NYC General Assembly 1/24/2012 (Minutes)

Posted by & filed under Assemblies, General Assembly Minutes.

NYC GENERAL ASSEMBLY DAY 130

Date/Time: 1/24/2012, 7pm

Location: Liberty Plaza

Facilitators: Anthony, Ronnie

Stack-taker: Nick

Minutes: Lauren and Chepe

Dissolution of Spokes from Strong Women Rules: Tabled

Adoption of a vision statement:Tabled

Craft Fair Fundraiser: Consensus

Reduce GA meetings: Tabled

Disruption followed by a conversation on how to deal with disruptions

Community Solidarity: Tabled by proposer

Follow up to GA reassembly: No Presented

Formation of Food Justice working groups: Tabled by proposer during disruption

OWS support for Occupy tour: Consensus

Working Group Report Backs: Facilitation, Information

Announcements: Safe Spaces, Occupy the Roads, Disability Caucus, Occupy Farms, Evelyn, Food Justice, Occupy LA, Joseph, Trish

Announcements

Hi everybody I’m from facilitation. Tomorrows NYCSC will be at the Quakers meeting house, doors open at 630, there will be food, also we have an open space on Friday at Unity Hall at west 24th street. There will also be food and good conversation.

My name is Justin and I’m from information. We are back in the park from noon to five Monday to Friday and we could use some support from the other working groups. Ask me if you are interested and want to man a table.

F: Anthony: Tonight’s agenda is going to be eight proposals long. So if there are any announcements bring them forth now.

We will be having a meeting to discuss as safer spaces to create a grievance process 7pm location TBD at either 60 wall or the Quaker meeting house

I’m Janet Wilson from occupy the roads,  we started in Seattle went down the west coast to San Diego and then came across Mississippi and came back here and we started here on October 3rd.

My name is Justin and I’m here from the Disability caucus and we’ll be meeting this Sunday at 2pm to talk about future actions and what it means to be a caucus at OWS.

My name is rich and I’m with occupy farms we’re having a meeting this Wednesday at 6pm at 60 wall st. we will be discussing a new lot for us to occupy with the urban farms chapter. Please come to help us scout it out and make decisions.

My name is Evelyn. I would like to bring to everyone’s attention the wake up call so we can revision it about what’s going on with OWS. I feel that there is some kind of mismanagement where there are people trying to get people off the website. Ravi wants to take my group off the website.

Justin: Facilitation and internet working groups are currently in the process of ratifying groups that are online. Any working groups with issues can contact the website directly.

Shawn: POI It is not facilitation or internet. It is

OWS Food Justice An event we are having next Tuesday January 31st 9am at Foley Square. 85 organizations representing scientists, farmers eaters are filing a lawsuit against Monsanto (fuck Monsanto from the crowd). Basically Monsanto can sue farmers for using crops contaminated with their gmos. Our event is a solidarity with the farmers fighting on the front line and telling them their fight is our fight.

Mic check: this is Santa. What’s with all the smoking?

Someone responds “does anyone have an extra cig?”

Hi OWS, I’m from Occupy LA. I’m finishing a portrait book. Hello from OccupyLA, Seattle, Wall St, New Haven, Portland, Oakland and else where. So if you want me to take your portrait.

Joseph: on white street, there’s three boxes of clothes. Shirts, fleeces, hoodies and everything on the step. Im going to hold a peaceful rally. I found a spot where we can get a lot of media attention. First Monday at February. And guess whose leading the rally: (points to self)

Trish: wheres the camera? Bcuz im speaking to the broad public. Ows is really occupied with agents provocateurs, racists, fascists, and others. We as activists know who our enemies are and we know The nycga working group invites all who think they’ve been approached, targeted, by any nypd or private intelligence to come to the meeting on Wednesday to give a deposition.

F: First item on the agenda: dissolution of the nycsc! Where’s nan?

Nan: Hi. Most of youse knows me but I have my partner here, Eric Richardson, hes part of OWS and Newark, NJ and he’s in solidarity with us and he’s going to be reading my proposal. And im going to pass it out. And we request 3-5 minutes of you to read.

Anthony: will it be okay with you to have a 3 minute breakout?

(proposal read by Eric Richardson, with a few conflicts)

Ted: what was just being said after the proposal were not part of the proposal, it was a personal opinion.

Anthony: it was just asked to me that we move on to check for consensus directly. So I’m gonna ask for a temp check to see if we want to

Point of Process In the original charter for spokescouncil formation it specifically states that in order to dissolve- interruptions- that in order to dissolve an announcement must be made every night prior at the ga and a week prior at spokescouncil. Neither of these things happened, so this proposal should be tabled until it follows that protocol.

Trish- point of info- actually the mandate covering the disposing spokes is it must be posted one week prior to the proposal being given to nycga. Each day leading up to the seven day proposal presentation it must be posted on nycga.net and announced at each ga. There is no paperwork. There is no issue saying that it need to be announced in spokes. What goes on in spokes- interruptions “this is not true”

Mic check. Marisa: I helped draft the prop for spokes. In the original prop it states that the proposal to dissolve the spokes must be announced at both in person one week prior and it must be posted on nycga.net.

Anthony: we have gone over the 20 minutes. Does this body want to continue? (mild chaos) it looks mixed but mostly down.

Nan: POI I have brought the prop here I followed the guidelines and it was cold and ive been begging and I’ve asked facilitation to put it online. And that’s the facts. I announced it at ga and at spokes.— ok lets bring it back together. And she has said she’s being announcing it so we’re going to bring the proposal now. We’re gonna check for 20 minutes? Ok, how about 10 minutes.

A lot of the infighting that is occurring in OWS and it makes us look that we are an unorganized group so can we stop the infighting.

Rich: my clarifying question to nan is what have you done to solve these issues you have with spokes

Nan: I strongly believe… if you can stop yelling than you can hear me trish… I strongly believe that this prop is not about nan but about the people, the general assembly, and spokes making rules of regulations-

Point of Process: the proposer is supposed to answer the question

Nan: I have focused my energy on the ga, not on the spokes.

Anthony: next on stack is trish. Trish? Trish? Trish?

Evan: my clarification question is who wrote this proposal bcuz this does not seem like your language?

Shouting matches ensue. Calamity and chaos enjoyed by all.

Anthony: I am not here for my health or to waste my time or yours. So can we please continue on with the process

We: hello everyone. My name is eventus, but call me we. Question for nan and whomever wrote this proposal is what kind of evidence that can explain to us that the existence of the spokes is damaging that brings us to dissolve it?

Nan: I would love answer the question. I researched and looked at the livetweets and at minutes and I looked at the evidence. One of the evidence was posted number nine. That basically. On Monday spokescouncil they tried to remove the freeze that ga had posted. The fund freeze. The spending freeze.

POI: Spokescouncil did not come anywhere near doing that.

POI: People at spokes are not they. They are we.

Anthony: Janice question was if the financial decisions made at the spokes are brought back to the ga. And if there is financial transparency at the spokes.

More entropy. Few people flee. Conflicts about smoking.

Anthony: we’re out of time again. How do people feel about continuing the process? Down twinkle

Ronny: please refrain from talking over each other when someone is speaking. We will stop you as a facilitator.

Anthony: okay, people don’t want to continue. Now the proposer has the option of testing for consensus or tabling the proposal. Nan?

Nan: the proposers have decided that they want to test for consensus.

Anthony: it was just clarified that we cannot go on with this proposal.  The next thing on the agenda is the adoption of the vision and goals statement. Mic check. Lets have some random dancing.

Patrick: from vision and goals id like to go around the room here and introduce the team. Jean, Yitzhak, marie, Isaac, satya, see, yoni, nadina, row, susan, sumumba. So just to catch you up for those of you who haven’t seen us. Wee have been working on your document for the last three months. Our first visit to you on October 21st began a long and aardvark process to come up with a statement for your movement. Vision and goals was instructed to stop taking feedback. We have shown it for a wekk and we notified everyone that we would take it for the final part in the process tonight. There are a few amendments that we’ve made. But we cant make any more changes, so we’ll have to bring them to you separately, as per the general assembly’s decision. We will advise but not take a position bcuz it is up to the nycga to decide. We would like to see if you would like to break out or ask if you want to go directly into checking for consensus.

Ronny: tempt check for 10 minutes break out? It seems its mostly down.

Anthony: we’re now gonna open up stack for clarifying questions.

Mic check, at the top of the document it reads GA-approved. From my understanding you were asked to table it. Has it been consensed upon?

Patrick: to be clear if it had been consensed upon we wouldn’t be here.

Anthony: can we do a temp check if we want to hear out the proposal… it looks pretty mixed.

I don’t know why they spent two weeks to collect what we are sposed to bring here and I know this is not what they had brought before out meeting.

Patrick: if I might clarify, we are suggesting to you on the back a couple of amendments. But the document you have in your hand is exactly the same as the one we gave you a week ago. We have promoted it in the meantime

Ronny: one left for clarifiers. We will be closing stack

I have looked thru this document, very beautiful words, I can see the feeling of these

Note: laptop battery low. Exact transcription ending.

Bana and lopi- friendly amendment and concern…. My concrn and friendly amendment is that there is an issue of the prison industrial complex and the profiteering of the incarceration of a disproportionate number of people of color and poor people. So we would like to add under justice: “specifically this includes the prison industrial complex wherein profits are gained off the labor of prisoners composed mostly of people of color and poor people”

 

Response: we feel strongly that this is an extremely important issue. But it does not belong in the VISIONS statement. We should include it in our goals statement.

Patrick: we are not accepting or rejecting anything bcuz this is your document.

Other person: this is a living document that can be changed in the future

Lopi: I’m gonna read it this time

I’m requesting that in the section where race is mentioned let us be sure to include words like ethnicity and disability.

Lots of discussion.

Marisa: this is absolutely a reformist document. This is not why I came to ows. “This is why decision making at every form and at every level exists with the will of the collective, where wealth will not something power”

Succeeds as a friendly amendment.

Hermes: I would like to point out that vision and goals has been coming for three months.

This statement does not represent me. I would also suggest that a lawyer look over this document to make sure there is nothing in this that the nypd can use against us. So my friendly amendment is a lawyer look it over.

Chepe: nonviolence is not my way of life. Also, the declaration is also a living document. I tried to block it in September, because it omitted many aspects of the white supremacist state. Does anyone know how many changes have come into the declaration? It has become static. If we call something a living document, lets create a real process for changing it.

…..

[At this point the minute takers computer ran out of battery. The audio file will be on the Internet soon followed by a more complete verbatim account of the meeting.]

 

3 Responses to “NYC General Assembly 1/24/2012 (Minutes)”

  1. NYCGA Council

    To Whom It May Concern:

    WE are aware Minutes strives to provide a complete and accurate transcript of all OWS meetings.

    We acknowledge that this can be a difficult task at times nevertheless..

    We as stake-holders should assist and go the extra mile to ensure that what is reflected in our history is as

    true and accurate as possible.

    Regarding the minutes of 01.24.2012 and the announcement made by Trish relating to a brochure given to

    her upon entering the General Assembly (Zuccotti Park) referencing…AGENTS PROVOCATEURS.

    THE MINUTES FAILS TO REFLECT AN ACCURATE ACCOUNT OF WHAT WAS SHARED DURING THAT ANNOUNCEMENT.

    Fortunately, there is a recording of what Trish said which can be shared with Minutes…also, we are

    reaching out to those who viewed live-streaming for feed-back.

    NYCGA Council, encourages the personal recordings of your words and meetings as a back up in the event

    questionable issues arise.

    Peace & OWS Minutes

    • Janet Wilson

      I am an outsider who visited for the first time on this evening. Not knowing any of the people present or Nan’s reputation for alleged “constant disruption” I would like to ask a question…. First, it was never mentioned that the proposal (while being read) was interrupted by someone with a disruptive comment but I don’t see it here. Also, after Nan’s proposal I asked “was it true that the spokes council or Finance were spending money without the consensus of the GA?” I also asked during the GA (which should be on the minutes I believe) if there “was a financial statement presented regularly for transparency?” Both of which were ignored and not mentioned here at all. I believe if everyone had access to this information there would be less speculation and concern.
      Janet