It's not a crime to sleep Here's some info on California laws and how they are selectively used against the homeless

+1 on "guidebook" rather than "rule" book

http://www.berkeleycopwatch.org/resources/homelessrights.pdf

This is a new real law in CA ~ It outlines our human rights ~ homeless or housed

+++++++
AB-5 Homelessness. (2013-2014)

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVotesClient.xhtml 53.2. (a) The existence of homelessness requires that fundamental rights that are amply protected in the home and in private places be extended to the public domain to ensure the equal rights of all Californians, HOMELESS and HOUSED.

(c) “Harassment” means a knowing and willful course of conduct by law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or a BID agent directed at a specific person that a reasonable person would consider as seriously alarming, seriously annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously terrorizing a person.
(d) “Homeless persons” or “homeless people” means those individuals or families who lack or are perceived to lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence, or who have a primary nighttime residence in a shelter, on the street, in a vehicle, in an enclosure or structure that is not authorized or fit for human habitation. “Homeless” also means a person whose only residence is a residential hotel or who is residing anywhere without tenancy rights, and families with children staying in a residential hotel whether or not they have tenancy rights.
(e) “Public space” means any property that is owned by any state or local government entity or upon which there is an easement for public use and that is held open to the public, including, but not limited to, plazas, courtyards, parking lots, sidewalks, public transportation, public buildings and parks. “Public space” does not include a private business establishment.
(f) “Rest” means the state of not moving, holding certain postures that include, but are not limited to, sitting, standing, leaning, kneeling, squatting, sleeping, or lying.
(g) “Soliciting donations” means asking for food, water, or money, which includes panhandling.

++++++++

From this law it seems our basic human rights and legal and civil protections,
(1) The right to move freely in public spaces without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, harassment or arrest by law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or BID agents because he or she is homeless.
(2) The right to rest in a public space without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, harassment, or arrest by law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or BID agents, as long as that rest does not maliciously or substantially obstruct a passageway.
(3) The right to eat, share, accept, or give food or water in public spaces in the same manner as any other person without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, harassment, or arrest by law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or BID agents

(6) The right to rest in a public space, without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, harassment, or arrest by law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or BID agents,
(8) The right to pray, meditate, or practice religion in public spaces in the same manner as any other person, without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, harassment, or arrest by law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or BID agents

(10) The right to occupy a motor vehicle, as defined in Section 415 of the Vehicle Code, or recreational vehicle, as defined in Section 18010 of the Health and Safety Code, either to rest, sleep, or use for the purposes of shelter, provided that the vehicle is legally parked on public property, without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, harassment, or arrest from law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or BID agents.

(b) Any person or organization offering food or water in a public space shall not be subject to criminal or civil sanctions, arrest, or harassment by law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or BID agents.

53.5. (a) To ensure equitable and cost-effective enforcement of the Homeless Person’s Bill of Rights and Fairness Act (Ch.____, Stats. 2013), every local law enforcement agency shall annually compile and review the number of citations, arrests, and other enforcement activities made pursuant to laws prohibiting the following:
(1) Obstructing a sidewalk, whether by a person or personal property.
(2) Loitering.
(3) Sitting.
(4) Lying down.
(5) Camping.
(6) Public lodging, including the prohibition specified in subdivision (e) of Section 647 of the Penal Code.
(7) Sleeping in a public place.
(8) Soliciting donations.
(9) Soliciting donations at certain restricted locations, including citing people for panhandling under Section 22520.5 of the Vehicle Code.
(10) Bathing in public places.
(11) Sharing or receiving food.
(12) Inhabiting or sleeping in a vehicle.
(13) Violating public park closure laws.
(14) Crossing streets or highways at particular locations,

There's a curfew ordinance for minors under Title 9 PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND WELFARE. It's from 10-6, with an exception
8. Exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States or California Constitution, such as the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, and the right of assembly;

http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/

I'll make an effort to reach out to Occupy Police.
It is best to let the city work with the city, if possible.
I negotiated a fair agreement between Occupy Savannah and the city.
The tensions are not the same as they used to be, though do not mistake that for the summer of love either.
There is a lot to a festival and that is basically what this is.
The city workers including the officers that will be stuck watching us are part of the 99% They are working joes. The clerks, the sanitation department, They may have a city job ( if they are lucky and it has not been privatized into a nightmare) but they are making the debt payments like everyone else.

Going and taking to the chief getting a feel before hand is a good idea. And Ofc heads up the ACLU.
But you do not want to go with a fuzzy idea of what is planned, however, a made in stone plan is also a bad footing too. :)

know your rights “guild” or “guide”? Probably the best way to do this would be to go to the experts as Julia suggested (Occupy Police) and NLG, ACLU, NLCHP, etc. There may already be a California guide that we can simply pass along.

Sacramento has a chapter of the ACLU http://www.aclusac.org
Someone wanna step up and reach out and see if we can get some Know Your a Rights at a Protest booklets and relevant info on Sacramento’s protections and restrictions regarding our First Amendment Rights to Free Speech and Peaceful Assembly

Tricia, can you e-mail LInda and/or Gandalf to find someone in Sacramento to do that? They may already have a contact—if not, having the host Occupy contact them still seems to make sense to me. If not, I can do it—going back to work now, and do not want to lose this.

We are planning a gathering. Scouts will be in the area in June to finalize the location. You do not need a permit to have a gathering.

I will write to Linda and Gandalf and link this conversation .
Thanks Lisa!!

In Sac, we're attempting to get permission/permits for our sleeping place and the parks where we'll have events. The reason for this is we're going to have agendas for each day, with skillshares, musicians, speakers, workshops--many of the presenters will have come from quite a long way, and it would be a shame if we had to cancel their presentations because we were focused on the cops, who, trust me, would definitely arrest us. We had many, many "sleep" protests in Sac, and cops always arrested everyone who wouldn't leave in the wee hours of the morning.

