Event:2015/05/21 Delegates Meeting

From Omni Commons
Revision as of 20:31, 22 May 2015 by Tunabananas (talk | contribs) (uploaded 5/21 mtg minutes)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Weekly Omni Delegates' Meeting - 21 May 2015

The meeting begins promptly at 7pm, every Thursday, and ends promptly at 9pm, unless delegates agree to continuation. Contents:

  • Introductions
  • Announcements
  • Working Group Report-Backs
  • Proposals
  • Discussions
  • Action Items
  • Tabled
  • Optional Breakout Session
  • = Attendees =
  • Facilitator/s: Jessie
  • Introduction to the Omni Commons & our values:
  • Explanation of hand signals:
    • "deaf applause", "raised hand", "point of process", "direct response", "time's up", "stop and reflect", "kermit" (wildcard), etc.
  • Stacktaker: Jesse
    • Explanation of progressive stack: Raise your hand and make eye contact with the stack taker. Please wait your turn, and try not to interupt or speak over others. Direct responses are allowed only as Points Of Information/ Clarifications, etc (use hand signal). For everything else, please raise your hand and wait your turn.
  • Timekeeper: David K.
    • Reminder to keep comments brief.
  • Notetaker/s: Jenny / Niki
  • Important Note for the Pad:
    • Please do not move or delete meeting notes from the pad, unless you have archived them properly. Always leave the most recent meeting's notes, and the template at the bottom. !! Thank you.
  • Vibe Reader: Matt
    • Reminder to stay calm, be respectful, and think before speaking.
  • Next weeks facilitator(s): Yar & DK
  • == Delegates ==
  • BAPS: Leah
  • Black Hole: David K.
  • CCL: (Inactive)
  • FNB: Joe
  • La Commune: Steve
  • MPM: John
  • Sudo Room: Yar / Matt / Jenny
  • TIL: (Inactive)
  • Phat Beets: (Inactive)
  • OptikAllusions: (Inactive)
  • Quorum: 6; yes!
  • == Introductions ==

Please be brief! Introduce yourself: Name; Prefered Pronoun; Affiliation; If you are new, what is one thing that brought you here?

  • Optional Ice-breaker:
  • Jesse (FNB): Feeling wonderful because she had the right amount of chocolate today
  • Yar (Sudo): Had a long conversation w/a close friend about Omni feels :'(. Love the community and also worry about it. We're supposed to have a party but only two people showed up to the planning meeting
  • Matt (Sudo): He's mainly manic; would do Omni differently, stealing land, making our own rules
  • Leah (BAPS): Hella social anxiety, working on it and excited about this project
  • Niki (BAPS, Sudo, La Commune): Made
  • Jenny (SUDO): Has been helping friends who had their squat raided one of whom has physical issues which is making her realize issues that this project does not address of housing and navigating social services
  • David (BAPS, Sudo, Black Hole): In order to break some eggs we have to make an omelet... people not exposed to conflict aren't doing the hard work. Yet we can't hold ourselves hostage to endless critique... but still must accept and embrace internal conflict
  • Steve (La Commune): Works in a grocery store as a cashier, telling people what they want to hear so they'll go away. Have to reprogram myself when here to tell people what they actually should hear.
  • Ben (Commons WG): Had to make a really hard decision some days ago... that it was either me or my cat.
  • Kim (FNB): Interested in a Homes Not Jails group at the Omni... hacking housing
  • Joe (FNB): Images coming to him about what the Omni seems these days. Seems like a cracked glass that will never come apart also sometimes like his house that shook like crazy in an earthquake but came down and everything (but one thing) was in the right place. And that thing got fixed :)
  • Thel (she/her) - Comes to poetry readings, hung out at sudo at the old space. Having a magical week, and will let that continue :)
  • Deetrik (they, FNB, occasionally sudo)
  • Gina: here with a friend
  • Rob. CCL & sudo. Working on lighting for the stage and around the Omni
  • = Announcements =

Any Omni-related announcements. Please be brief! Maximum 1 (one) minute per announcement. Reminder: Working Groups reports are after this, please save W.G. announcements for later.

