Donation thought...
Thomas Grace
Emily Reynolds
Sounds good to me. Did finance figure out the $75 for gas for so far for people going to congress? We will livestream back to vt and bring back gear
Andrew Sullivan
Eric Davis
Next, let me address the funding requests one by one...
As I stated at the meeting on Monday, I wholly support helping Fed Up and the feminist wg rent the contois auditorium. This is exactly the kind of event occupy in general and the finance wg should be supporting financially. The planned march will increase our visibility. The teach-in will increase awareness and foster empowerment in the community. And we havent had anywhere near enough teach ins! Furthermore, the subsequent rally at contois might even be a venue where we can set up an info table, get our message out, and maybe even recoup a little of the cash outlay.
Second, I fully support occupy Burlington helping to send occupiers to occupy congress. However, I think it is critically important that we are not just sending people to occupy congress solely at a discount, merely mitigating the price of the trip, but rather supporting people that have a desire to go, but wouldn't be able to get there without, whole or partial fiscal support from occupy Burlington. That kind of support would be awesome.
Much love in solidarity,
Eric
Eric Davis
First off, I thinking passing the hat/box/whatever is a solid idea...
---crossposted thoughts were here----
Emily Reynolds
I can not but I think that would be a great place for us to be. Also maybe have a sheet about what the money goes to such as wonderful events like fed up! that would help bring in some flow
Thomas Grace
I can't make it either. And to be realistic, 6 hours is not ideal lead time on organizing a presence at an event. We should probably add a recurring item to our weekly agenda where we review upcoming events and make a call on attendance.
Eric Davis
Emily Reynolds
I agree with having a table and the logistics are simple. I wish I could but cannot but if eric wants to give I agree with that entirely
Thomas Grace
Sorry if my comment was negative/poorly worded. I agree that a table and someone there would be helpful. We might also touch base with a non-finances wg occupier about helping out with donations if none of us can make it.
Eric Davis
I have some accessibility to printing this afternoon. I will print some for the trip to occupy congress too
Stephen Marshall
Stephen Marshall
11 Hungerford Terrace (out back)
Burlington Vermont 05401
Dispolemic.Blogspot.Com
802-922-1446
Thomas Grace
Eric Davis
Let this be a lesson to us all to remember to include an agenda item to look at the upcoming events and identify events we should have a prescience at...
In Solidarity
Eric
Thomas Grace
Back from Durban, South Africa at 6:30-8:30 at the library?
Which is another event that should have been on our radar. Woops.
Emily Reynolds
Hey finance! So did we reach consensus on sending a van down? So far four of us minimum are heading down and hoping to get another two people. Just wondering so I can finish planning before tomorrow. Also, everyone wish dana the best, she is going through a rough time!
Stephen Marshall
> Hey finance! So did we reach consensus on sending a van down? So far
> four of us minimum are heading down and hoping to get another two
> people. Just wondering so I can finish planning before tomorrow. Also,
> everyone wish dana the best, she is going through a rough time!
Has anyone on finance seen a disbursement request for this trip? (I sent
out the file of the form yesterday)
--
This reply email has been edited to reduce volume and to simplify
reading it.
Eric Davis
Emily Reynolds
Do I need to fill it out? Could you send it to me?
Stephen Marshall
> Do I need to fill it out?
Yes. If you need help, call someone on the finance WG.
Could you send it to me?
I think Eric sent it to you today, I sent it out to everyone yesterday.
Stephen Marshall
>
The fact that you are asking this question makes me worried you weren't
following the discussion yesterday about the importance of having a plan
and submitting a hardcopy of the form. I stated quite emphatically that
I would not approve a request until the form was submitted. What else
about that conversation did you not get? Of course you can't know, but I
can worry. Please review the emails so you are clear about what we expect.
Together with the form please detail your plan and how you expect to
meet the various costs of the trip. Remember, the protocol anticipates
requests from working groups, and the full working group is expected to
sign for this level of funding. Please go through the form thoroughly
and give thoughtful responses because approval could be delayed further
if answers are not complete.
Eric Davis
Stephen Marshall
> Please, let's try to keep the conversation constructive...
Eric, You're right of course, and I have been feeling remorse for my
sharp tone.
To state my feelings otherwise, I want this trip to happen and to get
funding. I'm impatient to get through the formality, and impatient that
Emily seemed to not understand something that we have been stating
repeatedly.