That being said, we should definitely have some flexibility in our schedule for spontaneous "actions" we might decide to do. Marches, occupations, other fun stuff : - ),even sleep protests if some folks want to do that. But for people who don't want to risk arrest, we want to have safe sleeping places.

LIsa, you are thinking like me—but be wary of over scheduling the day (as you mention in your second comment). One thing that I wanted to do in Kalamazoo—someone from Gainesville even stepped up to cofacilitate (nervously, as it would have been new to him) at lunch—but did not happen was to have a session for Occupys to simply catch up on what is going on, share tips, etc.—an old-fashioned coffee klatch, if you will.

Totally agree on having a variety of levels of safety / From permitted safe spaces to direct actons.

Maybe calling finding out what your up to can be called A Mega-Report Back - will clarify what we are looking for Report Backs on autonomous actions

We always have to balance pick and choose decide fine lines, where the consequences aren't always foreseeable. Law is the ideal area for this, along with science. They both use the same evidential method, Applied in the person's mind or in what the person perceives. That's what hegemonic things do. After they take over they then are challenged to govern properly. Regarding our Gathering's security, I think we will secure ourselves and comrades and groups in true anarchist fashion, the germ of law and order. And Allstreet's comment makes me think we will indeed have a secure place with good access to the venues.

Lisa, that is great—no need to reinvent the wheel. Do they have hand-outs, or materials that we can include in the guru? Will we talk to them about having observers at any (or at least major) actions?

Tricia, sadly, AB 5 which you cite above -- the Homeless Persons' Bill of Rights -- died in committee last year. Homeless activists, Occupy Sac and allies are petitioning, protesting and doing street theater to bring attention to this issue and get local and state lawmakers to (re)introduce it.

If not resolved by then, and realizing that the legislature is out of session, AB 5 might a focus for NatGat.

Here's the printable Know Your Rights Pamplhet from the ACLU of Southern California http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/direct/113839080?extension=pdf&ft=1399209843&lt=1399213453&source=embed&uahk=+Byh6lpybQ5J04wGps3vOZPmBO8

Perhaps this is our first legal discussion internal to NATGAT14. The way Tricia first posed the discussion and the way Justin made a proposal aren't clear as to what we are voting on. After this closes let's start a new legal discussion that is more to the point of the specific need for there to be a "risking arrest" element to our plans.

In Philly we came out strong with the People's Permit.

How about we send this letter to Governor Brown. It' might be an opportunity to put them on notice and make protecting the right to assemble one of the themes of the gathering.

LETTER OF INTENT TO OCCUPY

Dear Governor Brown,

We, the People intend to occupy public spaces in Sacramento, California July 31 until Aug 3rd 2014. Citizens from across the nation, from New Jersey to San Diego and Florida to Oregon will peacefully gather, as is our *human right and **civil right, in public spaces to seek redress of our grievances and may not be unreasonably restricted by the federal or state government.

Thank you for your kind attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
The Occupy National Gathering Organizing Group

*The UN Declaration on Human Rights
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 20.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
**First Amendment
Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

Speaking to Governor Brown is a good idea. He allowed anti-nuclear protesters to sit-in, in his office, during his first term. Our letters to him could establish our legal position. We would know what it is, Our civil-disobediance could be coordinated. He might find it advantageous to not oppose an international radical forum

Tricia is on the right track. However our "right" to sleep over the same way rich people do, may not be able to be decided by lawyers who don't "work for us". The Lawyer's Guild is good. Yet it doesn't "work for us". it advises on current law. We need a lawyer to work for us to create new law. We shouldn't assume that our civil rights are limited by current interpretations of law. We need to devise our civil-disobediance so that at each step, "our" lawyer is on the front line, with our own security people between the lawyer and the police.

There are some states (4) that have homeless bills of rights; others are working on them. Will post details when I have more time.

I cannot contact Occupy Police. The JCO & Occupy Police are apparently still in a tiff as I still cannot message nor comment on their page nor twitter. It has been such since
http://oolith.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/joe-jones-manifesto-will-not-be-removed/

Maybe someone else can reach out to them.

I did message and invite https://www.facebook.com/Jon.McLane.for.Tucson
He is very active in the homeless arena

A few random thoughts; First, AB 5, noted above, died in the California Legislature. It never became law. Second, whether to apply for permits depends on what we want out of the National Gathering. If it's to make a statement, don't get the permits and be ready to be arrested. If it's to evaluate where Occupy has been and plan for the future, I'd suggest complying with all local regulations, including permits, so we can focus on those goals. Third, thank you to Tricia for your insightful comments.

I agree with @les 's abstain , enough so I am thinking to abstain, but at the very least a letter to the Gov should be written and presented.

You don't have to "abstain" if you mean "no, we can do better" we'll just keep adding new proposals. I can speed up the closing date on this one so we can make a new draft before the conference call on Wednesday

I think we should agree, but, not that we couldn't change it if needed. We might find someone close to the Governor who'd give us advice as to how to word it. Yet I think we should agree on the tactic.

I propose we send two . A full length flowery with all the bells and whistles of an executive letter and an executive summary.

definitely include federal, state, local government

The Encampment strategy team is seeking permits as we type, so there will be a one-two punch approach. We will have safe permitted spaces and also directly and proactively informing the TPTB (the powers that be) that all public spaces are/will be occupied by people exercising their rights

I say that the Governor gets the name Media Alert as everyone else. =) as for the "homeless bill of rights" i'd much rather work on "Restoring The Constitution" because that's where those rights are empowered already, and use the UN's Declaration as our call to restore the Constitutional Rights they have made subservient to the Uniform Commercial Code.