  • Need help planning Omni FUN party! - Sesh on planning this Sunday, Party is May 31st!
  • Have several inactive member collectives: CCL, TIL, Phat Beets, OptikAllusions
    • These groups need to attend two meetings in a row in order to reactivate voting privileges
  • March against Monsanto tomorrow noon at the Ferry Building
  • Power Friday tomorrow! Come learn about electrical systems and map Omni's circuits. Angel and Matt will be meeting tomorrow starting at 11 onward.
  • Linux Install Fest Fridays starting tomorrow at sudo at 7pm!
  • Stuff on the above-cafe railing keeps showing up; ask people to move it or move it yourself off the railing.
  • We need a new CFO. Please contact finances@lists.omnicommons.org if you or someone you know would be interested in stepping into this role. Primarily data entry.
    • amgo is stepping down, but not leaving us :)
    • Niki meeting w/ an accounting collective and some other folks who are going to help us get organized
  • event bottomliners: please show up before your event.
  • = Working Group Report-Backs =

Please be brief! Maximum 5 (five) minutes per W.G. WGRBs are Alphabetical; All W.G.s are equally important. Report-backs consist of answering 3 (three) questions:

  • What did you accomplish this week?
  • What problems or action items are you currently working on?
  • What do you need to bring to our attention and/or need help with?

Building, permits, and Facilities

This group needs help; https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/building Ballroom-readiness needs and plans: https://omnicommons.org/wiki/Ballrooxm-readiness

  • Starting the south wall this week! We had a vast army of folks carrying in 95 sheets of drywall this week.
  • Okay from the owners on plans for the front door
  • Consistent electrical work being done on the weekends - just a few more tasks, we're 99.9% of the way there. If anyone has a pressing electrical need that has not been identified, do so immediately.
  • Currently pulling some really big permits from the city, gonna be really good!
  • Cafe bathroom toilet has been dismounted from the "temporary" garbage bag situation it's been in since October. ready for sealant, maybe tonight
  • All small tasks necessary to finish the building stuff before

Challenging Domniant Culture (CDC)

Meetings: every other Sunday at 3pm

  • Hasn't had a lot of meetings lately, focused on the party next Sunday
  • The purpose of the party is to do something nice for each other.
  • June 16th open Restorative Justice training

Commons

Meetings: Saturdays at 1pm

  • Great to have some other folks who can table events so we don't strain the Commons WG
  • Always need help with booking events and identifying point people
  • Only 2/3 of our expenses paid for by member collectives, the rest is made up by renting the ballroom and disco room etc. The building project money is fast dwindling.
  • If you have the ability to take on event a month, that would help enormously!

Communications / SysAdmins

Meetings: nope :)

  • omnicommons.org/cloud
    • down with google drive!
    • also down more than google drive

Finance

Meetings: Wednesday at 7pm

  • Need a new CFO
  • Meeting with Matt Clifford (accountant) next month to discuss La Commune finances, will try to discuss Omni as well
  • Meeting w/Strength in Numbers accounting collective

Fundraising

Meetings: Mondays at 7pm, BAPS Classroom

  • yar needs to pull some strings before we can email back the people waiting on perks

Kitchen

Meetings:

  • joe is holding off on paying 5k for fire suppression
  • still not sure what to do about the big stove
  • joe is going to yell at somebody on monday saying "we're a big customer! we pay so many building fees!"

Welcoming

Meetings: Thursdays at 6pm

  • they met and folded zines while talking about front door shifts
  • need people to sign up for front door shifts: ether

Bans

Announcement of recent bans.

