Just to clarify, TANC is Tenants and Neighborhoods Councils. They're a local tenants union who helps organize renters to form unions in and between apartment buildings to challenge rent increase or otherwise push back against property managers. I reached out to them last year when I was looking for advice in dealing with bad behavior by my property manager, and attended one of their meetings. I support their work.
https://baytanc.comCLP is Community Liberation Programs:
https://www.communityliberationprograms.org/. I don't know much about them, honestly. They organize programs around diverse socialist goals, which sounds like something I'd completely support, but I think it's misguided to block TANC from joining Omni, particularly on the charge that they're not outspoken enough about Palestine. I don't think they've provided any evidence for the claim, and it's also creating a lot of conflict within Omni that seems super unproductive.
Especially because Omni is facing foreclosure at the end of the year if we don't find a new lender. We need a strong financial base of support from member collectives in order to convince a credit union to loan us money to avoid losing the building. I don't want to pick a fight with CLP, but the consensus process is meant to encourage discussion and persuasion, and blocks are supposed to be used for matters of urgent necessity. Filibustering a new collective's joining or using a block because you haven't been successful persuading others is not a good-faith use of the consensus process, imo. Which is why I think Sudo should endorse a proposal to use the consensus-minus-one clause to proceed with inducting TANC into Omni.
Does anyone disagree? If so, can you please offer a counter proposal to resolve this dispute. If there is no block on the motion, then I believe whoever represents Sudo at the next Thursday Omni meeting will register our collective as being in support of the motion to disregard CLP's block on TANC joining.
-Andy