OE GA 11/30/11 Minutes

Please post all general assembly meeting minutes here. Arrange them by Year, Month and Day (e.g., Minutes GA 10/20/2011).

OE GA 11/30/11 Minutes

Postby IraA » Fri Dec 02, 2011 5:22 am

GA 11/30/11 Minutes

Minute taker: Buckli
Co-facilitators: Ira/Perry
Morale: Song by Benjamin Cook

No concerns about agenda, many people were at this GA for first time, review of hand signals

Committee Reports/ Announcements:
- Art with the Library: occupying kesey square Friday 2-6, the library received donations for OE
- Liz with Systemic Change Working Group: class for analyzing constitution sun at 3pm december 11th on site
- Peter with Traveling: offering greyhound tiks roundtrip to the occupy in Jersey during university winter break
- Joe with Engineering: restored electricity, a few days ago people broke into city power, when the generator is running 4-9pm you can draw a lot of power, when it is not running we are running off of batteries and draining these bats to zero is damaging them. You can run lights in here, info, medical, peacekeepers and 1 computer. No hair driers, power tools, printers, coffee makers, etc when generator is not running (haha power went out at end of report but Joe fixed it : ))
- Derek with Engineering: Tomorrow at noon we are meeting with people who live on camp. We need to draft a site map and that can’t be mapped by "houseys". At the dome. A generous donor provided money to build a library and reading area next to the dome
- Sue from Medical: appreciate support, Need cough drops, sinus decongestion stuff, look on list online for donations, when there is an incident bring the person to medical tent, if it is not possible find someone from medical to bring to them, move back from patient once the person is receiving medical attention. Provide space for care providers to do their jobs, keep traffic through the med tent down. Foot traffck is not a good thing in this area.
- Education Alliance: We rocked! WE marched and occupied Johnson, Lillis, EMU and Mac walkout was semi successful but rally afterward was AWESOME. Meeting of u of O faculty, the chancellor was there, farewell to U of o president, we wrote a mic check to do there. The bulk of what we said was taken directly from their very own mission statement. We said: we are here to present the universities own mission statement as the criteria in selecting a new president – a continued commitment to affordable public education, and freedom of though and expression … by welcoming and guiding change rather than reacting to it. (Find full text w education alliance).
Ed Alliance meets Friday at 3 in survival center
- Water: Use water when needed, don’t take big jugs to your tent. Need help getting water over at site. Sign up sheet? WE are starting it tomorrow
- Blackhorse with Children's Committee and Tepee: reiki circle every wed at 1, reiki teaching at 1 tomorrow in tepee, meditations at 11 on Fridays, big plans coming up
- Keith for Info: separating volunteers and donations and info desk, people with donations go around side, looking for volunteers to manage donations. Need volunteers to man the info booth.
- Peacekeepers: need more peacekeepers
Point of information- to be part of the safety cluster you must be 18 or older, shadow a member until they feel you are ready, call it deescalation and safety rather than ‘security’
All walkie talkies are missing. (reappropriated)
- Lobbying Committee: training 6 tomorrow right here
- Arrestees' Committee: 14th speak easy, fundraiser- booking bands, spoken word poetry, more info to come

New Committees:
- Perry for Mediation Committee: I see it as preventative dealing with interpersonal conflicts happening on site, another service available on site, meeting Friday at 1130 after the meditation
- Johnny for Self-Defense Committee: Sunday 3pm 1st meeting