  • Pidgeon asked to leave on Tuesday 05/11 by Niki following re-engagement with another community member she had previously undergone conflict resolution.
  • Violet/pidgeon starts explaining what happened. is dissatisfied with the process. wants a group for assault survivors at omni to decide their own way. too much credence given to someone who assaulted her. her dissociation from the assault wasn't taken into account.
  • unsure whether this is a ban report or actually an agenda item to discuss conflict mediation
  • jessie is available for mediation
  • jenny's been trying to mediate this conflict with tall-ryan & niki since january. they came to a "non-engagement agreement". jenny asked violet/pidgeon to leave for one month
  • Jessie doesn't know what to do to help everybody
  • niki wants the community to decide what the next steps should be, because the policy doesn't seem to be working. things in the space are affecting the wider community. it's scary to see people yelling in the space. "I don't want to ban pidgeon permanently. i just don't know what the next step is."
  • pidgeon: there's also other survivors who don't feel safe here because people who've been violent to them are here. it's necessary for survivors to have autonomy over what [?] means to them. i shouldn't have to share space with someone who robbed me. i have a 10 point list of shit this guy did to me, and his bro too. that guy assaulted me at a library downtown. yet i get asked to leave. feels like a form of abuse. centi was here right now! i could go on.
  • jessie: we can't do that right here
  • pidgeon: that's the whole point. the community at large shouldn't have to deal. intersecting dynamics of transmisogyny. way people look at me is different from at cis dudes. there should be an autonomous trans group. a lot of people like that idea. i've been on both sides of a lot of forms of violence. if people are uncomfortable with me there should be another group. lots of groups.
  • jessie wants to deal with it later, not this meeting. doesn't do justice to the conflict in a public forum.
  • joe disagrees.
  • pidgeon: basically i shouldn't get banned. they obviously robbed me. i just don't want to get banned.
  • joe: you deserve relief and i'm trying to engineer that. that's what we're discussing.
  • jessie: i'm confused about this process. i want there to be mediation but i don't know what to do.
  • niki: mediation has failed. that makes people unsafe. that's why i asked pidgeon to come to this meeting. i don't want to be around that. i want there to be resolution but i don't know what that is. what do you recommend? that everyone involved is asked to leave indefinitely? what's the next step? pursue another round of mediation?
  • jessie: policy isn't specific about time or structure
  • joe: don't need to ban everybody. set up protocol where the 3 people involved could not be in the same places at the same time. would temporary solve the problem. i don't have hope for mediation either. i know the other parties. it's kind of ugly.
  • pidgeon: that doesn't solve the ... mitch should not be here. he's a sociopath, will manipulate & abuse, maybe steal. pessimistic about safe space policies cuz i've been through a bunch of shit you know. noisebridge and other places. i dont' feel safe around mitch, want to feel empowered to ask him to leave while i'm here. he's been physically violent with me. i want that power. not for him to have it. shouldn't have to be retraumatized. he's making me out to be a snitch / federal informant. this guy robbed anarchists in the PNW. he stalked someone around here. one of the most patriarchal people.
  • jessie: please be concise
  • matt: our process leaves room (for when it doesn't seem possible) to bring to a meeting. ending has a procedure - this group of people at this meeting proposes & finalizes a remedy. that's what we could do now. just to be clear. also we're now talking about two seperate conflicts - mitch is another conflict that hasn't gone through process yet. only the conflict between pidgeon and centi has.
  • jessie: i want help to make you all feel good about this experience, because i feel confused
  • joe: i propose we only deal with the conflict betwene pidgeon, centi & elliot now
  • matt & dk: there's a fourth party...
  • joe: oh...
  • pidgeon: i don't want elliot involved, they've threatened me in the space. it's really complex.
  • joe: you said centi did something and elliot was bothering you, saying you shouldn't be here. but you said it was getting better and elliot was stirring the fire
  • pidgeon: huh? no
  • joe: still think we should have alternate days and stuff
  • pidgeon: wouldn't do justice. mitch could be here, lie about me again. dangerous person. same w/centi. also there's other survivors who don't feel safe. there should be a separate group. don't solve that problem. it's all connected. for all survivors to have autonomy, support each other, we could ward off more parties, keep them accountable. stop abuse.
  • jessie: great idea but we can't handle it at this meeting now. totally dropped.
  • dk: i'm not familiar with other conflicts outside the space. other people might be portraying YOU as an antagonist. from a perspective of a reasonable party, it's not clear what the solution is. we can't say everything you say is right, everything they say is wrong. it's difficult, every conflict has its own intricacies, prior histories, hard to get through at a group meeting like this. do you have a suggestion, if you were in our position where we can't carte blanche take a side, what would you do?