Warn? explain that? Are you looking to make drama for drama cause drama? Justin, this is not subversive action this is a national gathering. Our meetings are open, we are tweeting about it. It is not secret.
It is polite and good form to give a heads up

Again You use the word warn. FACT most local and state "authorities" are part of the 99%. They are doing jobs that are intricate part of a society, such gatherings as the National Gathering is an opportunity to join us.
Occupy the Senate may have not been a flashy bang, but it was in fact effective. .

Authorities being for example beat cops. Did you know most cops in GA are only paid 10 and hour. Police Departments and governments a like are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to funding. Militarization grants and surveillance grants are easy to come by, but grants for investigative tools or innovative community building or well being (municipalities) are not.

What I have seen more often than not , is the Chamber of Commerce being the hostile toward any kind of well being or wholesomeness campaigns.

I propose adding to the notification list the Chamber of Commerce and monitor the CoC reaction and behavior patterns to said notification.

potaytoes, potahtos
warn, notify
We are in agreement that somehow “the authorities” must be told in advance. So I agree with Sea, let’s work on the letter and to whom it should be sent.

Interesting thought about adding the CoC to the recipients. We might be trying to contact some smaller businesses for assistance (a brewpub was going to give a large grant if we were able to be at the Lamplighter last year; we discussed asking restaurants for leftover meals [not sure if it happened; would not want to compete with an agency that does that for the homeless, if that applies]); how would contacting teh CoC affect that sort of outreach attempt?

I think engaging the Chamber of Commerce as anything less than hostile would be a bad idea.

Agreed; I was talking about engaging individual businesses, not the CoC. My concern was that engaging with the CoC might hinder that effort and be counterproductive in that way.

Safety and security is a serious issue for people thinking of coming to this gathering. Here is a question that was posed on the Media FB page. "I It would be very useful for me and company to be apart of this but I'm not sure safe. My friend was shot in Los Angeles by the cops with a rubber bullet at the Occupy Los Angeles protests and I was wondering if this Gathering is connected in any to LA"
The attack on peaceful assembly that was on grotesque display during the Occupy evictions has had a chill on Free Speech. I think we need to come off STRONG and send a STRONGLY worded letter to the president, the governor the mayor and county officials.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0Jmqo1yQag

Any business offended by engaging the CoC absolutely should be excluded. Engaging the CoC would be a good litmus test.
Lest we forget:

e-mails appear to show the U.S. Chamber of Commerce contracted the firms to spy on and discredit unions and liberal groups. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBGary#Fallout
I can assure you that ( one of those companies were) was Walmart.
So unless you are wanting to partner with the likes of Walmart and other cultures of corporate corruption, the CoC should be engaged.

The US gov has effectively under gone a coup d'etat by corrupt corporate conglomerates that are utilizing the US government and its peripherals bully, cow, and intimidate all that will not comply with hostile corporate maneuvering, such as the pollution that goes along with fracking.

I was more worried about businesses being bullied into compliance with CoC than those who might be offended, but you make a good point. U.S. CoC is DEFINITELY the opposition/enemy; members of local CoCs might not be.

Pres. Obama has yet to answer the letter from the UN about the repression of occupy protests. We can use some of this language in our letter. And maybe try to contact the special rapporteur for the UN on human rights wrote this letter. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/1606735?utm_hp_ref=occupy-wall-street

@sallyg local chambers then need to take a stand against their leadership too. I have found in areas that are less funded, such as Georgia, that the local Coc is an oppressor, very much the muscle of the US CoC. .

I'll draft another letter to officials and maybe Julia can draft for for the CoC

good point, Julia; when I was a business owner (well, freelancer), I would never join the CoC because it seemed to be a waste of money and too conservative. OTOH, I knew some local cos. that were in it, but for which I had some respect.

FyI There's a "Peace Officer's Bill of Rights" in California that pretty much prevents cops from being fired for misconduct. https://www.cslea.com/legal/pobor

Tricia, your comment underscores how important it is to get our "legal" relationships with the Governor, City, and Police right. We established communication lines with the Police during our first year. That way we can balance our confrontational events to avoid violence while yet pushing the officials who protect the real "criminals".

Maybe have the local ACLU or NLB help vet the letter?

Yes. I also think we need our "own" lawyer. One who will plan our actions with us (different than advising us on current law), and who will stand with us on the front line, protected by our own security people.

Do we know of a California lawyer who would be willing to be “ours”? I think knowing California-specific law is important.

This is not only about sleepful protest, this is also about the daytime activities.

A notice of intent says we have a right to assemble, we will do it peaceably, and we expect to be treated with respect.
Some things should probably be permitted though. This makes it much more safe for people to show up that can't get arrested and people with children, etc...
Communicating with the public should not always be dangerous, and we don't always have to put protesting for the right to assemble above all other considerations.

The encampment team is seeking permits. The act of writing is a "shot across the now". The strategy is to have levels of action and levels if participation that suits their Ocvu-needs.

We are not depended on Gov a Brown. We are writing because we CAN'T depend of officials respecting our right to peacefully gather and exercise our rights.

We are also doing it to set up the release of the Media Advisory

This is happening today, ... Occupy Chicago Appeal Oral Arguments Charge Free Speech Violations, Challenge Constitutionality of City Curfew
Attorneys from People’s Law Office (PLO), along with other attorneys from the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) represented those arrested. Nearly 100 of the arrestees opted to challenge their arrests and the PLO and NLG attorneys drafted and filed a Motion to Dismiss the charges based on the First Amendment. We argued that the Municipal Ordinance violated the Free Speech of those arrested. We were ultimately successful and a judge found that the ordinance was unconstitutional on its face and as applied to the activists who were defendants." http://pastebin.com/sMSQCZTg

I don’t expect Gov Brown or any powers that be to assist us, but this is still a nation of laws. An aggressive preemptive strongly worded letter will create a paper trail that bureaucrats and law enforcement can understand and respect.

