Changes to Chai's request response
Jake Schumann
If anyone has any input, have at it:
A request for funding (although not in the form of a formal aaplication) in the amount of $300 has been received from Chai Gang on behalf of the working group 101 Monkeys. This amount is greater than 20% of available funds and therefore falls into tier IV of the finance working group charter. The section of the charter which discusses tier IV does not cover whether or not the finance WG is expected to provide a recommendation to the GA, but in the spirit of getting the work done in a working group, the Finance WG has elected to provide a recommendation to the GA on all tier III and IV requests. Another consequence of being a tier IV request is that the funds cannot be granted by the GA on the first occasion of its being proposed. The funds can only be approved at the second meeting of the GA in which the specific request is discussed.
After careful deliberation and much discussion of the request, the Finance Working Group recommends that the General Assembly do not allocate funds, for the following reasons:
1) Opportunity Costs: We feel that there are many other projects which could be completed for a similar cost which are not yet in the stage of development requiring that a formal request for funds be filled out. We believe that it would be rash to consider that such fund requests are not currently in the process of being created or will be created in the near future. Because of this, we believe that we cannot consider this proposal without considering the other possible uses for the same amount of money by other working groups.
2) Logistical Problems: We feel that, among other logistical problems, there is not a clear plan on a distribution of the magazine. As well as this concern, we have reservations about the ability of the working group to raise the remaining $1700 which would be necessary to print the magazine in the quantity indicated to us.
3) Movement Building: We feel that there are disproportionate amounts of materials in this magazine by individuals and that certain ideas expressed in articles are personal opinions and not representative of the Occupy Movement. In summary, we feel that this magazine would have to be more collaborative of an endeavor with less personal subject matter (although we do not discourage personal opinions, we feel that the articles in this magazine are solely of the editorial variety).
4) Charter Process: We have not received a formal written application which we view as necessary for complete transparency and accountability in our working group. Despite this fact, we have felt pressured to review the application and deliver a recommendation to the General Assembly, which we have done in light of the public request made at the General Assembly on 12/15/12.
5) Democratic Process: We feel that this working group has not formed organically and is instead the continuation of a previous project by a working group member. We are also concerned about the use of titles in this working group. For example, instead of members being considered "contributors" or a similar title, there are specific titles. Members of the Finance working group were specifically asked what they would like their title to be. We are further concerned that this project would not be one of Occupy Burlington, but would instead be supported by Occupy Burlington. This is not restricted by our charter, but if this is the case, then precedence needs to be given to Occupy Burlington working groups as opposed to affinity groups.
For these reasons, we, the members of the working group responsible for the raising and distributing of funds, recommend that the General Assembly of Occupy Burlington, Vermont not distribute funds in the sum of $300 to the working group 101 Monkeys. This request will have to be vetted and discussed at two consecutive General Assemblies for the consensus decision to be considered binding. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, you may address them with the following members of the concerned working groups:
Chai - 101 Monkeys
any theoretical cosigners from 101 monkeys
Jake - Finance
Stephen M - Finance
Eric - Finance
Thomas - Finance
Andrew - Finance
Jake Schumann
Volunteer Coordinator
Peace & Justice Center
60 Lake Street, Suite 1C
Burlington, VT 05401
Andrew Sullivan
I think the tone is very good and cordial.
Would it be worthwhile to point out that the amount represents nearly a THIRD of the current general fund? Should we mention that an allocation of its size could potentially put all other working groups at a disadvantage for months, if not for a year? These points could go into the section on Opportunity Costs, but I think the text is fine as it is.
Thanks to all,
Andrew
Eric Davis
I agree with Andrew, we should mention that these funds funds do represent essentially a third of funds available to Occupy.
I was thinking of organizing finances time at the GA little differently, more as a report back from finance than just bringing up Chai's request.
The first person from finance first updates the GA on the disbursements that finance approved in the last week, i.e., auditorium rental for rally and teach-in (this way the GA also knows what projects finance is supporting and may even encourage donations because they see/hear how their contributions are working for the movement).