  • pidgeon: i'd side with the survivor. i always do that. at noisebridge i got transphobes kicked out. it's such a manipulative tactic.
  • joe: she answered - she'd have the other person removed. that's her answer. i don't accept it. dk explained why we can't accept it.
  • yar: i see two different framings. conflict resolution gets mediation, but safe space doesn't always. seems like two different framings going past each other here.
  • niki: who gets to determine? both parties saying they don't feel comfortable with the other person.
  • jessie: if mediation's not possible we shouldnt' even be talking about it. only safe space issues.
  • niki: who do we listen to?
  • matt: we have 2 different kinds of policies. conflict resolution, copy-pasted from sudoroom. safer spaces, which is more about behaviors which have consequences. behaviors IN THIS SPACE. it's clearly defined what behaviors it applies to IN THIS SPACE. here, conflict resolution was evoked. both parties have said there's no further path. reason for bringing back to the meeting is that all circumstances are unique. no boilerplate. i'm still in favor of tabling this. as conflict resolution. if we're using safer spaces policy, it needs to be invoked. using its own process.
  • jessie: bring it back in a smaller container with more guidance, and a single mediator. and both parties.
  • niki: i don't have a problem with tabling this. my question is what do we do in the interim? do we ask everybody to leave until that happens? do we let them stay yelling at each other?
  • gina: my own experience with accountability process at omni ... someone who assaulted me is still here. i no longer come here. they were banned from multiple collective spaces in the bay area. i agree with pidgeon - survivors have ability to talk about their experiences and make recommendations to omni to meet hteir needs. i don't see that being worked out in a large group. amazing to be open to everybody but needs a space within that. having a group would be very relevant.
  • jenny: i didn't know about that. i don't think any of us know.
  • gina: it was january? feb? idk who the mediator was. could check my phone. long red hair, glasses. i was expected to go through the process but didn't go through it. whatever's happening, obviously they're falling through the crack.
  • matt: powerful tool to not have too much structure, but have some ambiguity to enable discretion. make some hard choices. also if you make the wrong choice i still support you 100%. would help at next meeting to have a narrative first for context, and then hear from individuals.
  • dk: i thought safe space took precedence over everything else ... presence of conflict creates other conflict. need stopgap measure. able to ignore each other or you're all asked to leave, or the antagonist is
  • joe: relieved to hear that. let's remove people quickly and move on.
  • pidgeon: groups i proposed would have better infrastructure for stuff like this. guy robbed & misgendered me, and i yelled at him and i got asked to leave. there should be a trans group. people told me it wasn't transmisogyny. people told me i'm the dominating male presence in the space. [la idea?] i look like the crazy person? wtf? why didn't hte two dudes get asked to leave?
  • jessie: i wanna refine down what you're saying
  • joe: i agree, support group structure for survivors would be great. i don't just belive in this mickey mouse you-stay-you-go thing.
  • gina: to dk. saying "both parties should be asked to leave" or "live and let live", as a survivor, tells me we should be expected to be silent and share space with their purpetrators. so now they suffer and no longer have a community space for support. that's what i'm seeing. either this can be made a safe space for abusers, or it can be committed to be a safer space for survivors and a transformative space for perpetrators who wish to make amends. can go either way. would be more relevant to set up a survivors' group to make recommendations for accountability processes to the omni.
  • rob: might be helpful for people who have conflicts ... doesn't helpt o directly confront them. would be more helpful to ge ta neutral party to do it. just gonna be inflamatory
  • yar's hadn hurts too much to type anymore somebody please help
  • Niki: Support Gina's recommendation that there be a survivors group here - but what do we do immediately next re: this conflict in the space?
  • Matt: Want to make it clear that there is no reason why there should be resistance to this new group coming into existence and using this space as a resource. We're supportive of all groups of that kind. There are ways to reserve the space and a process for being a member collective. I look forward to seeing the advancement of that. In terms of the specific outcomes in this context. If I hear correctly, there's an option to table, there's an option to figure out what to do in the interim, I would like some guidance as agroup where we can start going in this conversation.
  • David: I agree with everything matt said I think it would be good to guide ourselves towards a decision making point. The pragmatics of that is what I'm trying to get at. A lot of conflicts have erupted in the space and it's not always clear who is a survivor and who is not when both parties are claiming they are victims. We also have a responsibility to other survivors who are affected by conflicts erupting in the space. Certainly the conflict mediation part has to be tabled. What to do about the safe space aspect of conflicts erupting. I stated what I thought the options were, I think we should pick one.
  • Yar: If it hasn't been completely clear that the Omni's values are meant to side w/survivors and our entire structure is an open invitation for a survivor's group to be welcome here I apologize on behalf of the Omni because that's been my vision of what I'd want the Omni to be. I would love if the entire Omni spokescouncil was made up of survivors who want this to be a safe space place for survivors. I will do whatever I can to help with that. Same goes for a trans group at Omni. I tried to organize one sometime last year. It was hard to heard people to get it together. I used to go to a meeting half a mile up the road and tried to get them to meet here. I would love for that to exist. And I also really hear that that's completely relevant because if we had functioning channels like that we wouldn't need to be having this long meeting. That seems pretty directly related to me. I also don't know what to do in this situation. I don't know the people involved, I've hardly ever talked to you, I don't know Centi or this other peson. And I don't even know you. But to me, what that says, if I really want justice to happen here, my responsibility is to get to know you and participate in the mediation process which is really just window dressing for people to just talk to one another and to develop empathy.
  • Pigeon: Did Centi claim that I assaulted him?
  • Jenny: No
  • Jesse: I think was Yar said is a great way to move forward, to have this group be the gap between when something happens and when it's been figured out. I also think what David is saying is relevant to the strategic questions of what happens if there is no other alternative. But that wouldn't be the problem if there was a group, there would be an ongoing process that people could check in with.
  • Gina: I'm glad to hear that there's so much support for a group here at Omni. I understand when people are yelling at each other the inclination is to move the conflict out of the space. I also think that it's important for other people to not make a call in regards to how people respond to being confronted by their abusers.
  • Jenny: Clarifying: I spoke to Centi earlier and I wanted to communicate that I didn't feel that this was the proper space to bring this conflict to. Centi was concerned about having personal details exposed in this meeting and I think that's totally reasonable. In the moment when Niki and I were asking Pigeon to leave - I'm not a good mediator, I get too emotionally involved and I'm going to step back from that. It's my understanding that the process would be that the mediator and the steward would bring this conflict to the group w/out having those involved present personal details in re: conflicts.
  • Ben: I'm pretty new to the Omni and what I am seeing is that there's a whole lot of work being done by a small number of people and I really appreciate that. The reason I bring this up is because I think it's easy to point out how a space is failing or misstepping, it's easy to say that but what it could potentially mean is that people who are already doing a huge amount of work need to do more work and it can't be that. I support a survivor's group or a trans group or any number of initiatives or conflicts to address conflict. I would urge people who want to see that should work on putting those important projects in place they need to be leading / organizing them. I think people here will support these things as they have time.
  • Yar: sometimes I like to frame things as doing less work. For instance, if someone wants to tell you that you need to dismantle transmisogyny, you can reframe it as: you no longer need to perpetuate transmisogyny. Instead of "you need to ban the abusers", you no longer need to enable abusers! yay!
  • Jesse: I think we need to move on
  • Niki: but what do we do in the meantime?
  • Jesse: until the mediation is cleared up the determination needs to be made about what happens in the space.
  • Joe: right, now you've said what is a solution
  • Jesse: is it in the notes?
  • Niki: but something needs to be decided. What are you proposing, that no one is allowed in the space, that one party is not allowed in the space.
  • Jesse: there can't be a rule. the two parties cannot interact with each other until mediation takes place.
  • Thel: A clarifying question. Can I meet up with my friend Pigeon at the Omni tomorrow?
  • Joe: That's what we're trying to determine.
  • Matt: Spot that we're at right now if I understand correctly: There was a 4 month process where there was mediation w/a conflict steward and mediator. We tried to enact that part of the process. These two parties agreed to non engagement in the space and that agreement has been violated. So non-engagement is not an option. We have a conflict steward elucidating that us trying to move the process forward is not the right thing to do. We have now seen that it was a mistake to proceed tonight.
  • Jenny: I meant to call it off, to ask Pigeon not to come tonight
  • Matt: We can now call it off and say we're going to do it again, the way the policy says at the next meeting in two weeks. Does that make sense to anybody else?
  • Joe: It still doesn't say what the status of the parties involved is.
  • Matt: Both parties can't be in the space at the same time for the next two weeks
  • Gina: What I'm hearing is that in the interim the parties will not be allowed in the space in the next two weeks. But Pigeon is the one who wants to start a group and so if she doesn't have access to the space, is someone else going to start the group? There's conflicting information. The group is saying they want this group here but no one is able be accountable for starting the group.
  • Niki: We're 20 minutes over time
