[sudo-discuss] The Omni is happening - PLEASE REVIEW & DISCUSS!

[Matthew Senate]

notes in-line below:


> I know not everyone will agree with this argument - I know maybe something
> better and more utopian may come by - but are we really going to wait
> forever for the perfect building on top of a bart station? It's not
> perfect, but I'm not down for waiting for utopia. I'm down for hacking one
> together, which is what this is.
>

It is not just Utopia that may come by, there are other available, viable
spaces on the table in different locations. In most ways I see The Omni as
the Utopic option. For instance see mock-ups of 8th and Alice with a slice
of some of these collectives posited:
https://sudoroom.org/wiki/8th_and_Alice it's actually a pretty realistic
fallback option to The Omni (say if the deal went sour for whatever reason)
at the very least. I don't see 8th and Alice as Utopic, but it is actually
closer to a bart station (2 blocks to Lake Merritt station).

More importantly, this isn't an all-or-nothing situation. The Omni
Collective should be prepared to exist some place other than The Omni if
need be, it's fine if The Omni is the priority and primary focus. When we
see a proposal to sign a lease at The Omni, we should have one or two naive
options alongside, if even just for our bearings.


>
> *Shouldn't we be closer to BART / PT (@Phil) ?*
> It's true, the Omni is 8 blocks from MacArthur BART, so, 5 whole blocks
> longer than we currently walk.
>
> ...
>
> Is the time cost of 5 extra blocks mean a 'fraction' of those who now come
> to Sudo will come to the Omni?
>
>
That's not the only way to see this issue. Will Sudoers come to The Omni?
Will they come when it's no longer on their way to/from work? Will they
come if it's an extra few miles bike ride? Will some of our current paying
members be less inclined to contribute regular dues if dropping in means
heading much further from their neighborhood? Will hackers from other local
spaces, long-distance visitors, guests attending events, and the general
public from throughout the bay area make the trip over to sudo room if they
have to consider taking an extra total ~24 minutes of travel time (NB >
OMNI http://goo.gl/maps/iBsBg vs NB > SR http://goo.gl/maps/WV4ks)? The
lesson is both hackerspace-movement-oriented and a local lesson from
Noisebridge--being close to 16th St station encourages lots of traffic,
which I think is more beneficial than the opposite. I don't think this
suggestion is overblown, I think we have to accept it, and accept that 5
blocks does matter, even if it may be worth it ultimately to overcome that
hurdle for other benefits.

The reality here is that moving to The Omni, moving to any new space, will
change the patterns of attendance and usage of sudo room. Whether we like
it or not, for better or for worse. The idea of "forking" sudo room to keep
presences in multiple areas has even been discussed. I think this is a more
practical approach than assuming it will simply work out.


> *Okay.. But can we all actually pay the freaking rent (@Matt)? *
> In short, yes. Unless Sudo backs out. In which case, no.
>

I'm more interested in the following question.


>
> *Can we prove we can pay the rent, with concrete information (@Matt)?* Yes..
> but, I'm actually not sure how to do this on a public listserv? I can say
> the following:
>
> - We presently have a combination of donations and a long-term no-interest
> loan by people in our community that will cover first months' rent and
> deposit (move-in costs).
>

There have been lots of proposals and gestures on the table. Webs of trust
are great, but they aren't perfect. Indeed, it needs to be explicitly laid
out and available to all members of all Omni collectives in order for
genuine analysis to be feasible. The Delegates make a built-in
email/phone-tree btw.


>
> This is in addition to the month-to-month rent commitments made by the
> collectives (and their delegates) themselves. We knew the barrier to entry
> in the form of move-in costs would be a big burden on us. But you know,
> this is what we have been fundraising for, again, for months. This did not
> materialize overnight. It was the result of a lot of hard work.
>

Of course, appreciated work, that you yourself once said would be worth it
regardless of The Omni itself.