That said, we can learn their local laws and park use requirements, just to be good guests and keep the hassling of the attendees to a minimum.
City of Sacramento Park Use http://www.cityofsacramento.org/parksandrecreation/parks/permits/park-certificate.html

We’ve been doing this with the city and state police now for nigh on 3 years. We know what they do, how they think, and pretty much their chain of commands. They know us. They know me. One of our strongest members is almost a force unto her/him self.

The situation allows us to do what we want. We don’t “get permission”. If we want an event at the Capitol, the police know it and they protect us. The event can include protest. Other groups also protest and hold events. So certain spaces in the Capitol area have to be reserved in advance. They don’t give us permission to seek a reservation. If we follow the guidelines, we get the space if no one else has it.

We might have protests that are not foreseen. This is where the police will oppose us. That is why I am trying to arrange legal representation in advance and trying to make sure that some of our actions are unknown, only planned amongst us in our minds so there is no record of having planned them.

Getting a safe place to camp and assuring sanitation and safety is another matter. Doing our transportation is another matter.

We’re going to out-smart the officials. The Sacramento GA knows most about the details. The letter to Brown and the press releases are to manipulate and facilitate the peaceful and the confrontational events, so that neither prevents the other.

Once we get our strategy and tactics in mind, its very important that they are planned in detail. We will need some reservations (permits) and we will need plans known only to those people who agree to not sabotage or go against the plan.

I agree with the proposal. However an addendum is needed that certain persons will make final tweaks to the exact wording. And that is why we need a lawyer now. Where are the 20-30 Sacramento lawyers who say they support us? We’ve been successfuly working around these leveraging details since 2011.

Two proposals are going to close during today’s conference call. This can be a test of our decision making ability. As Tricia says, we can see how we’re thinking, because of our usage of Loomio. So on the conference call today, we can make a further decision on how to handle stuff.

In addition to having a good relationship with the NLG, we also have communication lines with the State and City Police. Once we're sure of solidarity, and once we can nail down our communing (camping thinking eating sleeping) place, I think Sacramento will be able to host a very creative and effective gathering.

This is a powerful statement by Tricia. "I don’t expect Gov Brown or any powers that be to assist us, but this is still a nation of laws. An aggressive preemptive strongly worded letter will create a paper trail that bureaucrats and law enforcement can understand and respect."

Here's an idea to leverage the power. Early in this discussion (perhaps not on this thread, perhaps on the Press Release thread), the statement/letter we are considering related to both the law and also to our press releases. It may have been said that we should notify the press first?

Let's, ASAP, get our letter to the NLG for tweaking, and empower someone to send it out, and also craft a letter to send to Sacramento's City Manager who has more power than the Mayor or City Council. At the same time (assuming we agree on solidarity and how to use the Block) I will write a letter to State and City Police because I know them, they know me, and I interceded between them and our actions in 2011-2012. LR @lrroberts and Brother Carter are also known and knowing. They might want to help with the plan.

With pressure being put on the State and the City, if any good comes, so good. Then, if there is no response, we could buy a full-page ad in the Sacramento Bee, the major newspaper here.

The ad could reproduce the letters and, since it would come later, could make further points since by then we'll know more about our communing acting and moving situation. The Labor Unions and other groups will then be more on board and we might have a lot of money. The Unions might verify their committment of bus transportation. The ethnic groups who "want us to get it together" that Cal mentioned in the "Reparations ..." thread which/whom is/are being discussed in the "Sociology of Ethnic ..." thread, might really warm up to us. When we do our press releases, they might be a bomb-shell.

The letter should be sent to Governor Brown first, and ASAP. Brown, since he's been on the left before, should be given respect and time to think about it.

The City Manager has more power than either the Mayor or the City Council. After Brown, the letter should be sent to her/him next and ASAP if it looks like Brown is balking or if we don't get a signed receipt that he has personally seen the letter.

Both of those letters should have return addresses with either a 95814 or 95811 postal code, so those two know we can easily walk into their office and cause trouble if they don't want to play nice. We could even get the media to cover a sit-in or protest in their offices. So maybe a letter should be sent to the media soon, to give them a heads up.

The City Mananger should be put on definite notice that we are coming and that she/he can either help, or suffer the consequences.

For the Governor's and Manager's letters, every day that we delay sending them will weaken us.

The State Police (Highway Patrol) routinely deals with demonstrations. They should be the last to receive the letter, and with different wording. They aren't the problem.

The City Police is the problem since they have to protect business interests, and they are controlled by the Chamber of Commerce loving Manager. Not the Governor. I think he is smart enough to know that he can use this event to his advantage. Brown has much more street savvy than the Mayor or Manager. Brown allowed anti-nuclear protestors to sit-in, in his Governor's office.

For the police, the letter's should be more subdued, and should mostly, just explain to them how they can handle the situation the easist way, with the least expense, and with the least bad publicity. Bad publicity can hurt the Mayor if the Manager doesn't do it right.

The wording of each letter should be different.

Those first two letters should be registered and should require that Brown and the Manager personally sign the receipt. There's two postal forms that insure response and receipt by the person they are sent to. Registered is one. We should use the other one also.

If we don't get a signature from the Manager within a week, we should arrange for a full-page ad in the Sacramento Bee, the major newspaper here. I am certain we can come up with the money for that, if we act now.

After we see how that happens, and the response to the full-page ad, then we should send letters to the police. I doubt that sending a letter to the Commissioner will have much effect.

The Mayor is way to the Right, and will not only not respond, but will twist it to his advantage. We should not show respect to Mayor Kevin Johnson. He can't do anything anyway. If the Manager thinks he has to consult the Mayor, it will weaken our ploy. The Manager was the one that gave the police permission to arrest us in 2011-2012. He can stop the City Police.

