October 17, 2011 in Meeting minutes
October 16th 7pm GA
Discussion on meeting between Occupy Denver and mayor of Denver, initiated by Andrew Bateman, a neutral third party who also offered to moderate. Andrew suggested three individuals as appropriate liaisons. Discussion ensued on A.) whether or not OccDenv wants to even have said meeting and B.) who should speak as representatives for OccDenv.
DABC legal team announced that 2 OccDenv protestors remain detained, and that $650 was needed before 10pm the same night, before bond limits were subject to an increase. Money was donated directly to legal team (not sure how much), and a suggestion was made for GA attendees to reach out for help from their social networks.
First majorly debated issue:
1. Whether or not we should have a meeting with the mayor.
Some expressed concern that the mayor should come to Occupy Denver, instead of the other way around.
Others rejected the idea of even holding a meeting with a mayor who condones police terror upon its residents, as was evidenced in the early morning hours of Friday and at Saturday’s protest.
Others promoted a meeting with a mayor, but clarified that the meeting would not be a negotiation or presentation of demands, but just a space for OccDenv to hear what the mayor has to say and present that information back to the general assembly.
And others expressed favor in a meeting with the mayor and other city councilpersons in order to clarify the needs and desires of OccDenv, as well as get a sense of where our local politicans stand on the issue.
VOTE IN FAVOR OF MEETING WITH MAYOR: 60
VOTE IN OPPOSITION TO MEETING WITH MAYOR: 27
Meets the 2/3 majority consensus, meeting between mayor and Occupy Denver is approved.
Second majorly debated issue:
2. Who would represent the OccDenv movement?
Many expressed concern on a few selected individuals representing the rest of the movement. Nominations taken: (entire body, Becca, Darren, Paula, Tanner, Shaun, Jules, Cat, Al, Paula, Amy, Talinga, Daniel, Law, P.J., Ryan, Pvalos, Chris, Nicole, and Ted).
First part of discussion is devoted to whether or not the entire body should meet with the mayor, instead of selecting a handful of representatives.
Some promoted this idea as the only way to represent the diverse set of needs and wishes.
Others stated that this would be chaotic and should be avoided by electing a handful of representatives (possibly 7-9) who would be able to accurately represent the entire body.
Others stated that a good compromise would be to elect a handful of representatives who would be responsible for speaking with the mayor, but that the entire body is invited to accompany the elected representatives in order to display our power in numbers and also to allow the body to feel invested in the meeting.
Facilitator calls a vote for electing representatives or against electing representatives, and modification can come later.
VOTE IN FAVOR OF ELECTING REPRESENTATIVES: 47
VOTE AGAINST ELECTING REPRESENTATIVES: 4
Meets the 2/3 majority consensus, elected representatives will meet with the mayor.
9:30. Suggested that we table the vote on nominees and the modified proposal of representatives plus the presence of entire body.
VOTE IN FAVOR OF TABLING: 42
VOTE AGAINST TABLING: 8
Meets the 2/3 majority consensus, proposals tabled for 7pm GA on Monday, October 17th.
Next point on agenda is whether or not to file a petition to the court for injunction relief, which is an order from a court that prevents or compels an action. In this case, it would prevent the state and city governments from enforcing the camping ordinance on the basis that the camping is protected speech.
VOTE IN FAVOR OF INDIVIDUAL (ANONYMOUS) FILING INJUNCTION: unanimous!
VOTE TO END MEETING: unanimous!