[sudo-discuss] Buy the building report back thread

Sat Oct 8 09:22:45 PDT 2016

i still think that if sudoroom managed the a/v aspect of event rentals &
omni kept the general rent from same, not much would functionally change.
all the working groups would be omni's & delegates would still make the
decisions.
sudoroom would merely handle the a/v side (which we currently contract out
to trained members)
most of the a/v stuff is sudoroom's anyway
several sudo members are willing to start an a/v training program

instead of splitting the building in half, we could split rentals...omni
gets the space rental/sudo gets the a/v contracts which, if part of an
educational program, will be considered charitable.

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 10:47 AM, <discuss-request at lists.omnicommons.org>
wrote:

> Send discuss mailing list submissions to
>         discuss at lists.omnicommons.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         discuss-request at lists.omnicommons.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         discuss-owner at lists.omnicommons.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of discuss digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Buy the building report back thread (Laura Turiano)
>    2. Re: [omni-consensus] Buy the building report back thread
>       (Patrik D'haeseleer)
>    3. Re: [omni-consensus] Buy the building report back thread
>       (Jenny Ryan)
>    4. Re: [omni-consensus] Buy the building report back thread
>       (Yardena Cohen)
>    5. Re: [omni-consensus] Buy the building report back thread
>       (Mary Ann Tenuto)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Laura Turiano <scylla at riseup.net>
> To: "discuss at lists.omnicommons.org" <discuss at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> consensus at lists.omnicommons.org" <consensus at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> finance at lists.omnicommons.org" <finance at lists.omnicommons.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 21:05:22 -0700
> Subject: [omni-discuss] Buy the building report back thread
> Everyone,
>
> At the delegates meeting we discussed the proposal to buy the building by
> creating a tenants in common agreement between Omni Commons and one member
> collective that is a 501c3. Please see the proposal and additional
> information on the pad (pad.riseup.net/p/omninom) if you didn't see it
> before.
>
> We agreed to update each other at least once a week on the progress of
> discussions in the collectives and the development of the contracts. This
> is the thread where we will put our updates.
>
> Everyone is welcome to attend the Finance/fundraising working group
> meeting at 6pm on Mondays to get more information or raise any
> concerns/questions.
>
> Laura
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Patrik D'haeseleer" <patrikd at gmail.com>
> To: Laura Turiano <scylla at riseup.net>
> Cc: "consensus at lists.omnicommons.org" <consensus at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org" <discuss at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> finance at lists.omnicommons.org" <finance at lists.omnicommons.org>
> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 21:34:46 -0700
> Subject: Re: [omni-discuss] [omni-consensus] Buy the building report back
> thread
> Thanks Laura,
>
> One thing I didn't understand about the two-non-profit idea was whether
> this was just a temporary fix, and eventually the ownership of the building
> would be with the Omni, or whether the building will be shared in
> perpetuity between the Omni and Sudo.
>
> If this is intended to be a permanent arrangement, I would greatly prefer
> setting up a new 501(c)3 just for the purpose of receiving the donation,
> even if that might take a bit longer to arrange.
>
> Patrik
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Laura Turiano <scylla at riseup.net> wrote:
>
>> Everyone,
>>
>> At the delegates meeting we discussed the proposal to buy the building by
>> creating a tenants in common agreement between Omni Commons and one member
>> collective that is a 501c3. Please see the proposal and additional
>> information on the pad (pad.riseup.net/p/omninom) if you didn't see it
>> before.
>>
>> We agreed to update each other at least once a week on the progress of
>> discussions in the collectives and the development of the contracts. This
>> is the thread where we will put our updates.
>>
>> Everyone is welcome to attend the Finance/fundraising working group
>> meeting at 6pm on Mondays to get more information or raise any
>> concerns/questions.
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> consensus mailing list
>> consensus at lists.omnicommons.org
>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/consensus
>>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Jenny Ryan <tunabananas at gmail.com>
> To: "Patrik D'haeseleer" <patrikd at gmail.com>
> Cc: "consensus at lists.omnicommons.org" <consensus at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org" <discuss at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> finance at lists.omnicommons.org" <finance at lists.omnicommons.org>
> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 01:49:32 -0700
> Subject: Re: [omni-discuss] [omni-consensus] Buy the building report back
> thread
> Replying all primarily for those I just subscribed who signed up for the
> mailing list at the end of the meeting - apologies! Your thoughts welcome
> and appreciated ~
>
> Jenny
>
> Help open a people-powered common space in Oakland, California!
> https://omnicommons.org/donate
>
> `~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
> "Technology is the campfire around which we tell our stories."
> -Laurie Anderson
>
> "Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining it."
>  -Hannah Arendt
>
> "To define is to kill. To suggest is to create."
> -Stéphane Mallarmé
> ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Patrik D'haeseleer <patrikd at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible
>> for Automatic Cleanup! (patrikd at gmail.com) Add cleanup rule
>> <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Fkey%3Dg20ZUOvD%252FvClXzblv9BwmIB5%252FdnjS%252F5RbdDht0HxaiU%253D%26token%3DW9ABBhCfZihxNauunxYLFnx9qKf6j4q%252BkU5p0%252BsAHWpyIA0FT4ltL849C4odoTTlyYixagW7h1keQcDpK8iJrk1tQne%252F2aQRxMHmw7J3wYlC0ZqLkODyWHf3IRJRKDMASO%252BG0KanuXw%253D&tc_serial=27071323876&tc_rand=102726429&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD&utm_content=001>
>> | More info
>> <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=27071323876&tc_rand=102726429&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD&utm_content=001>
>>
>> Thanks Laura,
>>
>> One thing I didn't understand about the two-non-profit idea was whether
>> this was just a temporary fix, and eventually the ownership of the building
>> would be with the Omni, or whether the building will be shared in