Letters to the City Council (not the Mayor) and other officials, should be last and tailored by the response we have already received. Commissioners rarely meet and rarely do anything.

I think the Sheriff will only be concerned much closer to the event, and would appreciate us telling them how to best respond.

We can't dely this. It has to happen now.

The letter should be sent to Governor Brown first, and ASAP. Brown, since he’s been on the left before, should be given respect and time to think about it.
The City Manager has more power than either the Mayor or the City Council. After Brown, the letter should be sent to her/him next and ASAP if it looks like Brown is balking or if we don’t get a signed receipt that he has personally seen the letter.
Both of those letters should have return addresses with either a 95814 or 95811 postal code, so those two know we can easily walk into their office and cause trouble if they don’t want to play nice. We could even get the media to cover a sit-in or protest in their offices a month before the event. So maybe a letter should be sent to the media soon, to give them a heads up.
The City Mananger should be put on definite notice that we are coming and that she/he can either help, or suffer the consequences.
For the Governor’s and Manager’s letters, every day that we delay sending them will weaken us.
The State Police (Highway Patrol) routinely deals with demonstrations. They should be the last to receive the letter, and with different wording. They aren’t the problem.
The City Police is the problem since they have to protect business interests, and they are controlled by the Chamber of Commerce loving Manager. Not the Governor. I think he is smart enough to know that he can use this event to his advantage. Brown has much more street savvy than the Mayor or Manager. Brown allowed anti-nuclear protestors to sit-in, in his Governor’s office.
For the police, the letter’s should be more subdued, and should mostly, just explain to them how they can handle the situation the easist way, with the least expense, and with the least bad publicity. Bad publicity can hurt the Mayor if the Manager doesn’t do it right.
The wording of each letter should be different.
Those first two letters should be registered and should require that Brown and the Manager personally sign the receipt. There’s two postal forms that insure response and receipt by the person they are sent to. Registered is one. We should use the other one also.
If we don’t get a signature from the Manager within a week, we should arrange for a full-page ad in the Sacramento Bee, the major newspaper here. I am certain we can come up with the money for that, if we act now.
After we see how that happens, and the response to the full-page ad, then we should send letters to the police. I doubt that sending a letter to the Commissioner will have much effect.
The Mayor is way to the Right, and will not only not respond, but will twist it to his advantage. We should not show respect to Mayor Kevin Johnson. He can’t do anything anyway. If the Manager thinks he has to consult the Mayor, it will weaken our ploy. The Manager was the one that gave the police permission to arrest us in 2011-2012. He can stop the City Police.
Letters to the City Council (not the Mayor) and other officials, should be last and tailored by the response we have already received. Commissioners rarely meet and rarely do anything.
I think the Sheriff will only be concerned much closer to the event, and would appreciate us telling them how to best respond.
We can’t delay this. It has to happen now.

@sea your post has a duplication.

If you think this is a good idea vote green. I am willing to call the ACLU and find a contact that is willing to look it over.

I like the idea of a a series of letters going out to various powers that be in the months and weeks before the event - each highlighting an aspect of the legality of the gathering.

I am here with Iwanka, who is giving me history from last year in Kalamazoo—Chris had spoken directly to the police before the event, as he has a personal relationship with the local police. He started out as the sole police liaison and Iwanka came in later. She says that meeting in person is the key: make an appointment to present the letter of intent; she suggests 2 or 3 people, even if one is just to observe.
Last year, she and Chris had a meeting with 8 levels of law enforcement, which she thinks was recorded; the police chief gave Iwanka all the paperwork to file for permits, with an understood level of protocol including that if Chris and Iwanka knew that anything was changing, they would contact the chief immediately so that everyone stayed on the same page, and generally they were very helpful from there. The biggest problem was officers on the street who denied the meeting, turned things around, misconstrued the situation, and in some cases tried to separate Chris and Iwanka from decision-making together as united liaisons.

When will the letter to the Governor be sent?

@sea you know some thought here ... Some cops may disregard because they want to voice their beliefs ( lack of better word) or have personal issues. Officers do undermine Chiefs, more often than you would imagine. It is a kind of political dance that goes on in stations.

The issue is, when will the letters be sent, and who will insure that the plan for the letters and media events and the stuff we'll do in Sacramento before the NatGat, is accomplished? Time is running out.

@sea can you please stop saying "time is running out."? It's not helpful. This must be approved and then sent. I think June 1st is a good target date. Thanks.

Can an invitation to join us be incorporated?

I sent Cres V in Sac the letter. Here are his insights and recommendation on the timing of the letter

"I like the letter. Let me strongly suggest you hold off sending it until AFTER June 3 because there are heavy, heavy local and state elections going on now which are consuming the media, as well they should. If you wait until the week after June 3, say the week starting June 9, the odds increase dramatically of good coverage, not only locally but statewide. Much of "trick" on getting media coverage is choosing the best time to release info or hold your protest - early in the day before deadlines (TV), early in the week works better because the media have more time, etc. So, in short, I would suggest holding off and then issuing the letter June 9 or 10. And maybe holding a media availability at City Hall and/or Capitol before 11 a.m. in the morning for TV/radio types.'

The press is secondary to our "firm known intentions" towards the govt.

@juliaclark can you post language for the said invite before u go?