Emily - I am sorry for my sharp tone. Have you presented an application
to anyone yet? We do not need to have a meeting - just that some one on
the finance WG can report what you have written.
Emily Reynolds
Emily Reynolds
I sent it yesterday. Did you receive it? Trust me I understand the tone. I have been using it a lot because plans are hard to get together for time sensitive actions unfortunately. It is a good time for us to all learn how to organize quickly
On Jan 13, 2012 11:22 AM, "Stephen Marshall" <visi...@burlingtontelecom.net> wrote:
>
M?
Emily Reynolds
Did you all receive this? I can send it again?
Eric Davis
Thomas Grace
Eric Davis
Emily Reynolds
So far we have two definites for our working group. It will not take $75 unless we convince more people we just want some so we can convince. So far I bought two megabus tickets. I will hand in the reciepts to you and give some money back if we do not use it. We are also heading with ten people from nh
Emily Reynolds
We also got 500 from wall street! So I probably will be able to give it all back.
Thomas Grace
A $500 contribution from OWS to mitigate travel costs? Is this correct?
Thomas Grace
Awesome in fact. Does that change the needs of your WG as far as OBVT is concerned?
Eric Davis
Emily Reynolds
Yes. For the second part of our trip. Our group from nh got 500 so dylan and I thus only need enough for our bus to boston and back. so all of food housing and gas from boston is paid for. I am just letting finance know that we did finance the majority of the trip.
Thomas Grace
Emily Reynolds
No idea ha. I will find out. Yes, interoccupy is super important. We now have really super ties in nyc, boston, nh and dc. Ties that anyone can get housing and food
Thomas Grace
Emily Reynolds
We are livestreaming in from dc on Tuesday. If someone gets me like 20 pamphlets on rupert stuff tomorrow I will bring them down to boston and dc. I also have a list of media contacts and believe I have an international contact sheet I can give interoccupy contacts.
Stephen Marshall
> No idea ha. I will find out. Yes, interoccupy is super important. We now
> have really super ties in nyc, boston, nh and dc. Ties that anyone can
> get housing and food
>
> On Jan 13, 2012 5:44 PM, "Eric Davis" <ericpa...@gmail.com
>
> Awesome!!! Look at the community building! NH and VT, OWS and VT!
>
> So, I take it that this is a reimbursement (not disbursement)
> request for up to $75
>
> I jazz hands this request!
>
> Do you know who (or what working group) at OWS, so I can give them a
> little shout out!?
>
> -Eric
>
It's good you got the extra money, I'm amazed. What was their process
for granting the money? So the point of financing now is to get you to
Boston?
I don't feel we need a promise that the money will be reimbursed, it's
great you want to replace what you spend and return what you can, and
we'll accept it, but we don't make reimbursement for spent funds a
requirement. Hopefully you and others will see the finance working group
as a responsible trustee and will also bring your externally raised
funds to us for safekeeping. That is what we are organized to do.
Besides that, We still need a print out, and real, physical signatures
on the disbursement form, and isn't there a working group behind you,
that can sign the request? (If you don't have a printer, come to my
house, I will print it for you) Can't you hook up with the outreach
group to sponsor you? If this isn't important, why did we write it into
our protocol? Will other members of the finance group please chime in on
this? Why do I feel like I'm fighting for adherence to procedures we all
agreed to, by myself?
I am going to abstain from voting so Emily can get funds, but I am very
unhappy that I am the only person who is putting weight on the formal
procedure. I want this trip to happen, but not with the message that if
you don't understand it and don't follow procedure, you can get money
without following procedure by letting the clock run out.
Please help me because I am not feeling good about my role in this.
Emily Reynolds
I do not have a printer. I am sorry I did not know. I am meeting thomas tomorrow and can sign then if he could bring the form. I think I would like to help make the process easier for people who are not part of finance. I would be happy to sign this form. Would you bring this form tomorrow thomas and we can exchange forms?
On 1/13/2012 5:47 PM, Emily Reynolds wrote:
No idea ha. I will find out. Yes, interoccupy is super important. We now
have really super ties in nyc, boston, nh and dc. Ties that anyone can
get housing and food
On Jan 13, 2012 5:44 PM, "Eric Davis" <ericpa...@gmail.com
<mailto:ericpauldavis@gmail.com>> wrote:
Awesome!!! Look at the community building! NH and VT, OWS and VT!
