
  • paige: email thread with patrik, john.
  • patrik: some issues. may need to be W2, more complicated. pushback on self funded position, it's exploitive, but if he's proposing it, that's his choice.
  • paige: if two people work on a fundraiser, eg pallavi would be paid different from jamal. that's why the cap makes sense.
  • patrik: we said 20% of revenue capped at yearly salary of 120k, so for 6 months it'd be half that. i tossed around 10% before cap, 5% after. have to figure out how to square that legally.
    • also what kind of authority, or different label? approved operations coordinator 2021, less useful for his resume.
  • jamal: i'm not playing title games. if you want another title you can find someone else. people say they're gonna do stuff, and absent authority to do it nothing will change. exceedingly troubled that a contract has been shared with a collective but not me.
    • paige: it wasn't shared to any collective
  • john: operations coordinator as a title makes no sense if we want them to be presenting themselves as the face of omni to fundraise. we're operating in a nonprofit industrial complex, in that space titles matter.
  • jamal: people are telling me things in my contract. talking about me in sudo meeting. about conversations i had. struggling with the nature of peoples' behavior. i won't tolerate people impugning my character.
  • paige: lawyer contacted the board recapping your convo. eric read that email to sudo meeting. not the contract.
  • jamal: communications between counsel and board are privileged. why was it shared to a room full of people? some of it was about contract negotiation like authorities i'd have. i wonder how emails are getting shared, extra emailing, pitchfork carrying is appropriate. grown people talk and lie about me when i'm not in the room. if you wanna carry along the way you are, that's ok, but i won't tolerate eric's behavior anymore.
  • toan: FNB had a meeting last night. I invited jamal to discuss it at the last minute. i shared your [contract] because i wanted to be transparent. since im representing EBFNB, i wanted to get their thoughts on how i should represent them. not done in bad faith. some people had some concerns about the terms and conditions, but overall they expressed favor over someone helping succeed & omni getting through the foreclosure. for me it is a balance, i dont think anyone from FNB is using it in bad faith, picking and choosing and spreading it in a bad way. i stand by sharing with my collective.
  • jamal: i dont think it should be shared, but mainly i dont think it is ok if someone is sharing something that is patently false. explicitly emails sent back and forth, with my name. nonsense like saying i'm a plant, blah blah blah, that is absolutely unacceptable for grown adults. i will not let eric send emails to me about me saying things in meetings that are not true. it borders slanderous, libelous behavior. im not going to tolerate that behavior.
  • gerald - jamal, my name is gerald, long time supporter of omni, one of the orignals. and i didnt see the emails that you are talking about. so i dont know what you are talking about but i know there is a thin line between transparency and gossip, and harmful gossip. i dont know, id have to actually read all the emails to make a judgment, but sounds like you are about to resign
  • jamal - i think the board has to self govern itself. line that they cant cross, violating norms, sharing lies. one of the emails about pressuring you. blatant lies.
  • paige: yes the tone of eric's email was that you forced us into it. eventually we resolved the truth and it calmed down.
  • gerald: you may come from a different standard of privacy. i know some of these people, i can tell you, maybe what you see as an attack might just be gossip. to tell you the truth, i dont think there is any way to stop that. i understand if someone says a lie about me in an email, i want to dispel that, but as i know the sudo room, its not, i dont know, not a bunch of scholars to be honest with you. i dont know if theres any remedy for what you seem to be upset about.
  • john: i would say, that we are moving into a different kind of relationship than we have ever had in the past, with this conversation of hiring a contract interim ED. relatively few of us in the collectives here have had the necessity to deal with human relations, kinds of negotiations in the nonprofit sector. i haven't see the SR emails but have no reason to disagree with your characterization that there have been lies. there needs to be a tone set in how we talk to each other when there's a contract/employee relationship, consistent with treating each other with dignity & respect. i appreciate your expressing and articulating the concern. there needs to be considerable education about proper conduct in a less horizontal/collective structure, and more a nonprofit org.
  • patrik: a lot of the issues about sharing the contract is we have never done a contract negotiation as it would be in nonprofit. i shared letter from jesse with CCL board. i need to have feedback from CCL for authorities to be given, lines to follow as a delegate. i didnt share it with all of our members, did not think that would be appropriate
  • toan: when i shared i made it clear to our collective that this is still in negotiation, not set, and this is what we are going with for an ED. can change. also want to respond to jamal's feelings from eric's email. we acknowledge how you are feeling. a lot of digital messages can be misinterpreted. maybe at another time you can ask eric what his intention was.
  • john - can we say we can continue with drafting the contract based upon the feedback from jesse, and conversations had in the collectives? [YES]
  • john: had feedback from a lawyer alumnus to review our contract, to make sure it complies with labor law and standards. we want to get it right
  • jamal: thanks for comments toan & john. appreciate feedback. my concern isn't the final language. goal is to save & renovate building. i suggest 1) do it without distraction 2) you can disagree with me, i invite that, that's how we grow. i won't tolerate people manipulating my words. if you're misrepresenting me, i do have a problem with that. it's dishonest, and it hurts my professional character.
  • eric: sounds good, send me an email. i have trouble tolerating my own behavior too sometimes.
  • john: contract drafting will continue at board level. folks currently working are me, paige & patrik. next draft we'll send to jamal to finalize. deadline tuesday 1/16.
  • eric: sudo passed a resolution that we won't approve any contract with any executive officer that'd include authority to ban people
  • john: ultimate authority for any bans is the board
  • patrik: unless it's a safe space issue
  • jenny: omni does have a conflict resolution process. not always doing great, could be refined. but there's a process. i'd love to go back and revise, but feel it's unfair to suddenly invoke having one person with unilateral powers. if someone declares a safe space ban, that's prioritized first and foremost, and a conflict steward & mediator are assigned. not perfect, but FYI for newer folks, it's been in place since the beginning. we should iterate rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater or pretend it doesn't exist. people saying "there's no process". there is, maybe we've lost sight of that.
  • anon: JENNY!!!!!
  • anon: Jenny aren't you banned?? yeah sure fuck off!