Dear Governor Brown,

We, the People, intend to occupy public spaces in Sacramento, California from 9am July 31, 2014 until the afternoon of Aug 3rd 2014.
Citizens from across the nation, from New Jersey to San Diego and Florida to Oregon will peacefully gather in public spaces to seek redress of our grievances. We expect you to take all necessary measures to guarantee that the rights and freedoms of all peaceful protesters be respected.
We expect the Federal, State and Local Government to ensure that the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, as recognized under article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is enjoyed free of arbitrary restrictions. In this context, we would like to refer to Human Rights Council resolution 15/21, and in particular preambular paragraph 7, where it recognizes that, “exercising the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association free of restrictions, subject only to the limitations permitted by international law, in particular international human rights law, is indispensable to the full enjoyment of these rights, particularly where individuals may espouse minority or dissenting… political beliefs”. In this context, we would like to recall operative paragraph 1 of the same resolution that, “Calls upon States to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely,… including persons espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others, including migrants, seeking to exercise or to promote these rights, and to take all necessary measures to ensure that any restrictions on the free exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are in accordance with their obligations under international human rights law.”
*We extend a cordial invitation to Your Honor or representative to join us for the event .
Thank you for your kind attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

The Occupy National Gathering Organizing Group

Also of course, you may know this detail
http://www.formsofaddress.info/Governor_US.html

Or :
We extend a cordial invitation to Your Honor or representative to join us .
But I thought that sounded too much like inviting him to Anonymous. .
Not that I would not invite a governor to Anonymous. :CheshireCatSmile: .

I like the word "cordial" there.

We have time to discuss whether to cordially invite TPTB (The Powers a That Be)
I propose we make a proposal so we can think about the ramifications, if any, to inviting Moonbeam Brown

(Disclosure- I worked hard on his presidential campaign in 1992)

This is from the Rainbow Family

"Why We Don't Sign Permits

The Rainbow Family World Peace Gatherings have occurred without permits since 1981. Our chief position has been that we do not need anyone's permission to gather, and that we sign away our right to peaceably assemble when we sign permits. We have always sought full cooperation with everyone impacted by the Gathering. We have always left sites in a condition at least as good as we found them, usually better; we did have a hard time in North Carolina because the Forest Service busted our cleanup crew.
As always, no one person is qualified to speak for the Family and there is a tradition that any contacts with the authorities have at least two family members present, so that one may act as a "fair witness". We are all "liaisons" for the council, and anything we say or do for the Family is subject to the approval of the council.

A common request from the authorities is that we post a performance bond. This is something we have never done, since it constitutes requiring insurance to go to church. The Family holds that Rainbow is not a sue-able entity, or is even a legal entity at all - judges aren't too hot on this idea. A good model to cite might be the Mennonite community in Pennsylvania, which conscientiously objects to having auto insurance, which is mandatory in PA. They have a deal with the government whereby they simply pledge, as a community, to make good on any liabilities incurred. Rainbow has a spotless record on making good on liabilities."

Re: the letters that are going to establish our legality: The idea included that we do events, sitins and protests that highlight what we and the officials have said, or ignored, before our gathering.

There is a walk from Benicia CA to Rodeo CA on June 14, and a walk from Rodeo CA to Richmond CA on July 12. Sponsored by Idlenomore. The walks are titled: "Connect the Dots, Refinery Corridor Healing Walks".
ConnectTheDotsHealingJourneys.org

I have the contact information. Such should be considered, and we should plan other impromptu events that are energized by our caravans. The events would highlight the responses we get from the officials, and would highlight our media stuff.

A vote no from @allstr33ts: We feel this is a bad idea. It's too noisy, and it is creates the wrong feelings. We do not support.

What does @allstr33ts not support?

@juliaclark Julia, What are you Blocking?

Cecily McMillan's s case has helped foster realization that militarized police– not protesters– were reason for OWS's "failure" http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/19/cecily-mcmillan-three-months-jail-occupy-future-protest

@sea I stated why I was/am blocking.

Julia's block i believe is to address including an invitation to the gov.
It is being addressed in another disc. and proposal.
https://www.loomio.org/d/J6BlG2Ic/invite-gov-brown

and doing poorly. I am assuming we met that, or will have when the proposal closes. Julia?

This discussion and the proposal, 2nd Draft of letter to Gov. Jerry with edits and cc's, is what we must address to come to a decision.

I propose we extend this proposal closing date, give folks a chance to view in editable place, http://natgat2014.titanpad.com/74, and encourage more folks registering agreement or dis..

I've had a hard time digesting the letter reading it here. and would also like a link to the Human Rights Council resolution 15/21.

After listening to Sea talk about strategy tonight, it made more sense to me - the piles of text on many threads turns me off to the topic. Now that I've digested it more I think we may have found our "launch" material and message. Free speech and the right to assemble as the main focus. They're incarcerating every type of protester.

forget the anxiety of a press release. send this letter in a coordinated media blitz of our social media, and occupy email base of 8 -10K in the form of a newsletter/email.
(e.g. http://crm.interoccupy.net/civicrm/mailing/view?reset=1&id=387) send to msm or not. it was said in the first year of occupy the network on twitter extended to a million people at one point.

We should also establish who on the ground in Sacramento and online will field questions from media. and where to send media requests - I'll pout it on media somewhere.

thoughts?

Sorry, Julia. My browser doesn't let me see the reasons for a person's vote. Its old, like me. :-)

I like Cres' idea to start the media campaign with the week beginning June 9th. Thanks Cres and Tricia.

It says proposal closed. What was the result?

The letter(s) have been put on a pad for editing:
http://natgat2014.titanpad.com/74

I believe the block has been addressed.

next steps?

Edit the letter to be ready June 8th and sent out June 9th.

Just saw the outcome - don't believe the invitation passed with 4-3. not strong decision. But, yes, moving forward with the letter; seems to be agreement for June 9 release.

I am concerned that only one Occ Sac voted on this proposal, and think the final edited version should be presented on a call for a decision - whether that is the planning call or media call, not sure.

After it's edited the final version can go to a the call and to the Occ Sac GA for final approval

Maybe those folks want to help edit; @sallyg reminding myself to send the current text and link to the e-mail list—should it be to full list or to media?

The way it will work with the Occ Sac GA is that the letter campaign to officials will be first brought up on June 7 and it won't pass until June 21. However that doesn't mean that the media campaign won't start before Occ Sac GA approves the letter. The letters aren't the media campaign. Whenever Cres imparts information to media, he will know the drift of the impending letters, or of any other moves that could effect his media work.