So, I take it that this is a reimbursement (not disbursement)
request for up to $75
I jazz hands this request!
Do you know who (or what working group) at OWS, so I can give them a
little shout out!?
-Eric
Andrew Sullivan
Thank you for your commitment, activism, patience, and skill throughout the process of organizing this important trip to D.C. As far as I am concerned, several emails are as good as a handshake and they are, in themselves, signed and dated documents. You have received many messages of support from multiple participants in the Finance WG from the start. This process should take three or four emails, rather than three or four days. Moreover, your case is especially important and urgent. I hope the process can be streamlined for urgent requests that have general and firm support from everyone involved.
Thanks again, and OCCUPY D.C.
Andrew
Thomas Grace
Eric Davis
Stephen Marshall
discussion of Inter-Occupy. We never really reviewed the consequences of
our discussions leading up to the Inter-Occupy disbursement, but given
the heat it generated, I think a review would be worthwhile. Therefore I
am sending along some responses I had at the time, but didn't actually
send at the time, just to see if there are any points that need to be
reviewed.
I think the discussion parses out to a question of how best to build the
movement, and there are two strategies - empowerment through
disbursement, and empowerment through respect for process. I would ask
you simply, How do these arguments affect us going forward? Is there
conflict, or simply friction, between these approaches? Is the best
resolution to split the difference, or can both approaches be
implemented simultaneously?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 14, 2012
I'm feeling like a stick in the mud. I'm trying to understand why.
On 1/13/2012 9:35 PM, Thomas Grace wrote:
> All,
>
> Do we need a signed physical copy? Please keep in mind I worked at a
> bank for 5 years, and I came away with an antipathy to the suffocating
> bureaucracy which can build up around issues of money.
Thomas, this explains your feelings but feels to me not a reason to act
differently.
> We've been having
> an ongoing conversation with Emily here online and in person for days
> now. That fact combined with the electronic copy be sufficient for our
> purposes. The charter says a form 'in writing' - but it's not specified
> whether it's ink or bits.
I am willing to accept an electronic version of the application, to be
backed up by a printed version later. A series of emails does not a
record make, and does not transparency make.
> And unless it's specified explicitly I believe
> we should err on the side of fewer barriers/restrictions than more.
I agree that in the absence of other factors, we should make this
easier, not more difficult. I have been feeling about this consideration
all week. I have been wondering whether we should dispense with the
application in this case.
Every time I come up against this question, a voice inside of me asks
"What about the other groups and requests? What about fairness?". And
"What about transparency?" and "Who do you think you are to put aside
procedure we agreed to?". Didn't we create tiers to adjust the rigors to
the amount of money being considered? "What about documentation?". "What
about the distribution of power?" Don't we become more powerful when we
assume the right to decide when procedure will be followed?
The barrier of an application, even of a paper copy, is a very small
one, unless you don't understand your responsibility and circle around
it for days and days. I reject categorically that it constitutes a major
barrier. "We", meaning the Finance WG and our applicant, have been in
agreement with each other for days about the mission, ever since we got
across the first minor hurdle of getting a "plan", which was only
delayed because Emily didn't respond with a plan until we reminded her.
But even though I had said I would not approve funds until we had an
application, on Monday, we didn't actually see one until yesterday
(Friday; When at first it didn't happen, I sent out the file on
Wednesday). Was it the necessity of filling out the form which prevented
it from being filled out? The only barrier to completing this process
expeditiously was the applicant's failure to read our emails and heed
their meaning.
>
> In response to a few points you brought up Stephen, the first thing I
> want to encourage everyone to think about is that our responsibility as
> the finances wg is to openly facilitate the collection of funds, and the
> distribution of those funds towards efforts that build our movement. We
> have two documents, the charter and the disbursement form, which are
> meant to empower us in making our decisions.
"Empowerment" is an interesting concept here. The document "empowers" us
in that it puts in front of us the information we think we need to make
a sound, transparent decision. Are you not sure that having the form
duly expressed is part of the empowerment we need? I must refer you back
to the question of power - would you have the question of approval rest
in our subjective preferences, or in the process we use to make those
decisions? We are, I believe, empowered by the trust put in us, and that
trust is validated by our reasonable fidelity to protocol. Assuming the
right to abandon protocol converts authority into power. Be careful to
not argue for privilege.