  • David: At least 2/3 of the people want to keep talking about it.
  • Jesse: I'm just really confused because as facilitator, I've had this power taken away from me.
  • Niki: we're in real time and real space we can't just press pause.
  • Jesse: I'm almost disappointed that we are spending this much time on two people but I honestly feel like you don't want me to.
  • Matt: I think you one of the best facilitators I've ever met in my whole life. Something that's getting confusing. According to the policy, this is the appropriate place to address this issue. The necessary information could be prepared by the stweward and mediator. We do need to know at least nominally what we do in the meeting and until the next meeting.
  • Pigeon: I don't know. Isn't there something in the Omni wiki that privileging survivors and their experience and supporting the rehabilitation of perpetrators. Centi hasn't alleged that I've assaulted him, I've alleged that he has assaulted me. I think that's reasonable given the policy. It seems like the mediator is misinformed on what has happened here.
  • Yar: Can I make a proposal - Stepping back from this. The agenda was we talk about bans and we talk about rekeying and another proposal
  • Steve: Can we identify the options
  • DK: I want to add that maybe we should identify some ground rules. Like time limits. Second, we might agree that the specifics of the conflict at stake here are not brought up here.
  • Joe: maybe we can toss around the idea, get a straw poll, do people think a ban of everyone is better or worse than a time share.
  • Matt: Not my opinion what I am understanding is that there are two parties that have been engaged in this conflict .
  • Yar: Concern w/timeshare is that there would still be an abuser in the building. If everyone is banned, Pigeon will be unable to start this survivor group.
  • Steve: No matter what we decide it was be imperfect
  • Jenny: That was an opinion stated as a direct response
  • Yar: It was a tautology
  • Jenny: I think it would be unfair to make a decision w/out hearing the context of the conflict
  • Joe: It's just two weeks
  • David: If we arrive at no decision for the next two weeks, then...
  • Niki: Can we ask those involved in the conflict to have some patience and understand that we are trying to do the right thing.
  • Thel: I'd like to make a recommendation that Centi be banned for two weeks and Pigeon not be banned for two weeks so that Pigeon can start this survivors group. It's not really important the details of the conflict.
  • DK: One of the concerns is that one of the person involved in the conflict would be forming the group and making recommendations that could create a conflict of interests
  • Thel: Not the intention to be judge and jury but a chance to demonstrate a committment to the space
  • Matt: Many people get the impression that we're in a bit of a pickle. I've seen my fair share of conflicts. It's never easy, it's never nice, it's very rare for anyone to respect the process. Based on my experience. Given that I want to make something very clear about the choice on the table. No one is dependent upon being able to come into the Omni to start a survivor group. I want to de-escalate that dichotomy. A real community is not based in a building.
  • Deetrick: What I'm seeing here is a lot of individuals who have a vested interest in the space who are allowing the perpetuation of violence in the space. I'm not necessarily saying that everyone here does or doesn't care. I don't come here because someone that assaulted someone that I know is allowed in the space and me asking that person to leave probably won't make a difference. And this process right here doesn't make me feel safe in the space. Banning people isn't going to help either.
  • Pigeon: I don't know a better place to do this than the Omni. I'm not the only one who thinks that this would be great for the Omni. We're both passionate about this. Why do I have to leave and not these two dudes?
  • Jesse: the reason why i keep interrupting you is because I want to propose that we go back to stack
  • Steve: I think we need to remind ourselves that this is only for two weeks, this is nothing permanent because obviously we're not going to be able to make a decision tonight. We need to make a decision about what to do in the next two weeks.
  • Joe: I think that's the only way we're going to get a decision here. I'm sorry that that's the best we can do. The contingent that's espousing the rights of survivors and supporting Pigeon are telling me things that I can't accept point black.
  • Niki: we could agree to meet next week to discuss this issue specifically.
  • Thel: There are three solutions on the table. It sounds like most people are keen to ban both parties, I don't like that very much but I am not casting a vote.
  • Matt: I move to extend for 5 minutes to discuss proposals on the table
  • DK: Thel, I just want to say that there's a presumption that the Omni runs on it's own power like some infinite energy source. When we consider the different proposals, we should take into account the additional effort that would be involved with the time share proposal. I personally would be willing to try this but I dont' think it's realistic.
  • Joe: It's one week, so we failed for one week
  • Niki: We run the risk of not adhearing to our Statement of Solidarity in which we explicitly state that we privilege experience of survivors.
  • Matt: I have a proposal: There's been a temporary ban on Pigeon, in a show of solidarity we extend that ban n to Centi.
  • Yar: let's start with people, what people think that's appropriate. (8 yes, 4 no, 3 abstaining)

