Event:2024/05/01 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 Discussion after meeting with CAST- Day Month 2024 7pm-9pm

Meeting Details

RECAP of CAST discussion

Attendees

  • CCL: Patrik
  • FNB: Toan
  • LL: John
  • SMAC: Pallavi
  • SM: Daniel
  • SR: William
  • DG: Myesha
  • Paige


TODO add notes. William, Pallavi, Patrik?

Discussion after CAST leaves

Attendees

  • CCL: Patrik
  • FNB: Toan
  • LL: John
  • SMAC: Pallavi
  • SM: Daniel
  • SR: William
  • DG: Myesha
  • Paige/notetaker


  • Pallavi - PP's proposal said they would not kick out collectives, or raise rents. there is an option to work with them without CAST. If we went solely with that, would have negotiation over ownership potential. Maybe CAST could facilitate. There is a possibility we enter into LOI with CAST, if whatever third party, could make up half up the cash. Even if PP does a partial investment [even though they have said they can provide full amount], if we have CAST under LOI, CAST was clear that they would still be the controlling entity. I.E. permits, inspector, property management. The issue there is we would need to pay for all those things, Woud require us to have a robust business plan. We would change how we do everything. If we get cash from another group, might not be the same sort of overhaul. PP may introduce something like property management, and they want building up to code, but wouldnt have tight structure timeline.
  • Patrik - also have separate proposal from CiM, would bring in money and essential manage event space. I dont think they would be able to do anything 3 days time. Also dont know if PP can get money in 3 days time.
  • Pallavi - CAST said we should presocialize, I will ask how soon they can access money. If its an absolute no
  • Patrik - one is there are intense emotions with PP
  • Pallavi - by a minority of the collectives
  • Patrik - i think enough to vote against
  • Toan - 3 collectives voted against their membership. To avoid conflicts. This was SR, CCL, and SM. Maybe these three groups can discuss if they still have reservations. need to decide before tomorrow whether to invite them to meeting.
  • Patrik - we could still have conversation after Friday.
  • William - I dont see value of bringing in more partners
  • Toan - Can CiM and PP work together?
  • Pallavi - PP has enough to cover the full so not necessary. Im also thinking about priorities of CAST.
  • Pallavi - we want leadership from the bay area, preferably from Oakland, preferably from north oakland. Can we agree on that we are not trying to be gentrifiers? CAST are prioritizing BIPOC led organizations. I think it behooves us to bring Peoples Programs to meet CAST. I will presocialize on whether they have capital. I can envision a possibility that CAST would prefer partnering with someone who already has capital.
  • William - I wasn't involved in SR at time these meetings with PP took place, but I think best solution is to go just with CAST, given past drama
  • Pallavi - You have to look at services they do, and practical work. Most viable, simple, and strongest way to save the building, and its being blocked because a few people have discomfort on what is written online? Optics for that in this community? And given fact that they are black organization. CAST would be very disturbed by your reasons, why you would reject such a good organization. "I feel some discomfort, I feel some drama" so i will let north oakland community lose this building. How do you think those optics are going to look for CAST?
  • Toan - maybe SR and CCL can go back to your community and talk this over
  • Patrik - I think theres more openness to bring in PP with CAST involved too
  • Pallavi - yes, I was interpretting that William was objecting to them coming to the building tomorrow.
  • John - we have a time constraint, if PP is still open both financially and as a partner, my sense is that it makes sense for them to part of the conversation.
  • Patrik - I think people have been uncomfortable with how many have shown up to meeting
  • Pallavi - how about restricted to a few members
  • Patrik - yes if time restricted, and also bringing in CiM
  • Pallavi - CAST will not be interested in CiM
  • Paige - also Ken said we should present groups to Mulberry so Mulberry can also weigh in if they have an opinion
  • John - We just need to say we are interested in PP as option going forwards with CAST. A longer conversation among the collectives around the specific rationale for denial would be useful in the future. We live in white suprecist, male supremacist, colonialist society. I know I have perspectives that I can still improve on.
  • Patrik - Im only vote in favor of pursuing partnership with PP at CCL
  • Pallavi - if we are rejecting an organization without an actual basis that would be accepted generally by a majority of people, as being sound, then please re-examine. My expertise as development consultant, Im saying from what I know. Arts funding community with CAST. Ive been talking to EB community foundation, they will be really interested in seeing BIPOC stewardship of this building. If Omni doesnt survive... before we get to that. If some reason proposal CiM or PP[??], are we in agreement on CAST
  • Patrik - yes. CAST will help with structural issues
  • William - promise fatigue, theres probably value of attaching older[other?] names, might not make ourselves look good. We could vote on two initiatives. One go with CAST, other one, see what the alternate thing is with PP.
  • John - letter of interest only. Any objections to how CAST described going forwards? CAST in lead, with potential investors of CoM and PP?
  • no objections


  • Pallavi - the benefit of going outside of CAST with PP, is PP will not enforce a hierarchial structure here. You may say you dont know them, but we also dont know CAST. Ken today said things about hierarchy. Not historically how we've been. We dont necessarily have to change everything about how we operate. If PP come in, wont have to raise as much money. Or have as many positions
  • Patrik - have to pay above loan
  • Pallavi - PP considering $300k above the mulberry loan. Whereas CAST was saying $1M
  • John - dont need to decide this tonight
  • William - only option to fund with PP is extension of loan. Right now only CAST has been in communication with Mulberry, to request that extension.
  • Daniel - as SM delegate. Dont know much about discussion, but in my digging online, my decision was a no to Peoples Programs. I cant have a yes without going back to collective, but at the moment SM is a no. Paperwork is very complicated. If you bring in another partner, theres a lot more complication. Timing is tight. That is my perspective.
  • Pallavi - also more complicated for CAST to get loans, as opposed to PP would just bring in funding
  • Toan - from what CAST said, they are confident they could get that money
  • Agreed invite Peoples Programs and CiM to meeting tomorrow?


End of Meeting

Retrieved from "https://omnicommons.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Event:2024/05/01_Delegates&oldid=6792"