jamal updates

  • jamal: tuesday meeting set fundraising goal, outside of loan principle. event request $6k. shout out pallavi, having grant meetings. need urgency language - who writes it? talked about fundraising letter, getting news involved, skilled & in-kind donations of construction, dry up lake sudo. [tomorrow plans & outreach plans redacted]
  • jamal: need to find a bookkeeper urgently.
  • silver: let's put job description out
  • jamal: i need authority from board to advertise job
  • jenny: sarah's put out useful guides for future bookkeepers. i can assist, i did it before sarah. can do job as a last resort but not long term.
  • john: let's draft something quickly
  • jamal: draft job description this week, approve next week then i'll post it
  • jenny: ideally we hire someone with fairly considerable experience. in recent past we haven't done that, myself included. someone not coming in this blind.
    • yar: agreed, as the person responsible for that

update on ban

  • jamal - objection to due process. will get a chance to respond to charges against him.

Updates on Omni future options

  • Eric - misssy, interested in working with us. women and gender expansive youth
  • pallavi - my friend works with the ED.
  • Eric - jennifer?
  • pallavi - my best friend's mentor is with misssy, can speak to the good work they can do
  • eric - someone came by who broke his arms, i splinted arms, and he had contact with misssy
  • gerald - lot of desper
  • yar - currently in default
  • patrik - omni badly needs more structure, hired people to make sure things dont fall between the cracks. whether that means ED, i dont particularly care, sure he is throwing out a lifeline when we are drowning, but he is also offering as a self financing
  • gerald - i am an opponent of capital, i understand you want to get a loan. but im not sure. i think this body ultimately has to mantain
  • yar - it will. he serves at the pleasure of the board
  • gerald - and he undersands that ok? thats good? but all that yelling? i would vote no


Philip Bell potential Conflict of Interest

  • Can Philip Bell stay involved in event scheduling, while he has a proposal in front of Omni delegates? This is a potential Conflict of Interest, but is it significant enough to keep him from helping w event scheduling?
  • yar: if we don't let him keep do events, more work will fall on silver and they're trying to step back
  • jenny: he won't be representing his org, just himself
  • john: we waive the conflict of interest for now?
  • jenny: or just have jesse send him a little thing to sign?
  • still need to build trust
  • yar: in the long term we should be finding more people also, but meanwhile we should let phil do the work he's doing
  • vote: no objections, passed.
  • jenny: with strong recommendation to have everything approved by jesse.