Process Proposal:
Intention is to clarify our process, care about our ability to self-govern together well. Room for improvement for further fairness. Separate voting and consensus, inclusivity and efficiency need to both be present. Read the hand out to be posted by tree. Condensed version
A. When considering a decision first the group attempts to make a full consensus meaning that the entire group stands in unity with the decision.
B. If a proposal addressing a particular issue has been brought to 3 GAS and unity has not been reached, then following the test for consensus at the third GA, a fall back vote may be invoked-95 percent majority needed.
C. If the voting fallback is invoked the people have the following options: 1. Yes 2. No 3. Abstain- I choose not to participate in the making of this decision.
If there is a test for consensus and no one stands aside the group is clearly
Second test of consensus, no more than one block and no more than 2 stand asides needed to then vote for consensus.
If a proposal has been brought to 3 GAs and consensus has not been made
Clarifying questions: at the second test for consensus, if one person blocks and two people stand aside I still passes this second test right? There is a contradiction
Abstain versus stand aside? No stand aside at the voting stage. There is just yes, no, and abstain. Old system created a motive to block, and we don’t want that.
If there are no blocks and 4 stand aside would that still go through? No, that would mean we still need to work on things
Check for comprehension of the proposal- most understood
Gwen- I want to be involved because I am working on a proposal of my own
My concern is that if we have an urgent need to make a decision, it would be easy to derail the system with a 95 percent vote. Im thinking it needs to be around 60 percent
I'm concerned about timing issues, how to draw the line between pushing through and consensus by contrition
I really like what OW does. Originally we were based on their model. Their model has changed quite a bit. They have an option for a majority vote to be able to deem blocks unreasonable. One block per person per meeting.
Open assembly has not taken off yet. In villages in Chiapas they spend 2 to 3 days in a meeting, not suggesting GAs take up days, but we need mechanisms to continue conversations from GAs to GAS
Support the higher percentage because feeling strongly with high emotions may rupture relationships
Last time we pushed something through we got a bail out. Lower percentage majority is no bueno
How about Break up into small groups when there is a contentious vote
Agreement with reservations possible? I vote yes but I have reservations, agreement with reservations makes 95 percent consensus possible.
I want to clarify about the emergency, low percentage for consensus
Based on what ally said, when you make no motion, you don’t get counted, so then I consent but don’t necessarily agree I still get counted. That makes a lot of sense to me.
For Fallback emergency does that have to be 3 GAs in total or in a row? In total
Where did the 95 percent number come from?
I’m trying to keep the minority from getting steam rolled. I’m not attached to these numbers but I wanted one higher than the other to make sure the minority were getting their voices heard
Amendments to Proposal:
Add consent with reservations as an option
Add one block per person per meeting – did not pass
Small group breakouts as a tool to reach consensus, reflective listening and other process tools
Is there a way of evaluating a block? Be able to vote on whether it is valid or not? 75 percent vote
Temperature check= we feel like we’re going in the right connection
Once consensus is called for twice, break into small groups, temp check again, agree on an approach to the process
Consent with reservations? How would that be addressed? Person expressed what the reservation is so at least the group knows why they’re not completely with it.
Temp check do you like it? More conversation? A little more discussion but most people are on board.
Only being able to block once in a meeting is a form of censorship
DR- I feel that you're right if we didn’t go about it in the right way, but we have had issues of over blocking without valid reasons for why they are blocking. It slows down the process and makes us dead in the water.
Lets take it case by case basis if some one is unreasonable with over blocking
There should be a way of evaluating blocks
Still ways to make sure concerns are heard even if you can’t block.
Is an amendment to be able to vote on whether a block is valid or invalid?
What happens when we work a proposal where 2 blocks in the same meeting may be necessary.
Suggest if some one blocks many many times, We take consensus on whether that person is just screwing with us or not.
This is not going to solve all of our problems. A Block is a BIG deal in my mind and maybe I need to reevaluate that.
75 percentage to over ride a block.
Maybe we are rushing the earlier stages and that is why we have so many blocks. We are rushing through the parts where we voice and listen to concerns from the heart.
People feel they are going to be criticized for their opinion,we need to maintain respect and unity over a process,
Active communication, we hear what you are saying, we understand, and we are going to take that into consideration, this might stop a lot of circular arguments we’ve been having.
Love what lotus just said. This is an unconventional group for consensus, we have different mindsets. I love that we are discussing this now.
Last nights meeting was contentious and long but after the meeting the energy and vibe of that group was totally different. People were listening, being respectful,, even when they didn’t agree. The most beautiful thing about this proposal is that it gives the decision the time it needs for respectful listening and processing. Thank you
Did we want to address the time issue? How long an item can be on the agenda before coming to consensus?
We need to discuss that further
Urgency- percentage to determine urgency?
Block can be over ruled by the group not if they disagree, but if they think it is an innappropriate use of blocking power. This needs a 75 percent vote.
Small groups,
Consent with reservations as an option, make sure all CWR reservations are heard. Hand sign to be determined.
We need to talk about when a vote is urgent.
A block that happened last night = I don’t think it was appropriate
Rob was blocking from the heart, there's an enormous amount of pressure, we get mob mentality. Would the group have overridden his block?
Hell NO. It was appropriate and there was more than one block
One thing up in the air- when do you determine that a proposal is so urgent and pressing that we can’t wait 3 GAs to make that decision. 75 to 80 percent gets to declare it's urgent?
Final stack
About voting to over ride blocks. I’m confused about how that relates to tabling. Come back to me
Emergency- a high number makes it difficult to address truly emergency issues. A few detractors could stall it out. This isn’t a normal group, there are people with egos who use dirty tricks and consensus can be greatly affected by this
Put in language that addresses the seriousness of overriding blocks and determining that a proposal is urgent
Last night watched cops busting down occupy LA. There are undercovers. When there is an emergency they will disrupt us. They will take advantage of our vulnerability. 75 percent is still hard to get in this group and it would make it harder for a few subversives and few assholes to shut down the process.
Language about what constitutes an emergency would be helpful.
If 90 percent is general consensus, anything higher than 90 percent doesn’t make sense for determining emergency. 75 is good.
Not mob mentality last night, everybody was really passionate about what they were saying
Any blocks? No
Any stand asides or concerns not addressed yet?
Is a deadline an emergency? I’m worried about that decision rushing
Consensus reached on proposal with the following amendments:
75 percent vote to override a block that the group feels was made irrationally in an inappropriate use of blocking power.

