NYC GENERAL ASSEMBLY DAY 34
Meeting Date/Time: 10/20/2011 / 7pm EST
Location: Liberty Plaza
Facilitators (F): Sonni, Dori, Leah, Steve
Process Review/Opening Comments: Facilitators are not leaders, they are only here to help facilitate the process of the meeting. They are always looking for new facilitators, and especially encourage anyone from an underrepresented minority to join them. Review of hand signals and definitions. Establishing additional generations of People’s Mic if needed. We take progressive stack. This means that speakers who do not usually get the chance to be heard. If anyone can interpret in sign language, please come up.
34.1. Agenda Items (Proposal from Stop Stop and Frisk Working Group, Proposal from Legal Working Group, Proposal from Structure Working Group, Proposal from Pulse)
34.2. Working Group Report Backs
34.1. Agenda Items
34.1.1. Proposal from ‘Stop, Stop and Frisk’ Working Group
18.104.22.168. Hello, I’m Alex, with the working group, stop “stop and frisk”. We have a proposal to endorse an action tomorrow. Before we read the endorsement I’m going to tell you what the action is and why it’s taking place. Before I’m done speaking, two people in NYC will be stopped by the police before GA is over, 75 will be stopped. This year, 700,000 people will be stopped. 85% Black and Latino, most of them doing nothing. This hangs over and defines an entire generation that at any moment, you could be forced to empty your pockets, get down on your knees or be degraded. This is an injustice and an outrage. We’re here at Wall street to stand against such outrage. We cannot call ourselves the 99% if we do not support this action tomorrow.
Tomorrow at 1pm in Harlem, Cornell West, Carl Vicks, Reverend Stephen Felps, many others, will engage in non-violent civil disobedience to put a stop to this. Many others will wear black and be there to bear witness and support. This is from the Stop “stop and frisk” working group, and we’re proposing that this movement get behind this. Very briefly John is going to say one thing about this.
John: Hi, my name is John and I’m from NY. I’m also a US Navy veteran. And I also want to share something with you. I have had my own personal experience with stop and frisk. To make a long story short, my friend and I were driving to a restaurant one night and were stopped by undercover detectives, they forced us out of the car, hand-cuffed us, had us sit on the sidewalk while they searched the vehicle and searched our persons. The made us get to the front of the car, after they had found nothing and then asked us to dance for them. The dance called the Chicken noodle soup. This needs to stop now. There’s one more thing, this is very embarrassing and humiliating, It should not happen to any American. That’s all I want to say and have a good night
We propose four things: One. This pledge be taken by us by posting it at the top of our website and online. This Friday we will join Cornell West, Karl Dicks and others, to go from up against the wall to up in their faces. With stop and frisk. We are answering the call to engage in non-violent civil disobedience. Targeted at this illegitimate, unconstitutional , racist policy. Or to support those actions, and bear witness in Harlem. We are stopping all this. And we need your help in doing that. Two: We wield our social media to make this known to the world. Three: A press release go out and a press conference be held at 10:30 tomorrow morning right here. Where we express our support. Four: And one hour of tomorrow’s drumming with the help of the drum team if they so desire, take place from 10:30 to 11:30 over here, to rally us to go up to Harlem. That’s our proposal.
22.214.171.124. Clarifying Questions
126.96.36.199.1. Where in Harlem?
Response: The state office building. 163 West 125
188.8.131.52.2. Are we discussing all four points at the same time?
184.108.40.206.3. I have a question about the exact type of civil disobedience that we will be participating in.
Response: If you want to participate, in the civil disobedience component, you can talk to him: Kamil. You don’t have to be part of that, you can just go and support.
220.127.116.11.4. Can you tell us, so well be informed, so we can decide how to support what kind of civil disobedience is planned.
Response: No everybody, the civil disobedience that is planned is non-violent. It may look like a number of people linking arms to virtually shut down a police station. To send a message about stop and frisk.
18.104.22.168.5. I have a concern, about moving the time, and the location, of the drummers tomorrow morning. I know that the community relations team have been in conversation with the drummers and I don’t want that negotiation to be placed in jeopardy so we can follow this proposal.
Response: I understand, we can change that proposal item, to a suggestion and talk further with the drummers.
22.214.171.124.6. What are the chances that people will get arrested in front of the police station?
Response: If you participate in this civil disobedience, it is likely. If you are there to bear witness, we are working to ensure the police respect that difference
126.96.36.199.7. For people who decide to do the civil disobedience, do they need to be there at an earlier time for any kind of training?