There's been a temporary ban on Pigeon, in a show of solidarity we extend that ban to Centi.

  • 5 delegates yes, 1 abstain

Proposals

Please provide the following information with your proposal:

  • The date the proposal was put on the pad;
  • The group or person making/bottom-lining the proposal;
  • Who will be speaking to the proposal at the meeting;
  • Where the full text or other information about the proposal can be found, if it's not all here.

proposal: rob being in there to work on lighting infrastructure

  • 6/6 delegates yay. consensus.

Follow up on ReKeying the Front Door Proposal passed last week

Here is the Front Door Key Access Process and Criteria (DRAFT) https://omnicommons.org/cloud/index.php/apps/documents/#309 The purpose of this document is to outline the process and criteria we will use to decide who will be granted the use of a key to the front door of the Omni Commons. The criteria and process seek to balance the security and safety of both the people who use the Omni Commons and the building itself, and the need for access to Omni. I. People will be eligible for a key if: 

   A. They are a member of a member collective who has been identified by that collective as someone who needs a key. Each collective will make that decision by their own process to determine who is entitled to reasonable access and able to assume the responsiblities that come with being an Omni key holder.         
   1. Some factors to consider are:                 
       a. Does the member need to open or close up the building?                
       b. Does the member take responsibility for collective activities and events?                
       c. Does the member participate in organizing the Omni or maintaining the building?                 
       d. Is the member someone who understands their responsiblity to take care of the Omni and the people inside it, and who is trusted by the                                        collective?        
       
   2. The collective will enter the name and contact information for the member who will be given a key in the (contact manager spreadsheet)
   B. As an unaffiliated Omni volunteer, they request a key using the form below.  (Which working group? A new Keymaster WG?) will review key requests and approve or deny them.

II. All key holders will be required to give a key deposit of $5 which will be used to replace lost keys. Upon turning over their key to the (working group), the deposit will be returned. III. Keys will be given along with a document that states the benefits and responsibilities of being a key holder and how to close up the building. Not fufilling the responsibilities may be grounds for having to return the key. Key Request Form Date Name Email Phone number Address I am an active member of an Omni Commons Working Group Y N If yes, which working group(s)___________________________________________ I need a key because_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________This Omni Keyholder is my reference __________________________________________________

PROPOSAL -- Omni Open Hours Brought by La Commune, 5/19/2015

The Omni will continue to be accessible at all times to key-holding members of Omni member collectives. Provided that a key-holding member of an Omni member collective is present and willing to accept responsibility for all non-members in the space, non-members will be admitted to the Omni between the hours of 10am and 10pm. No collective member is ever required to open the building or to admit non-members to the space if they are unable or unwilling to assume responsibility for non-members. Non-members are not guaranteed access to the building at any time if no collective member is present or willing to admit non-members to the space. We further propose that Omni collective members on site at 10pm every night take responsibility to sweep the building for non-members and lock the doors.

Regarding special events with end times after 10pm:

  • Members of the public will be welcome to occupy specified areas of the building only until the stated event end time. The event's coordinator and the Omni point person will be responsible for making sure all event attendees exit the building once the event has ended.

To be clear -- under this proposal, the building remains fully available at all times for collective members with keys, and their individual guests. All collective members accept full responsibility for non-member guests present in the building outside of the stated open hours. PROPOSAL -- LIGHTING ROOMS IN BASEMENT Brought by Rob 5/21/2015

  • Want to use a room in the basement to put together lighting for the ballroom
    • Niki: What if a new group wants to rent that space?
    • Jesse: What about remediating black mold / pulling up carpet?
    • David: Anyone, including Phat Beets will have to move out while that happens.
    • Rob: Been trying to do it upstairs but it's a lot of material
    • Matt: Just to clarify that Rob would be willing to include some sound equipment down there.

Passed

Retrieved from "https://omnicommons.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Event:2015/05/21_Delegates_Meeting&oldid=3657"