Lightning general announcements
Friends Meeting- unanimously endorsed occupy, we will publicize that, We the People Eugene also officially endorses occupy, city council meeting on the 12th, candle light vigil in courtyard of city hall to show support for OE?
Really cold, offer to take people to egan warming center.
Animosity and divisions on this site.
On dec 5th and 12th from 7 to 9 at harris hall, having community conversations.
Dec 5th first in film series, unitarian church on donald, What would Jesus buy, fundraiser for occupy eugene. tGoing into the whitaker going door to door with had outs and petitions, sat at noon, meeting on site.
[Mixed bag about whether to extend GA meeting time or not. ]

Scheduling Proposal
To schedule GA and coordination meetings on alternating days, 4 days a week, and a grand assembly on Saturday.
Logistical considerations:
Speaking participants should be recognized members of occupy eugene
Focused, with agenda planned 24 hours in advance,
Meetings should be recorded via minutes
Friendly amendment Sunday there will be village meetings on
Mon thursdays = coordination meetings
Tuesday fridays = GAS 7pm
Village meeting Wednesdays and Sundays at 7 about camp issues for people who are living here.
Any blocks to this proposal as read? None
Any stand asides? None
A few consent with reservations but this proposal was consensed upon
Any CWR that want to speak?
If GAs are only happening twice a week, they might be a lot longer
Also concern about coordination meetings.
Worried about tensions between inclusivity and efficiency.
Rob would not block this evening; he requests that issues about process be discussed at another meeting, but he would not block.
The 2 week coordination meetings didn’t go well at the beginning. How are those issues going to be different later?
Fucking kudos. Everyone did a great job tonight, end with one long stack
Question of efficiency- GA is inefficient. 3 groups of people who are on the same page can speak in a united way from 3 different perspectives will increase in efficiency.
Coordination is focusing on larger political fronts, not having to do with day to day issues of the site
Coordination better decides on internal organization
People who are not on committees are active on site.
We should not be putting so many rules on people not trusting them to make good decisions.
Now there is a space for camp related issues and there is more room freed up at GAs to talk about why we’re here and what our vision is.
Work it out over time
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 12:10 am

Return to GA Meeting Minutes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest