Category: Passed Resolutions

Occupy Boston Announces New General Assembly Schedule

May 15th, 2012 · mhacker · #bostonGA, Events, General Assembly, News and Announcements, Passed Resolutions No comments

The following proposal was passed by the General Assembly of Occupy Boston on May 15, 2012:

General Assemblies will no longer occur on Thursdays, effective immediately. The next General Assembly is scheduled for Saturday, May 19th, and will continue to be held at the previously scheduled time on Tuesdays and Saturdays. Groups and individuals within Occupy Boston are strongly encouraged to be innovative in creating space for the community to come together during the time now free on Thursdays.

The General Assembly agrees to fund May First Coalition, InReach WG and approves changes in GA location, process and a special presentation

April 27th, 2012 · JAlvarez · General Assembly, News and Announcements, Passed Resolutions No comments

The following proposals were passed by Occupy Boston’s General Assembly on April 26, 2012:

That 90 minutes of General Assembly time on Saturday, May 12, 2012, should be used for a presentation to develop a common level of knowledge about the current financial crisis and what are the practical alternatives. The presenters will be Gary Epstein, Professor of Economics at UMass Amherst, and Jim Campen, Professor of Economics at UMass Boston.

A $200 donation for the May First Coalition.

OJP proposes moving the Occupy Boston General Assembly scheduled for May 5 to the Southwest Corridor Park, location of the Wake Up the Earth Festival. Aria will get an exact location to Facilitators and as many email lists as possible within the next two days. If WUTE is rescheduled to May 6 because of rain–pending approval by SAA–SAA will move to WUTE. GA will discuss details and a topic during the regular meetings between now and May 5.

The InReach Working Group proposes to purchase a 1-inch button machine with parts for 2,000 buttons ($632) and reimburse members of InReach for expenses from the Open House ($64.27). The $397.71 that is left from the Info Tent proposal will go to this purchase, meaning an additional sum of $298.56 will be allocated. The machine will be the 1-inch button maker purchased in November by Bil Lewis along with remaining parts from the 2000 purchased at that time.

To create a “consent bucket,” which is a list of proposals that can be considered to address subjects around which a broad consensus can be reached. Proposals would be grouped together in a bucket or package. Initially all new proposals would be introduced as items in the “consent bucket.” There would be no discussion about the proposals themselves beyond clarifying questions. If any member felt that any proposal or proposals required discussion, it would be pulled out of the “bucket” and considered as part of the regular proposal process. Members of the assembly should feel comfortable in expressing reservations about any part of the “consent bucket” and request assistance from fellow members if necessary. The remaining items in the “consent bucket” would be adopted by unanimous vote. The “consent bucket” would be considered after announcements and before the agenda. If adopted this proposal will be implemented immediately.

General Assembly Endorses Rally for Union of Adjunct Faculty

April 26th, 2012 · JAlvarez · General Assembly, Passed Resolutions No comments

The following proposal was passed by Occupy Boston’s General Assembly on April 24, 2012:

Occupy Boston endorses the May 2, 2012, Rally for the Union Of Adjunct Faculty (UAF/UAW) at UMass Lowell at Coburn Hall Lawn from 11:30AM to 12:30PM.

General Assembly Supports an Alternative Decision Making Process – Consensus

April 22nd, 2012 · gmurphy · General Assembly, Passed Resolutions No comments

The following proposal passed General Assembly, On April 21, 2012.

Need: The current GA process is centered around written proposals. This conflates “decisions to be made” with “solutions to issues” – the only way to raise an issue in the GA is to have a solution ready in proposal form. Furthermore, the requirement of written proposals has a potential for discrimination along class, level of education, and native-speaker lines. To be more inclusive and to facilitate better decision making, a new process is necessary.

Proposal: A new process for decision making should be created. This process would exist in parallel with the current process – that is, this would be a new process that would exist in addition to the old process, which would still exist. It would be up to the proposer to decide whether to use the new process or the old. The process follows:

A Proposer will raise an issue requiring a decision to be made. They will say why they felt a decision needed to be made, and offer a solution if they have one
The process will then enter a “understanding” round in the full assembly. People will offer points of information and clarifying questions to understand the issue at hand.
The assembly will then break into facilitated small group discussions to hash out what the issue is and what possible solutions could be. Notes would be taken. Groups will try to come to consensus – small groups can come up with new ideas and solutions and amend them as they go.
When the break-out groups return to the full assembly, they’ll report back. Every significant thread of discussion should be reported to the GA, with an aim to making sure all serious concerns are heard so they can be resolved.
Discussion would continue in the full assembly. If at this point consensus is emerging the facilitator will reflect it and check if we’re ready to move to consensus.

If it comes time to check for consensus, consensus process would proceed like this:

Every member of the assembly would register via hand signals one of three options: voicing for, standing aside, or voicing against. A voice FOR means that you support the consensus . A stand-aside means that you have concerns that prevent you from supporting the consensus, but these concerns are not significant enough to make you want to stop consensus from proceeding. A voice against means you have serious concerns and would not be willing to let the consensus.

If there are no voices against and at least one voice in favor, the GA has consensus. If not, we can attempt to resolve concerns to try to achieve consensus, or back up and return to discussing the original point of discussion, either in small groups again or in the full assembly; additionally, if it seems to be the sense of the GA, we can table the discussion entirely.

Coming to consensus does not necessarily mean that discussion ceases. Some issues will require several different decisions be made. Some discussions will be resolved quickly in one session; other discussions will take place over multiple sessions.

OB Joins With National Lawyers Guild in Congratulating the Legal Working Group

April 20th, 2012 · mhacker · General Assembly, News and Announcements, Passed Resolutions No comments

The following proposal, brought by Kendra Moyer on her own behalf and on that of Urszula Mazny-Latos, was passed by the General Assembly of Occupy Boston on April 19, 2012:

The National Lawyers Guild Annual Guild Gala is a fundraiser that brings in a large portion of their annual budget. This year the NLG is honoring the Occupy Boston Legal Working Group and the NLG Mass Defense Committee with the Legal Worker Award. As part of their fundraiser they sell ads in their gala program book that are messages to the honorees. I am proposing that Occupy Boston send a message of congratulations on a quarter page of the program for a donation of $250.00. The donation goes to the work that NLG does fighting for civil rights and social justice, including the defense fund. I am working for NLG at a 15% commission for funds raised. Any amount raised by me for the NLG Annual Guild Gala fundraiser will be returned to the Occupy Boston General Fund.