> I'm not sure if my earlier
> email was just lost in the shuffle,
I re-read the sections of the charter you sent out, but wasn't sure what
meaning you were trying to convey.
> but to sum it up my understanding of
> our decision making authority is that it derives solely and exclusively
> from those two documents. The 'formal procedures' we operate by are the
> charter and the disbursement form, not the standards, which I'll concede
> might be more rigorous - or oppressive, depending on one's perspective -
> than those used by other organizations.
Having a form means that we expect the same thing from every different
applicant, and that our deliberations cover the same essential criteria.
(We have previously allowed groups to fill out the form retroactively,
because we were just getting started and felt that our being unprepared
should not be a barrier to them.) Not insisting on the form being filled
out throws the decision back onto the grounds of subjectivity, which are
anathema to democracy, and conduce to the accumulation of privilege.
>
> In going back to our charter, we never explicitly ruled out
> disbursements to individuals. Rather, it said that *priority* would be
> given to funds requests from the WG's, and whether a disbursement would
> advance a WG's strategy. In this case I would say we've learned a lot in
> this discussion, but we can't rule out Emily's request based on the fact
> that it the Interoccupy WG isn't as far along logistically compared to
> other WG's. Every working group had its start somewhere. I believe its
> worth our effort to support this one given that intra-occupy organizing
> will be key to the long term success of many of our actions in the future.
I Guess I did expect there to a working group, and I accept your point
that it isn't required, but Why wasn't more effort made to organize one?
As you say, the funds being requested by an individual is not
prohibited, but the foundation of a working group is one of the
strategies we (I speak of my intent when I wrote it and what I thought
we were agreeing to), use to justify disbursements.
Two factors entered my mind when I wrote it: a working group has more
people in it, and therefor the disbursement supports the work and will
of more people; and, a working group is more diverse and more competent
in making decisions about how money should be used than one person is.
People (as we are in this moment) will challenge each other to think
through the plans and expectations.
Although we can support an individual, having a working group or at
least a few people who gathered and discussed the plans and were willing
to say "This is our plan", would have helped make a better, clearer,
plan. We did not lack for time in this process, we lacked a recipient
who understood her responsibility, and we lacked a uniform voice
expressing the need to have and articulate a plan. Except that no one
had a copy of the form to give to Emily on Monday, Emily could have
gotten some people together, hammered out a plan, and had it ready mid-week.
>
> I hope I'm not beating a dead horse here but my thoughts on the matter
> can be boiled down to this:
>
> Please keep in mind our authority is rightly limited by the charter
> which we brought to the GA.
This I agree to.
> Changes to our process
Have I implied changes?
> require a proposed
> modification to be consented upon by the Finances WG and be brought to
> the GA. We need to exercise self-restraint and hew as closely as
> possible to the methods which both we and the GA have consented upon.
Are you suggesting that my insistence on getting the paperwork done is a
deviation from those norms?
> Otherwise, we're overstepping our authority in the midst of a movement
> rightly based an a refutation of oppressive authority.
I have wondered about my role in this process. I think I have been
carrying the voice of the procedural curmudgeon because no one else was,
and someone had to, and that you have played the roles of liberators,
because you could, and someone had to. Otherwise, this language treads
dangerously close to breaking our trust. I am quite frightened by it. My
conscious role has been to uphold transparency, consistency and
objectivity in our process. If I have done so in a way to offend anyone,
and I am asked, I will withdraw from the working group.
>
> Another point worth mentioning. We're a handful of occupiers making a
> decision on $75 which can get help our comrades in struggle represent us
> at a national Occupy event. We're not a commercial banking committee
> deciding on a $175,000 investment. Let's try to keep a realistic
> perspective here.
They are tiny amounts of money. How does this change our
responsibilities? Sense of humor? Sure, say that when we have spent down
the $1000 and people say "What did we get for it?". I want documents to
show I have been responsible.
>
> Solidarity,
> Thomas
>
>
Truly.
Stephen Marshall
11 Hungerford Terrace (out back)
Burlington Vermont 05401
Dispolemic.Blogspot.Com
802-922-1446
---------------------------------------------------------
On 1/13/2012 11:29 PM, Eric Davis wrote:
> I really want to echo everything that Thomas said and I think he said
> it quite well.
>
> Stephen you seemed to raise two concerns, sponsorship and the desire
> for
> a signed paper copy. On the sponsorship issue, It was my understanding
> that InterOccupy was a WG? However, as Thomas pointed out our charter
> doesn't necessarily exclude funds to individuals.