Response: If you have, these kinds of concerns, about HOW we’re going to do this, our working group will have a meeting after GA meet as right here at the sculpture.
F: Temperature Check: Good
188.8.131.52: CONSENSUS: ACHIEVED
34.1.2. Legal Proposal
184.108.40.206 WE do things like getting you out of jail, and applying for permits. So we have a proposal for the GA concerning permits. The Activist legal team, is asking for a consensus of the GA that no person or working group, apply for permits or injunctions or file lawsuits on behalf of Occupy Wall Street through the city without consulting the legal team first. This is first and foremost. To encourage and give legal resources to autonomous actions. This is also to negate redundancy. And to coordinate efforts. It is also to discourage individuals or working groups from filing legal actions on behalf of occupy wall street without consensus through the GA. Going through the legal team, ensures that our team of lawyers, can act in our best interests. They will not prohibit our autonomous political decisions, but it is important, that our lawyers are made aware of legal proceedings. Above all, this will empower us.
220.127.116.11. Clarifying Questions
18.104.22.168.1. My question for the legal team, please clarify what exactly is the proposal because it seems confused.
Response: Sure, simply, we want anyone who is going to file for a permit which will affect this group, to go through the legal team, before you proceed. What we’re asking for, is that if you want to take legal action, the ramifications fo which, might affect this assembly, or this occupation, don’t do it, without first consulting the legal team because there might be, political ramifications you haven’t thought of.
22.214.171.124.2. Your previous statements about not taking autonomous action, without first consulting the legal team, without considering how this action will affect our community, does that include restraining orders, used to manipulate work group actions? AKA: I don’t like what you’re doing, please go away, or I’ll take a restraining order out on you. These are really great for community
Response: There is a difference between taking legal action about your own personal situation, and taking action on behalf of the occupation, even if you’re not using the name of the occupation. For example, if you decide to take it upon yourself to apply for a permit to put up portapotties, this is something, that affects the whole, and needs to be coordinated. So, if you want advice, or want to consult, about legal actions, involving your own personal situation, we’re available for that, but we’re not talking about that right now.
126.96.36.199.3. : If we come to a consensus on the current proposal, will the agreement be manifested in accessible readable form?
Response: Yes, online, in the GA minutes, and afterwards, at our legal table, and on the NYCGA website.
F: Stack is closed for questions. Are there any concerns with this proposal? If so, get on stack.
188.8.131.52.1. Shawn(C): If the proposal passes, can we translate it into Spanish?
Response: Yes, and into as many other languages as possible
184.108.40.206.2. Nan: I feel, this movement is becoming a cooperation rather for the people, this movement is about the people including laws that we are currently fighting, that are not good for the people right now, she stands in favor of blocking this proposal.
Point of Information (PoI): One reason, we are asking for the GA’s consensus is that it’s quite possible for somebody to go ahead and apply for a permit, or file litigation that ends up having an undesirable effect on this occupation. If we have this on our records, and we need somebody, to consult the legal team, before taking such actions, we can then in the future, refer to this agreement, as evidence for saying, that person did not, act on our behalf, therefore the decision, shouldn’t actually. It’s a preventative measure.
F: Temperature check? Do we have any blocks?
220.127.116.11.1. My concern, is that this statement, that he was reading, stated, that no one can assume if something would have happened, for example, if I understand right, if someone, does something to someone here, that means, cannot take legal action without, going to legal, what if, legal, refused to give that individual the victim, the clearance to file the proper lawsuit papers.
Response (Legal): Three points: the first is that, this is a very good point, and concern, the second is that, we will reiterate that the focus, is on legal action on behalf of the entire occupation. Which is not to say, that legal matters, concerning individuals, might not have repercussions, and it would be cool, if you want to talk to us about that, but that’s not what our proposal is about. And the third point, is that legal cannot block anybody from taking the action that you decide to do.
BLOCK: then I will, remove, my block.
F: Temperature check!
18.104.22.168. We have reached consensus.
34.1.3. Spokes Council Model from the Structure Working Group
22.214.171.124. The proposal is available at http://www.nycga.net/spokes-council/. Marissa: Hi, I’m Marissa, I’m from the structure working group, after 2 GA discussions, we started meeting to discuss problems of structure. Our movement is growing at a rapid pace. Every night we see new people. And we hear new voices. This is amazing and historic. But working groups, who do most of the day to day work, that keep us warm and safe, have found it difficult to work within the GA. Many of those groups, don’t even come to GA anymore. We need a process for those groups that is accountable and transparent. For instance, financial decisions, are very difficult to make with the people’s mic. They require, longer dialogue. A spokescouncil, allows working groups and caucuses, to maintain our culture of horizontal process, participation and direct democracy, but in keeping with our larger scale. The structure working group has a proposal that outlines the spokescouncil model. It is now being distributed for you to review. We are suggesting, that we all break out into groups of 20 or so and meet for about 30 minutes, then we will reconvene, each group, will have someone report back suggestions for the structure working group. We will take these suggestions and make an amended proposal tomorrow night. How do people feel about that. Members of the structure working group, will be visiting your break out groups to help answer questions.
Sonni: So to reiterate, what we’re going to do now, is break into groups of about 20. Read the proposal. Designate one person to take notes and report back on what you love about the proposal and what you’d like to see changed about the proposal. And after small groups, each group will be able to report back for 1 to 2 minutes, and your notes will be sent to the structure working group. Can I see some fingers if you understand the plan? Let’s implement the plan.
—BREAK OUT IN GROUPS—
.126.96.36.199. Group Comments
188.8.131.52.1. (Group 1) Audrey: Hi everyone, I’m a little nervous. Some of our concerns were about how to define working groups and clusters. There was also concern about what we understood would be a fringe working group for anyone who is not in a working group. This seems unwieldy, but may be the only way for some people to participate. There was also some concern about the ability block. There was concern about accountability between the GA and the spokes council. My time is up but I’m not done. There was worry about clusters and marginalized groups being in one cluster and therefore more marginalized. And the suggestion to slow down the timeline so that the GA can still happen on Tuesdays and Thursdays at least for a while.
184.108.40.206.2. (Group 2): I have 4 points to make: The first is that the document is not on the website. It should be there. My second point, is that the four bullet points of the types of decisions that the spokes council will attend to are a little confusing and broad, they should be clear and direct Specifically, the fourth should be rewritten, to include define checks below it. My third point, what is the enforcement if a working group does not submit a charter? My fourth point, has to do the language about the documents, specifically, working groups should be encouraged not expected
220.127.116.11.3. (Group 3) Hi everybody. My group came up with 3 main points. Generally we support the spoke system and are eager to try it out. First point: we’d like the GA meetings to continue during the week. This is to keep up the energy, increase transparency, and keep it more accessible. We’d also like the GA meetings to interact more with the Spokes meetings. Second point: we need to talk more about the caucus clusters in the GA meetings. They sound like they could bring in a lot of messy identity politics. Third point: We’d like to continue the conversation on setting up the structure for thematic groups and how they differ from working groups. That’s all, thank you.
18.104.22.168.4. (Group 4) Kelly: My group came up with 5 points. We’ll keep it brief because most of them have already been address. 1: Curiosity and concern about blocks, making sure the structure has the possibility to be removed. 2. Transparency. Good concept, good structure, we can work out the kinks, and we suggest a brief trial period of one or two weeks.
22.214.171.124.5. (Group 5) Louisa: I’m a little nervous. I have four points. First: When you are a member of 2 or more groups or caucuses, who do you stand with? Second: When a person represents a working group or a caucus how can we be sure, they are speaking for the agreed upon decisions of the entire group and not just representing themselves, we need a democracy, not another republic. Third: Working groups should perhaps come before the GA once a week regardless. Fourth: How practical is it to call back people when they are representing your group and you’re in the fifth row and you can’t hear what they are saying. That’s it, thank you.
126.96.36.199.6. (Group 6) Jaylin: Good evening. My group had two questions: First: How will the number of clusters pokes be determined and amended? Second: If there is division within a cluster, who will mediate those disagreements?
188.8.131.52.7. (Group 7) Ashley: My working group was concerned, if there was only one vote per spoke, which would mean smaller groups would have the same influence as larger groups which could spell out inequality. Our second concern is the selection of spokes is almost similar to the way of gerrymandering which could disenfranchise certain voters. We were also concerned about the qualifications of “thematic” groups, would the POC and women’s group be considered “thematic” groups because there already seems to be an outcry that POC and women are not being heard. If the drummers are forced to be in the Arts and Culture group would they be marginalized like they are now. The majority should never vote on the rights of the minority in a pure democracy.
184.108.40.206.8. (Group 8): Hi, we have 5 points. Most of which have been brought up.
First: Thematic groups may clash with working groups. Two: We like the first two fo the four decision making groups, we disagree the third and fourth decision making points. Third: We are concerned about, one vote per spoke. Fourth: We are concerned about the number of people within each cluster. Fifth: There needs to be a mechanism to account for non-consensus within each cluster.
220.127.116.11.9. (Group 9) Benjamin: Hey everybody. Our group liked the ability for people to talk in a more intimate space, multiple levels of engagement and the ability to get practical things done quickly. But we would like to remind that transparency, having a clear agenda and strong facilitation are going to be critical.
18.104.22.168.10. (Group 10) TC: I’ll start with the positives: We like this proposal because it’s a way to promote more active participation in the working groups and to formalize the working groups. We also like it because its in use in Chiapas and Basque region. It seems there is a possibility for lack of access points to marginalized groups, there needs to be more clarity about the relationship between the GA and the spokes council. Also who decides what is essential to the occupation. How do we define what is more policy oriented and what is more logistics oriented and how are those expressed in the GA versus the spokescouncil. For instance, in the list of groupings of the caucuses there is no mention of spiritual or religious groups, how do these groups establish themselves within the system?
22.214.171.124.11. (Group 11) Casey: Our group had a grave concern that those who cannot attend working group meetings will be disenfranchised. Some felt we are dismissing direct democracy too quickly. However, some felt this addresses the issue that in a very large group, only the loudest voices will get heard. So, we have two friendly ammendments. 1: the spokes system is only for budget and logistical concerns. 2. the GA retains the power to dissolve the spokes system.
126.96.36.199.12. (Group 12) Christian: our group came up with concerns that were very much like the last person who spoke I could say that we were in consensus with her. The only other concern I could bring up: Defining what active participation means leads to leadership, we need to keep this a leaderless movement. We have a special GA dedicated to working groups clearly detailing what it is they want to work , how much autonomy they need and how much autonomy we can give them regarding budget decisions. Have we thought about decentralization? How can we bring this process to other communities so that other communities in NY can work on their own needs. In order for that to happen the GA process needs to continue to be encouraged more so than a spokescouncil.
188.8.131.52.13. (Group 13) Chris: To start, our group was in unanimous consent about the concept of a spokes council we were also in unanimous agreement that this would work to destroy already existing implicit hierarchies that were formed out of necessity and works to make our movement horizontal. We are worried about what the transition would look like and if this would be a messy process in the beginning. We suggest that in the first week we hand out tons of schedules describing when the meetings are taking place, when and where they are taking place. Some people think we should have Gas Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday Sunday. Others, Tuesday, Thursday, Sunday. In general, we just want to open dialogue about schedule. There was concern about GAs on Saturdays when there are lots of mass arrests. We were also concerned about people in multiple working groups.
184.108.40.206.14. (Group 14) David: How could new interest groups get into spokes council considering this has already been an issue in just the GA. One of our members has had trouble finding who to talk to in just the GA. IF you make something less public like the SC, The amount of stress that is going to be needed to be put on financial transparency, it was suggested that minutes be posted on the GA website, specifically regarding financial situations on a regular basis, not just from the SC. Another suggestion: running the SC as a trial. Concern: the potential of the SC limiting direct democracy, although it was acknowledged that there needs to be some expediency added to this process.
F: That was amazing and thoughtful and smart and expedient. So now, before we move on, to the next proposal we are going to hear a brief report back from the structure working group
220.127.116.11. Hello again. Thank you for all of your wonderful suggestions. We are taking your concerns both now and via email and we will report back with an amended proposal. Briefly I want to respond to some of the concerns raised. The SC meetings will definitely be public. We want to encourage more participation in working groups. We promote transparency. All minutes will be posted on the NYCGA site. WE will also be posting our amended proposal of this on the NYCGA site. The issue of representation was raised a few times, the SC model is not a representative model. It is a horizontal model. In which the position of spokes would be rotated and recalled at any time. Each working group would be empowered to make that decision about that spoke. WE encourage more participation in working groups. We encourage many members of the working groups to be the spokes. The SC makes the working groups more accessible because it makes them visible and makes their meeting times, and minutes to the public. Please email all of these questions, concerns and suggestions to OWSstructure@gmail.com sometime tonight so they can try to modify this to find something that works for everyone.
34.1.4. Pulse Proposal
18.104.22.168. My name is Elija Moses. I’m here today to propose a consensus with you all that will assist us and this movement we are looking to achieve a base outside this occupation which will be an occupation for drummers and musicians. IN order to do that, we must create base here. However, we do not have the funds to start this. Another problem, the other night, our strength was weakened. More than 5,000 dollars of equipment was intentionally destroyed. Now, we are trying to rebuild. We are asking for 8,000 dollars to help replace and secure. We do understand that we must stop. However, when we are not playing here, we will be elsewhere, making what we can known elsewhere. We will build on our information, our strength, elsewhere. Let’s use the strength of PULSE to help occupy other areas. Us as drummers who are valuable to this movement and in many ways equal to any other action in this movement are tying to organize so we can optimize the usage of our skill.
22.214.171.124. Clarifying Questions
126.96.36.199.1. (Ashley): I’m here with a few other drummers and we never agreed to the 2 hour thing that you’re saying. My question, two questions: Did you hear that we had agreed in a resolution meeting last week that it would be 4 hours? Therefore, if this proposal passes, does this mean our plight to have 4 hours has just been bought for $8000, that a few drummers will have, is more important than our plight. Which I don’t.
Response: We all had consensus on 4 hours, however, yesterday, community affairs came up to me personally and told me the community board still said no, so what we drummers have to do is strengthen ourselves elsewhere so they can respect us again. In order to do that, we have to show what it means not to have drummers here.
188.8.131.52.2. (Ellie): I have 2 questions. First: Is about the ownership of the materials that will be bought with GA money. Second: I just need a clarification of what you mean by building a base?
Response: First off, all materials that will be purchased will be under PULSE as a working group. They will be used by drummers and musicians who know how to use these instruments. We also are trying to equip ourselves for repairs. The other day a hand made drum was sabotaged, it was worth more than $5000, to us it was priceless. Overall, the base will be meant to protect these instruments.
That requires dedication. We need to grow, and we need your responsibility involved into this.
184.108.40.206.3. (Jessica): First thing I want to say. Is that I do think that drummers should have a voice in our movement, it’s a powerful sound and I hope we can come to a resolution on how it fits in here. I don’t understand about the sabotage who did it? Why should the whole movement be responsible for paying for it? And what kind of drum was it?
Response: Overall we are not trying to place responsibility for these replacements on GA, we are here requesting your assistance. The drum that was destroyed was a handmade drum, given by a community member. The sabotage happened two nights ago. I was sleeping in the rain. They took advantage of the fact that it was raining and that we were not going to go out there. So we woke up in the morning to find our instruments missing or destroyed or removed. That is what happened.
220.127.116.11.4. (Jason): I have two questions. First: Do you have a detailed list of which items you would be spending this money one that you could present to the general assembly? Second: Have you considered reaching out to the community for the donation of drums instead of funds.
Response: We have as a working group been earning funds since day one. We have been giving our funds to finance. We have earned more than enough to do what we are asking. We are willing to put our everything… We have a list, to go through this list will be extreme and will take too much time now. We will have receipts, any money not used will be returned to finance with receipts.
18.104.22.168.5. Have you considered starting a kickstarter campaign so that people can choose to support this so that you don’t have to take this out of general funds.
Response: Well, we have considered this, but we no longer have the materials to support ourselves. But if you feel that we need to support ourselves think about how hypocritical you are being. We are here to support each other. We have supported this movement by bringing people here from blocks away. This movement would not be here right now if we need not do what we did, by playing all day.
22.214.171.124.6. I have two questions. First question is, around process, it seems to me that process is being violated in accepting the proposal of one individual from a working group without consent of the working group. Why is there, all kinds of exceptions being applied with regard to the drummers?
Response: These people that have a problem who are claiming they were not a part of this consensus they are responsible for themselves for the consensus. These people behind me are working every day to make our instruments top quality. So if you have this problem, come and make your voice known, and then come and be a part of the consensus.
126.96.36.199.7. It seems to me that this is a proposal to buy out the drummers which goes against the spirit of the movement. This is a question for the GA. I don’t think that this is your doing. SO my question to you is perhaps if you shouldn’t be separating the issue of the funds for purchasing the replacement drums from the question of the consensus. Thank you
Response: Overall, these people are a part of this. We are trying to fund ourselves. However, they wish for us to also fund them. How can we fund you if we can no longer fund ourselves. We need to build as a group and build on our respect as a group. We need you to take us more seriously. What we are doing is trying to establish a place for drummers to connect to the entire movement. This movement is not just Zuccoti park, it is the occupation worldwide. We are trying to connect this worldwide. But we cannot do that if we do not start somewhere. Where better than to start right her. So if we build a vessel that we will replicate that we will have when we move than we will also be able to replicate this globally.
188.8.131.52.8. (Hero): I’ve been here since day 1. About a week and a half after this movement started we had a band of drummers and other musicians, that band has been very helpful in building this movement. Since I’ve been here, this has been a little bit of a nuisance during meetings and GAs. But these drummers have made sacrifices over and over again because they knew it was essential to take a punch to keep going. We are here in solidarity together I know what its like to take a couple punches because something is bigger than one person and one group, and they have done that, so for them to ask for a couple of thousands of dollars to last for a long time, when we have many thousand, I think is asking well within their means.
184.108.40.206. 9. (Jack): I would like to say this is an issue of money. We shouldn’t worry about that. We are the 99%. We are fighting for a common cause. We should support the drummers. We have a cause we have the means we have the people lets continue moving and stop worrying about small things we have a park we have occupy so lets start. Who is here for the occupation? Mic check, who is here for the occupation? Mic check, Who is here for the occupation? Support the drummers.
Point of Process (PoP): Dori: I know we all have strong feelings about this, but please try to follow the process that we have agreed upon and leave questions for the questions section and concerns when they are due.
F: We’re all tired, its normal to feel frustrated. Just keep in mind, we want to do this in a way that is efficient and not keep us talking about the same thing for a very long time without new insight. PULSE is requesting $8000 and solidarity to let their voices be heard.
F: It is now 10:40 and 20 minutes before quiet hours and I simply don’t think that we will have time to voice our concerns, address our concerns and finish our GA. I think that we should let PULSE know that they should bring this proposal back tomorrow night so that we can further discuss this.
220.127.116.11. Drummer: We are trying to grow. We are forced to have these two hours, the community board will go against us if we do not go with these two hours. WE asked for four, we were told no, so a few of us said we were going to play anyway, but we must think about the entire movement, we do not want to remove you all because of our apathy for you. However, in order to compromise we need to re-establish our strength here and develop elsewhere.
F: Sonni: So since there are only 15 minutes until quiet hours, I suggest that people with concerns take them right now to PULSE outside of the GA so that they can bring their proposal back tomorrow. So let’s do another temperature check on this proposal so that we can see if we can decide this tonight.
F: Temperature check: Mixed
Elijah: With the drum circle, the drum working class. We have worked for you. We will remove ourselves and earn as we did. And when you realize what happens when we remove ourselves, you will come to us and appreciate what we are doing. We shall support ourselves.
F: Sonni: What we’re doing here is trying to build consensus. There is a proposal right here that we don’t have consensus on. That’s okay. We can voice our concerns and make our suggestions so that we can reform the proposal so that we can hopefully eventually come to consensus. So, we need to move on from this issue right now. Because frankly, we do not have a choice because we do not have consensus. So hopefully PULSE can amend their proposal so that we can have consensus.
Ashley: I was just at the community board meeting for two hours. I support the drummers. They have earned their money. The drummers had consensus on 4 hours, the community affairs working group had a consensus on 2 hours. I thought the timing of this proposal was problematic because we have not come on consensus about the time. I think we need to demand 4 hours before we accept $8000. Because I will not be sold out and neither will the other drummers.
Concern: I don’t feel that that emergency announcement kept to process. We may need new facilitators to close out this meeting.
F: Ashley: The yelling had nothing to do with the drummers. This is anti-drummer sentiment.
PoI: Tonight at the meeting at 250 Broadway, the community group, included the yelling with the drumming, we have now all been silenced in solidarity.
PoI: I was just at the community board meeting. The community board fucking loves us, many of the residents fucking love us. They want to work with us. I believe we need to all work together and give the working group of drummers our full support.
(YELLING, CHANTING, 4 HOURS!!!)
Comment: I believe, we should all support the facilitation of this meeting, take our time and compromise.
F: Dori: There is a lot of frustration and a big sense of urgency to make a decision right now. Seeing as though there is no way for us to get through the rest of the agenda. I suggest that we end the general assembly now and reconvene now when we are not as frustrated or tired and can think with clear minds.
Comment: The good neighbor policy does not even mention anything about the drummers or any bullshit this community is putting on the drummers.
PoI: The current good neighbor policy has no official hours of drumming. It just came to me that there is only two hours of drumming per day. None of the drummers of PULSE has had any say in this 2 hours at all. When do we have a say?
F: Sonni: This general assembly needs to end. This is turning into a free for all that doesn’t respect the process that previous GAs have consensed to. Therefore, we as facilitators are stepping away. We are going to call this general assembly over.