This is critically important to understand. Cres' target date for the media releases beginning on June 9 is good, even though the GA will not at that time have approved the first letter. The GA does not approve media releases. Similarly, the GA will not have to approve every letter. They must just approve the general outlines of the letter campaign, knowing that it is being vetted through Loomio and the Conference Call, and knowing that Cres won't let us down.

Make no mistake. Cres' media releases are not the letters, although the releases will be informed by the letters. Here on Loomio we are now discussing a series of letters which will probably bear little resemblance to the original letter posted on this discussion. Still, a particular letter may be similar to the original. The content of each letter and who receives it, isn't being decided on Loomio, because the critical part of our disagreements over letters (not over media releases), only concerned Governor Brown. He is an official sui generis. Each official will receive a differently worded letter, and only after the previous shoe drops, ie that we have assessed the result of the previous letter. Then we will have more shoes to drop.

Sacramento has a strongly functioning GA that adheres to the original Occupy Wall St guidelines for decisions, including hand signals and Blocks.

A note to jemcgloin. What you say is correct that the Block seems used in a weird way on Loomio. But not so at the GA. A Block in the Occ Sac GA always gets resolved because with rare exceptions we always get good consensus. Occ Sac GA takes its work very seriously. We're good at side-lining idle issues or disrupting Blocks. We paid a heavy price for not being able to side-line such from 2011-2012. Now we know how.

However the process of approving the letter goes deeper since people still think the letters are for the media.

The letters are to put pressure on officials, who, if they don't play nice, the media releases will expose.

The person doing the media, who is very professional and all of Sacramento respects his work, doesn't work through the GA. He follows what is happening and then does the best media alerts he can. That is Cres. He doesn't need to approve the letter, other than he will give good advice on its wording. Likewise, the GA doesn't need to approve his media releases.

Each letter is a tactical move within encompassing strategic moves, which involve more than a particular letter, and which also involve things done besides letters, or besides media releases. Each successive letter is tailored after the previous letter is sent out. Each letter is directed only at officials in their official capacities. Each official has a different capacity. This was confused because the first rendition of the letter made it seem that a single letter would be sent to all the various officials. It was further confused by thinking that the letters were for the media. The only way the details of the official letters will be overtly known to the media, is if we have to do a full-page ad in the Sacramento Bee exposing City officials. That will only happen if by the first week of July, we feel that the officials want to be violent. We already know their every move. This strategy and its tactics will prevent them from having any idea of what we are going to do. Other than they will know it is to their advantage to cooperate with us.

Cres will massage the outcome/responses from the officials, to make a hit with the media. And hopefully Homer Simpson :-) will be doing his best to comment on both the letter campaign and the media releases, and on developing events on the ground. Particularly if the officials seem determined to prevent us from camping. We'll have an idea of whether they can hit our hard-balls before the end of June.

I repeat. The Letters are not Media Releases. The appropriate media releases will be made, with foreknowledge of what letters have been sent out.

Folk should read in great detail the discussion titled "Legal, Permits, do we ... ". It describes the letter campaign. It does not describe the media releases. Read it many times and read between the lines.

I think it's understood that the letter this the news and Cres will share with the media and the media will report on the news.
I don't see a proposal for a series of letters. This needs to be discussed as to the why/how.

Also I didn't actually agree that we would sign the letters "Abe Simpson" ~ that was just a joke.

I thought you meant that humorously, stylistically, and effectively, "twitter" (ha, ha) might spread rumors of Abe Lincoln's deathbed prediction concerning the impending doom of officials who oppose Occupy, that was revealed to Homer Simpson in a dream.

I

Sea certainly suggested a series of letters a while back, not a formal proposal while we were working on wording for the governor’s letter; I am in a rush going to work or would figure out how to make such a proposal now.

I sent the 2nd draft to the Sacramento ACLU ~ They don't have lawyers so are sending it to the Northern California Chapter. Will post what they say here.

Point of Information: Yestetday a federal judge banned Idaho from removing #Occupy Boise tents on state grounds because it would violate the constitutional right to protest. http://m.tribtown.com/view/story/9dee6b938006408388a948862460d791/ID--Occupy-Boise

Thanks Tricia. I forwarded this to our Legal team. Any information like this I will forward to Sacramento's Legal Team.

The local ACLU is interested in helping. I will forward this news to them and see how they can help.

The ruling in Boise was in federal court so applies nationally.

Tricia,

Who are you dealing with at the ACLU? I am a former ACLU board member in Sacramento, but left to co-coordinate the National Lawyers Guild chapter here, which has been much more "friendly" to Occupy. We have our own legal team in Sacramento - about 30 plus lawyers - who worked pro bono on cases. 110 Occupy arrests, and everyone one of them dismissed. FYI, the ordinance in Sacramento prevents anyone from being in city parks after 11 p.m. weekdays/midnight Fri-Sun. And also prevents any other night camping, even on private property, for more than 24-48 hours.

I sent them a heads up that it's happening. This is what the NorCal chapter said: (My comments are in parens)
I will definitely let them (the local chapter) know about it. There are some students and teachers in Sacramento that I work with fairly regularly who I will reach out to. Do you have a flyer? (I sent the flyer) The chapter is also a great ally—you can reach out to Tess Ahmad who originally responded to your e-mail about ways the chapter can be involved via tabling/public education/help with organizing etc. The chapter’s role is an organizing/public education role. The number/website I sent you to will be able to direct you to the resources that will help with the legal side of looking at your letter.

Best,
Tessa
[email protected]

I sent the flyer attached and got this response
"Thanks, Tricia. Please keep me posted - our Chapter would like to help.
Tessnim Ahmad
435-720-0773
[email protected]"

I haven't felt clear (or had time) to write back.