>
> - Rental amounts have been discussed by member collectives and delegates
> for months in most cases, at every meeting. These amounts have fluctuated
> to reflect reality of what members can afford. Everyone knows what is at
> stake. This is not just a fairytale dream.. well heck, it is a dream, but a
> dream we have all worked hard to bring to the brink of reality. Does it
> involve a level of trust? Yes - of course. Do I have any doubts that we
> won't pull through? At this point? No.
>

It's nice to hear these things, but ambiguity can be eliminated if the
numbers and plan are simply written down and handed out.


>
> - Am I expected to dump suitcases full of cash onto the conference table
> Wednesday, or.. Anyone who wants more details on this please email me
> offlist or just ring me?
>

Nothing is expected of you or any Omni Collective delegates other than what
you want to put in, and anything you are unwilling or unable to do should
be announced back to the sub-collectives.

I do not like even the idea of participating in a loan, especially from
friends (despite benefits over sycophants like banks). I would personally
be inclined to compromise on taking one, but only knowing precise terms.
Instead, if we started collecting regular rent dues for April and May, we
would simply have the deposit down without the loans. Plus we would have
the commitment of member-collectives.


> *What are the terms of the lease (i.e. the full contract)?*
> Ok - the proposed terms of the lease are finally just now starting to be
> negotiated, in that we are finally starting to actually make
> counterproposals.
>

This isn't what I mean. Yes, some of the terms are up for negotiation, but
what about a contract with the rest of the landlord's terms for our
reference and to have time to get clarity?


> - We can collectively afford our rent as is, at least for the first year.
> I will show you the spreadsheets.
>

If the existing collectives actually are going to contribute at the rate
they've suggested and if they actually pay. Knowing collectives, let's just
be honest, a member group of The Omni Collective may simply back out--sudo
room included--it happens. I'd like to know what lurches are possible to be
left by everyone and whether those constitute risks that are worth taking.
On the other hand, recruiting alternative collectives may become a bigger
priority if we realize that say more than 1 of the Omni Collective member
groups won't be making rent.


> - We will have the first+deposit covered by donations and interest-free
> personal loan.
>

If we agree to this.


>
> - Sudo's part would be $2K/mo.
>

Patrik's comment above is crucial in terms of contextualizing this rate and
the rates for other member collectives. That amount is how much sudo room
gestures it can make as-is.


> *Lease length (2 years, 3 years?) (@Matt):*
> - We can sign a 2 or longer year lease. Up to us. Less than 2 years would
> be a hard sell. More than 2 years is easier.
>

Have the other collectives weight in on this? Can we get a better rate for
greater than 2 years? Does any collective have a reason why a 2-year
timeline is not feasible for them?


> *Landlord in or out? (@Matt):*
> - Up to us entirely: If he can stay there for ~3 months while he moves,
> the rent will be a lot lower for those months. If we don't want him to
> stay, he'll vacate in 30 days, but then we dont get a break during those
> first ~three months.
>

Any chance of making an ask to get it rent-free for a 3 month summer
move-out and simultaneous build-out? (basically we'd just be coming in to
their home for 3 months preparing as they moved, right?)


> *What are the terms of space usage? (@Matt)*
>
> In the current envisioning, Sudo would have to itself:
> - Half the bocce ball court room (giant back area), shared with CCL in the
> other half
> - This area is handicapped accessible, with handicapped-accessible
> bathrooms, & street access.
> - This area has massive, 55ft(?) ceilings with ample space to make add'l
> rooms, lofts, balconies, etc
>

This is precisely what needs to be outlined for everyone to even consider
moving in. I'm very uneasy about vagueness here. One of sudo room's minimum
requirements is relevant
https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Spaces#Precise_Constraints

"Security and privacy
e.g. not a hallway or shared access with other tenants we don't know."

If sudo room is sharing the bocce ball court with CCL, we have to either
consider how we share space, or consider build-out to meet this minimum
requirement. Maybe we can be embedded like /tmp/lab/ and La Paillasse, or
maybe not. We need time to at least talk and decide before agreeing to
move. I don't think that's very extreme. It doesn't have to be perfect,
just a baseline.