> I have addressed this in my reply to Thomas. please refer to it.
>
> On the issue of the need for a signed paper copy, I thought we had
> conversations about this previously that a form with a physical
> signature was not necessarily required, while it may be preferred.
> the online form that Anna came up with specifically for instances like
> this so finance could receive requests that are time sensitive. It is
> extremely common to e-sign things these days. I would say that the
> most
> important documents I sign are e-signed insurance, student loans,
> taxes,
> etc. To me Emily's e-mails and Name on the form with a note in the
> signature line, satisfies that for me.
Since this seems to be the general sentiment, I am willing to let go on
this point. However, a series of emails does not documentation make. The
recipient of funding, for all the reasons I put in my response to
Thomas, must provide all of the information requested on the form. In
the interest of timeliness, we can do some of this retroactively, such
as printing and signing the form in ink.
>
> In terms of merit, we are supposed to be funding proposals that
> further
> the aims of the WG and build the movement and this request certainly
> aims to do that by going to a national protest and GA and representing
> VT. Our charter says that we will prefer requests in which the WG
> raises
> their own funds. This request meets that criteria, we are being asked
> to
> support transportation for part of the trip, the rest has been taken
> care of. We also say that we will give preference to requests that can
> replace the money disbursed. This request also meets that criteria,
> through funds raised externally, building connection to other
> occupiers,
> and raising the profile of Occupy VT. So, on the merits this seems
> like
> something we should most certainly be funding.
On its merits, this request is outstanding. My reservations have been
based on my desire to see these merits explained (before which I wasn't
sure), and articulated in the application.
>
> I'd also like to briefly touch on the danger of creating excess
> bureaucracy. I know I've told this story before when we were working
> on
> the charter. For small expenses at work, I often chooses to pay with
> my
> own money, while thes are things that my employer is responsible for
> covering, the reimbursement process is so time consuming that it just
> makes more sense for me to pay the cash myself rather than spend the
> time
> recouping it because that would be a bigger net loss. That is not how
> it
> is supposed to work and I don't want our process to be like that
> which I
> think is possible given the size of our group. So I agree
> wholeheartedly
> with Thomas when he says, "And unless its specified explicitly I
> believe
> we should err on the side of fewer barriers/restrictions than more."
Please see my remarks in my reply to Thomas. Also,
I wanted the application so we could quickly and transparently approve
this. The fact that it was such an ordeal must be attributed to the
applicant, not to us or to me, except that you guys were not repeating
my message "Fill out the application". The next time, let the applicant
be told "Get a member of the working group to help you fill it out." If
I had been asked, it would have been ready on Wednesday. Printed and
signed. Ask for help. This is not a burdensome form. The hardest part is
understanding your plan, and writing it down!
>
> From my point of view this has been a positive learning experience,
> though challenging. This is a evolving process and we are creating it
> organically. Discussion is good.
>
> Emily, Thanks for bearing with us on this one...
>
> Though I'm still not clear if you are looking for a disbursement
> (funds
> pre-travel) or a reimbursement (funds post-travel). In the past
> finance,
> by precedent only not mandated on the charter has preferred
> reimbursement so that the costs of the action/travel/expense is known.
>
> Cheers,
> Eric
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Thomas Grace
> <thomas...@lsc.vsc.edu
> <clifford...@gmail.com <mailto:clifford...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> I do not have a printer. I am sorry I did not know. I am
> meeting thomas tomorrow and can sign then if he could bring
> the form. I think I would like to help make the process
> easier for people who are not part of finance. I would be
> happy to sign this form. Would you bring this form tomorrow
> thomas and we can exchange forms?
>
> On Jan 13, 2012 7:21 PM, "Stephen Marshall"
> <visi...@burlingtontelecom.net
> <mailto:visi...@burlingtontelecom.net>> wrote:
>
> On 1/13/2012 5:47 PM, Emily Reynolds wrote:
>
> No idea ha. I will find out. Yes, interoccupy is
> super important. We now
> have really super ties in nyc, boston, nh and dc.
> Ties that anyone can
> get housing and food
>
> On Jan 13, 2012 5:44 PM, "Eric Davis"
> <ericpa...@gmail.com
> <mailto:ericpa...@gmail.com>
> <mailto:ericpauldavis@gmail.__com