Difference between revisions of "Event:2014/02/27 Omni Delegates Meeting"
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "== Check-in == * Present: David (BAPS), David B. (Bookstore Cafe & BAPS human rights observer status), Andrew (Hacker Spa), Olive (SALTA/Dancers), Niki (Bookstore Cafe), Mara ...")
Revision as of 16:41, 28 April 2014
- Present: David (BAPS), David B. (Bookstore Cafe & BAPS human rights observer status), Andrew (Hacker Spa), Olive (SALTA/Dancers), Niki (Bookstore Cafe), Mara (SALTA/Dancers), Jeremy (ONL), Yar (Sudo Room)
- Missing, presumed eaten by narwhals: Otis, Lauren
- David Keenan reads: Public School vision
- Mara reads mission: Dancers vision
- Andrew reads: Hacker Spa vision
- Niki reads: Bookstore/Cafe vision
- Jeremy speaks: "ONL highlights local culture & passion"
- Yar reads: Sudoroom vision
- Niki suggests: That the Building Bloc cobbles together one statement from all the delegates' statements
- Andrew: And there's already omnicollective.org. Let's make a running list of alternative names.
- David suggests not bikeshedding now (vis-a-vis names)
- digesting our divers visions into one vision
- Mara: who wants to work on it?
- Niki: lets put this together (synthesize visions into one) BEFORE next omni meeting so we can vote on it next time
- David says we should keep promotion/marketing in mind. succinct byline to agree on.
- David Brazil suggests we formally consent on his writeup of our raison-detat
- we should modify the list of groups present/recognized
- Niki suggests we also start thinking about drafting:
- Safe space policy
- Code of conduct
- Conflict resolution process
- DK suggests we refer to Sudoroom's
- AK Press is maybe in?
- buying is a lot more attractive narrative than renting
- if you're buying it: we're taking it off the market! radical ownership enclave!
- if you're renting it: "help us pay our rent"
- is it ok to post pictures publically yet?
- DK is wary of tying publicity to the omni, that one building
- Niki suggests we not be officially called Omni Collective
- but make it clear our current primary project is acquiring that building
- donors will ask about this. they can't give you money unless you exist.
- needs to be resolved before fundraising starts
- Disambiguation of incorporation vs 501c3
- we need to write bylaws
- Lawyer friend is not available for the next 2 meetings
- many anonymous donors have offered support already, in particular with "getting over the hump" of first/last/deposit etc
- some might have agendas / strings attached
- they tend to not want to be the only one with "skin in the game"
- need a pool of donors sharing the risk.
- some might not like our politics...
- "i'm really wary of depending on anonymous donors"
- fundraising should be done in the open
- perception of backroom deals
- "if you want strings attached, maybe this isn't the project for you"
- there are two fundraising approaches, maybe they are both valid. two paths.
- private anonymous donors are compatible with the public ones
- DB says if someone can give us 20k to get us in the space in a few months, that's worth it
- andrew thinks we should just try to fundraise for the 700k
- Niki thinks that will be a lot easier once we're in the space
Goals for next meeting
- pare down our visions into one page that is appropriate as corporate bylaws
- this enables incorporating in sacramento, which enables a bank account
- decide a name so we can register a domain name and web presence
- next meeting in or around BAPS at 7pm march 6 (tentatively)