> *Who moves where? (@Matt)*
>
> All groups: have use of shared space
>
> We need to go over the floor plan, but point being - we do have a space
> for everyone that people are good with
>

I can't stress enough how much I disagree with this point. We can't build
consensus by saying it's so. It's not bike-shedding to know precisely what
you have access to in exchange for payment, and relative to your partners.
Patrik's message in this regard is a good first step, but this is essential
and unresolved, high priority IMHO.


>
> *Which areas are exclusive (private) or inclusive (common)? (@Matt):*
>
> Shared areas:
> ...
> - big ol cafe to hang out in
>

This is the only space mentioned of concern, the rest make sense. The cafe
is actually private space, unless we have an agreement that it is treated
especially different since it should be treated as common space for various
reasons. Either way, it's important we know this going in.


>
>
*What is the protocol for conflicts and concerns between (or across members
> of) Omni Oakland sub-collectives?*
> To some extent re: how the delegate structure works, see:
> https://sudoroom.org/wiki/The_Omni/2014-04-03#The_Omni_Oakland_Collective
>
> In terms of conflict resolution, that has come up several times and we are
> working on that now - we are looking at the terms Sudo uses that (from what
> I understand) were originally cribbed from Noisebridge. This is an area we
> need to work on - we have been mostly focused on the financials,
> apportioning space and accruing the will to come together and do this.
>
> We also have to work more on our articles of incorporation and
> association. We are working actively on that.
>

I know the details are under-developed, and they will only improve with
time as all things. However, does The Omni Collective think it can come to
resolution on this by June 1st or is this something that should be turned
into an ask for help from the sub-collective memberships?


>
> *Additionally, what rights and responsibilities do members of the public
> (or as I usually say for sudo, which I think applies here, "prospective
> members" of any of our collectives) have? (@Matt)*
>
> In broad terms - my view:
>
> For the entire space, members of the public have a responsibility to abide
> by the accepted rules of the space assented to by all the collectives
> within it, which will be akin to the safe space policy Sudo currently has
> in place @ 2141, and although we haven't voted on it yet, a conflict
> resolution policy in line with what Sudo already has.
>
> Each collective additionally maintains its own subset of rules for itself
> and members of the public in its own localized dedicated area within the
> building, that are not in conflict with rules and values for the whole
> space.
>
> Its conceivable that the public may not be allowed free reign over 100% of
> the space and its materials all the time. For example, I can imagine if
> there are dance rehearsals, Live Space may not always want that public. If
> there is film development going on in a darkroom, its possible they may not
> want the door open randomly. If TIL's letterpress machine is in the
> basement, the public may need to be trained on how to use it before using
> it. The same way that not everyone has access to root on Sudo's Mediawiki
> off the bat - there are conditions. CCL may have machines and rooms that
> not everyone in the public is able to just freely use unless they have the
> requisite knowledge. Stuff like that. Make sense..?
>

I think this needs to be more direct, e.g.:

There are private spaces (defined by map) that only the members of the
respective collectives are entitled to access, under the terms relevant for
their community. For common spaces, either a process exists for reserving
and using the space as private space (up to the reservation's terms), or
all members of the Omni Collective have access. As for "prospective
members" or the general public, essentially at this point there is no
entitlement to common space nor to any private space. Perhaps there are
spaces designation for building maintenance / storage needs, access based
on discretion and need.


> *For existing member collectives can we start collecting rent
> contributions immediately (to be paid forward to rent after any agreed-upon
> contract is signed)? (@Matt)*
>
This has been discussed obviously. We will start this forthwith. Remember
> we have donations and a loan that forms the basis of the barriers to entry.
> We just received paperwork of our CA NP status, so we can open a bank
> account just for the collective. Partly we're also waiting on Land Trust
> fiscal sponsorship which will make things easier on donors. But the money
> is there, with or without that.
>

I'd much rather see an ask to put in a membership deposit by June 1 than
move-in given the wild hairs. Unless there's a reason to believe these
things will come in line to allow for a consensus process to conclude
before May 1.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20140415/17ae904d/attachment.html>