People's Programs Member Collective application

  • gerald asking about PP and their food distribution, yar giving answers
  • From email:
    • We are reaching out to formally propose the inclusion of People’s Programs as a new member collective within Omni Commons. Recognizing that this idea has previously been put forward by fellow member collectives, we believe it is a vital move towards us collectively building trust and strengthening collaborative working relationships. This request is not asking for any space or specific office within the building.
    • As some of the member collectives of Omni may recall, many of us have generational roots in Oakland that go back to the Great Migrations. Not only that, many in our leadership grew up in North Oakland, blocks away from Omni Commons. Combined with our community work and local roots, we are a great fit for Omni Commons, and would strengthen Omni’s relationship to the local community.
    • By becoming a member collective, we aim to ensure a more diverse and representative Omni Commons. Our unique perspectives and steadfast dedication to the community through a lens of equity and inclusion will significantly enhance the Omni Commons community.
    • We are excited to participate in any discussions or steps necessary to advance this process. We greatly appreciate your consideration of our request, and we look forward to a positive and collaborative future together.
  • yar: i think this is a great idea to build trust
  • paige: i support the programs they do and having them in the building. if our focus is saving the building, that'll be our main topic in meetings - should we ask them to recuse themselves for those parts of the meetings? that'll be more work. maybe another option besides collective?
  • patrik: didn't have a lot of details
  • toan: i think the intention is good. want to build trust. need time to go back and discuss since it was just sent today.
  • juul: we should never just encourage people to do a member collective application like this directly. we should have a runway where people come in a low stakes way. it's difficult to decide on, and could turn people off if it takes too long to make the decision. tires people out. if we just let people into the building with a timeline, see if we all get along.
  • jenny: maybe we should articulate our process for getting to know groups, make sure we're aligned and on the same page, not last ditch efforts
  • eric: very reasonable
  • patrik: uncomfortable to have them in meetings where we're talking about potential options where they wouldn't have a vote. if we go with their proposal and co-own the building, keeping orgs separate would be conflict of interest. would need cross membership in leadership to be approved by both parties.
  • yar: so we'd say that if they become a member collective, there should be a clause severing that upon sharing real estate
  • gerald: who are they? ive been in so many orgs and black liberation movement but havent heard of them
  • yar: describes programs. 300+ volunteers
  • silver: 400
  • patrik:
  • gerald: has anyone seen them volunteering in person
  • silver: ive been teaching decolonization program, in each one of my cohorts there were at least 1-2 PP members.
  • john: so sounds like there is hesitation on becoming a collective but welcome them becoming part of omni commons
  • eric: invited to book events here
  • jenny: more trust. i dont know, i have what people have shared in emails. and my direct interactions from a few people from PP that have been positive. what they just proposed tonight, is to become a member collective, to create trust
  • john: time check
  • yar: whose trust matters? many people have come forward saying we've worked with this group and trust them. there's always going to be people coming in saying "what's people's programs?"
  • yar: who's trust matters here? so people coming in who know and trust. and always people who wont
  • 4 or 5 people
  • yar: you dont think it matters, is what you are saying
  • jenny: i think it matters, but it doesnt represent omni communities. multiple collectives that consist of 30, 50+ epeople
  • patrik: i propose we do free events for them, along with to city of motion.
  • silver: we need money
  • yar: i think its missing the point. point is they want to be participating as equals
  • gerald: cant exist as equals if not equals. every nonprofit vote.
  • john leaves, gerald takes voting power for liberated lens
  • yar: i think "free ballroom events" would be an insulting counter offer. i would not bring that back to them acting like it's meaningful. this clearly sounds like a refusal to me.