>> perpetuity between the Omni and Sudo.
>>
>> If this is intended to be a permanent arrangement, I would greatly prefer
>> setting up a new 501(c)3 just for the purpose of receiving the donation,
>> even if that might take a bit longer to arrange.
>>
>> Patrik
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Laura Turiano <scylla at riseup.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Everyone,
>>>
>>> At the delegates meeting we discussed the proposal to buy the building
>>> by creating a tenants in common agreement between Omni Commons and one
>>> member collective that is a 501c3. Please see the proposal and additional
>>> information on the pad (pad.riseup.net/p/omninom) if you didn't see it
>>> before.
>>>
>>> We agreed to update each other at least once a week on the progress of
>>> discussions in the collectives and the development of the contracts. This
>>> is the thread where we will put our updates.
>>>
>>> Everyone is welcome to attend the Finance/fundraising working group
>>> meeting at 6pm on Mondays to get more information or raise any
>>> concerns/questions.
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> consensus mailing list
>>> consensus at lists.omnicommons.org
>>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/consensus
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> consensus mailing list
>> consensus at lists.omnicommons.org
>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/consensus
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Yardena Cohen <yardenack at gmail.com>
> To: Laura Turiano <scylla at riseup.net>
> Cc: "consensus at lists.omnicommons.org" <consensus at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org" <discuss at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> finance at lists.omnicommons.org" <finance at lists.omnicommons.org>
> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 09:05:42 -0700
> Subject: Re: [omni-discuss] [omni-consensus] Buy the building report back
> thread
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Laura Turiano <scylla at riseup.net> wrote:
> > pad.riseup.net/p/omninom
>
> Hi all, I'm really sorry I'm not more involved right now and very much
> appreciate all the work that's being done to make this project work! I
> have some questions about this proposal...
> * Why can't the donor just wait until January? Do they really need
> that 2016 write-off?
> * Would it work to create a new project that's fiscally sponsored by a
> 501c3? (like Sudo, CCL, FNB)
> * Maybe we should get a second legal opinion on ways to make this
> work. Anyone know a good accountant?
>
> I don't know any behind-the-scenes info, but it seems like this would
> fundamentally change how power works at Omni. Right now anybody in the
> community can come to a delegates meeting or this list to voice their
> concerns about use of space, but under this scheme, half the building
> would be off limits. For instance, there's been a proposal to have a
> co-working space in the basement, and some people have been blocking
> consensus for a while because of their concerns. If hypothetically,
> Sudoroom's 50% included the basement, there would be no way for people
> to have any say. I'm not saying I'm for or against Marcus's plan, but
> if there is strong opposition to it, it seems like a good thing that
> people have a chance to talk it through rather than be forced to
> accept it.
>
> I would most like to hear from people who aren't Sudoroom members in
> this conversation, because it seems they would have the most to lose.
> I hope the fiscal urgency - and our desire to be polite to our
> hard-working friends - doesn't overshadow questions about values and
> power. I hope nobody feels pressured to keep quiet during this
> process. That could do a lot of damage to the community.
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mary Ann Tenuto <cezmat at igc.org>
> To: Yardena Cohen <yardenack at gmail.com>
> Cc: "consensus at lists.omnicommons.org" <consensus at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org" <discuss at lists.omnicommons.org>, "
> finance at lists.omnicommons.org" <finance at lists.omnicommons.org>
> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 10:47:36 -0700
> Subject: Re: [omni-discuss] [omni-consensus] Buy the building report back
> thread
> I’m inclined to share some of Patrik’s and Yar’s feelings. I think it’s at
> least worth exploring/researching
> the option of another nonprofit, which I believe was Option D in our
> meeting with Jesse. Since time is
> of the essence, that would need to be an important first part of the
> exploration/research.
>
> Mary Ann
>
> > On Oct 7, 2016, at 9:05 AM, Yardena Cohen <yardenack at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Laura Turiano <scylla at riseup.net> wrote:
> >> pad.riseup.net/p/omninom
> >
> > Hi all, I'm really sorry I'm not more involved right now and very much
> > appreciate all the work that's being done to make this project work! I
> > have some questions about this proposal...
> > * Why can't the donor just wait until January? Do they really need
> > that 2016 write-off?
> > * Would it work to create a new project that's fiscally sponsored by a
> > 501c3? (like Sudo, CCL, FNB)
> > * Maybe we should get a second legal opinion on ways to make this
> > work. Anyone know a good accountant?
> >
> > I don't know any behind-the-scenes info, but it seems like this would
> > fundamentally change how power works at Omni. Right now anybody in the
> > community can come to a delegates meeting or this list to voice their
> > concerns about use of space, but under this scheme, half the building
> > would be off limits. For instance, there's been a proposal to have a
> > co-working space in the basement, and some people have been blocking
> > consensus for a while because of their concerns. If hypothetically,
> > Sudoroom's 50% included the basement, there would be no way for people
> > to have any say. I'm not saying I'm for or against Marcus's plan, but
> > if there is strong opposition to it, it seems like a good thing that
> > people have a chance to talk it through rather than be forced to
> > accept it.
> >
> > I would most like to hear from people who aren't Sudoroom members in
> > this conversation, because it seems they would have the most to lose.
> > I hope the fiscal urgency - and our desire to be polite to our
> > hard-working friends - doesn't overshadow questions about values and
> > power. I hope nobody feels pressured to keep quiet during this
> > process. That could do a lot of damage to the community.
> > _______________________________________________
> > consensus mailing list
> > consensus at lists.omnicommons.org
> > https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/consensus
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org
> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20161008/1ccc6db1/attachment.html>