Proposed bylaw changes

  • previous bylaws change: https://omnicommons.org/wiki/Event:2023/09/28_Delegates#bylaws
  • Remove from delegates list: Global Women’s Strike, MOP, BOGSS
  • Add to delegates list: Sketchboard, Media Lab
  • Modify SECTION 14. MAJORITY ACTION AS BOARD ACTION
    • "Every act or decision made done or made by a majority of the directors present at a meeting duly held at which a quorum is present is the act of the Board of Directors, unless the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws of this corporation, or provisions of the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law require a different percentage or different voting rules for approval of a matter by the board."
    • Propose to clarify that on the 1st meeting that a topic is brought up for vote, any delegate can request to delay until the next scheduled delegates meeting. At that next meeting, vote is by [majority/60%/consensus-1/consensus?]
  • patrik: last bylaw change was removing CLP. what im proposing is we remove MOP, BOGGS, and GWS. Also need to add SB and Media Lab. I would also like to update majority action as board action section. Right now says majority, i would propose to change that, any delegate can propose to delay to the next delegate meeting. can also change majority vote to something else. could be majority + 1, consensus, consensus - 1.
  • jenny: to clarify, youre articulating changes to the bylaws obviously congruent with who is a voting member collective.
  • marc juul: so asking if delegates should bring this back to their collectives?
  • yar: adding & removing groups is a no-brainer
  • patrik: rather than 1 week push off, just make it a request. there are some things we need to do right away, like funds to replace fire extinguishers
  • yar: this is just giving cover for what already happens. makes sense.
  • eric: yes fire extinguishers make sense, but painting with too broad a brush
  • toan: if request being delay, is it a vote?
  • patrik: no, any request accepted
  • paige: some protection on not being able to repeat delay?
  • patrik: yes my wording only allows a single delay, to the next delegate meeting. dont have a method for updating the bylaws automatically when new group is in. so when we approve a new group we should also vote to update the bylaws.
  • silver: lot of turnover of delegates. need to transfer institutional knowledge of what it means to be a delegate. and responsibility to be a representative. and adding a minimum term, so not changing so often. and a maximum term. something to talk about in the future
  • patrik: believe there was some language that anyone who can appoint a delegate can change a delegate
  • jenny: there are processes in the wiki about what sudo room delegates should act, also things on conflict resolution. history of sudo room originally being the non profit gave itself's 501c3 to omni to buy the building (hello? https://jennyryan.net/using-integrations-and-webhooks-for-project-collaboration-organizational-coordination/ )
  • pallavi: that should come with some sort of training
  • jenny: that our exiled community should give?
  • pallavi: i mean standard things for boards
  • jenny: ah like ones that have paid...
  • paige: sudo room, sudo mesh, CCL, sketchboard, media lab, food not bombs, liberated lens
  • PROPOSE: only remove collectives no longer active, and add new collectives
    • Current groups: sudo room, sudo mesh, CCL, sketchboard, media lab, food not bombs, liberated lens
      • All approved

ED chat

  • patrik: initial funding mechanism proposed was 20% on all revenues. I had suggested some % of donations, grants, fundraising events, and any new (non-collective) rental contracts
  • paige: john's included new member collective rents
  • jenny: honestly i feel like this is risky and doesnt make a lot of sense. not fair to jamal and omni. so up in the air. im jumping in just to represent myself. to what is this beneficial to him, for no financial reward, and a total crap shoot for omni
  • patrik: 10%, then 5% at another level. if we do 10% up to $200k, 5% above that, and he manages to bring in a million he would be walking with 60k for 6 months
  • gerald: not bad
  • patrik: if he saves us from our debt, that is a worthy salary
  • eric: as you saw im not jamal's favorite person. made allegations. when i found out that there was going to be a letter banning jake. i came in at the very worst time
  • jenny: i would like more context
  • gerald: this guy has no experience
  • jenny: i dont get why people are saying no process cause there definitely is process. i have been disengaged from omni since 2020
  • paige: effectively no process. explains POV
  • yar: i think jamal's one mistake is he misunderstood how fucked up omni. at other places, ED would just remove someone. but omni someone can get third white man mob of 20 people
  • jenny: accusing me of lying?
  • yar: how many times do i have to be accused of lying. go to hell. i almost lost a friend, someone said they didnt know if they could trust me because of my association with racism at sudo room
  • patrik: boggs then to conflict resolution. that process didnt work. we have gone through that process with jake before. and it has not come to any resolution before
  • gerald: do you really think jake is a racist?
  • yar: yes
  • gerald: hes an asshole but not every asshole is a racist.
  • yar: i am glad you havent felt harmed, but not true of every black man
  • patrik: i wouldnt have for racist behaivior but he does as have a behavior issue
  • eric: he wasnt told he was on the agenda
  • yar: isnt our entire safe space policy based on we ban first, then ask questions . lots of people say they dont feel safe.
  • gerald: how could anyone say they dont feel safe?
  • yar: not just about intimidation
  • silver: threatened to tell that i was a zionist
  • yar: when that first happened i believe he wouldnt do it. but i see how you interpreted it that way now
  • gerald: you know each other
  • patrik: also the numbers with paige
  • silver: more time talking about jake than the foreclosure
  • gerald: dsa has since worked with jewish voices for peace to stop traffic on bridge. all the dsa is zionist shit is gone.

End of Meeting

Retrieved from "https://omnicommons.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Event:2024/01/11_Delegates&oldid=6741"