There was a major ruling in a federal court in Boise Idaho that blows the local ordinance argument out of the water. http://rt.com/usa/165804-boise-idaho-occupy-camp/

I think this changes everything.

The NLG provides legal representation (in terms of arrests), and observers to any and all events, actions, etc. I'm coordinating a pro bono team of lawyers to handle court appearances, for instance, of the recent Rise99 Capitol arrests.

That said, where is the group at re: permits for Capitol Park grounds, or alternatives???

The Capitol park permits have been applied to for Thurs, Fri and Sun. LR is handling that.

The group voted on last week's call to get a permit and to allot the money for Southside Park for Sat. Cathy is handling that. Lisa is helping both with the transition.

So, we know where we are everyday now, and can start making more concrete plans for set up and activities.

@cresvellucci that's great about the NLG and coordinating a team of lawyers.

Did you see the thread elsewhere about coordinating a conference call with ACLU reps? Perhaps there can be a larger legal team call.

Jackie, thanks for making the "extra calls" discussion private. The questions you asked in the "Planning the Training" discussion are exactly the kind of questions I had hoped would arise when I spoke of the changes in Sacramento with 99Rise. I will try to give a really good answer to those questions, hopefully soon. However here I want to comment on the post above regarding the scheduling. And I will use this comment as a preface to the answer to your questions in the “Planning the Training” discussion.

The most clear first statement I can think of to fully express the beginning of this comment and of the answer to the questions you raised, is that, “we will only know if our plans work after the Gathering has come and gone.” As for the reasons why we think our plans would work, many have been given. I list them in random order and I do not imply that I think one is a better reason than another. The reasons are either historical, or ahistorical. I am only listing the ones I consider ahistorical reasons here. Though ahistorical, they can't help but arise out of the past of our worldly consciousness. So, though I call them ahistorical, they do point to history. The pointers then tell (they intimate or disclose) the historical reasons that I am not discussing here, but which, have been given in clear terms since 2011, and so most of us have some idea of them. But its the reasons that I call “ahistorical” that I think are most compelling regarding our Gathering, its prospects, and what the scheduling and Training has to do with it.

And before I continue, let me state my belief and inspiration. What has arisen in the Occupy and 99% movements in 2014, is consciousness whether historical or ahistorical. That consciousness grips the whole world, including “the rich”, Tea Partyers, Police, Pentagon, Obama, and Brown. So its our ability to “vision-out” consciousness, that will cause us to succeed.

The ahistorical reasons that have been adduced for the reasonableness of our efforts and our hope for success, include:
1 A shift in consciousness.
2. That the universe wants us to succeed.
3. That the world wants us to succeed.
4. That the repressive powers are not really as repressive as they seem, whereby a slick maneuver by us can out-wit them.
5. That young, poor, and disadvantaged people (along with women Blacks Indians and Immigrants etc), will simply not stand for such bad govt anymore.
6. That this is a “New Age”, etc.
7. That privileged “white” people are indeed capable of carrying out the revolution that T Jefferson said would be required.
8. That patriarchy is in retreat.
9. That horizontal decisioning works and vertical doesn't.
10. That the split between Occupy and 99%, is either not relevant to what we do, or that it will be resolved by what we do.
11. That violence has proven to “not work”.
12. That our “greatest minds” foresee this future.

If people want to add other reasons, that's good. However my comments here and the comments I'll make regarding the questions Jackie raised in the “Planning” discussion, will presume that regardless of whatever reasons for our success or failure are offered, I will only be commenting in terms of their ahistorical dimensions.

Having said all that, Jackie tells us that LR is getting permits for Thu Fri and Sun and Kathy is getting one for Sat. However the one for Sat is a permit for Southside Park and yet we might be involved in an Energy Conclave on Saturday, which may or may not relate to how the Mime Troupe business is treated, which was originally thought to be on Sun at Southside Park, thereby Sat at the Capitol was available for our “big” events. There has been ultimate confusion about what will happen on Sat and Sun, yet Jackie's hopeful statement hasn't resolved that confusion, unless the Training, the plans of Laura and NikiV, the tedious discussion we did have about Fri and Sat, and Les from Sacramento's question, are ignored. Les's can't be ignored ultimately, however it will be ignored according to being in SouthSide park on Sat, instead of being there on Sun. Because the above scheduling is being done by people who have participated little in the Loomio discussion. LR and Kathy are doing good. However their good isn't the complete answer to how we can make our Gathering a success. Having specified permits and days, means that the Training is all the more needing to be focused on. And the training doesn't fall under any of the permits. And the only place where all of this has been discussed is on Loomio.

The energy conclave can be either Sat or Sun either at the Capitol or Southside Park. So this will likely work out. But the confusion will not thereby abate, and the overall prognosis for the success of our venture will not change. That is because a shift in consciousness is involved, and that shift in consciousness is not reflected in the report of the permits being obtained in Sacramento.

For those unfamiliar with issues surrounding the Energy conclave, it involves the Sac GA and its “abortive” NatGat planning group, Brother Carter and Chickenfoot Ranch, and Governor Brown. However the most dynamic part of this potential Energy conclave is being expressed by NikiV, and she too is infrequently seen on Loomio.

wow. well then, this does present some serious problems of collaboration. not one soul has mentioned "Energy Conclave", at least on the planning calls or spkrs group calls. (though br. carter's day plan was to be focused around energy - but he has as recently as a couple of days ago said he is not involved, and in fact does not want his name used in connection with any plans - if that has changed, please let the group know - though I imagine he would do that himself, since he was gracious enough to come to the call and let others know he was pulling out, instead of just disappearing.)

The capitol is NOT available for Sat, so it was never on the table (this has been known for months).

the folks on the wed call, of which Donna and Niki were part of, voted to get the permit for Sat. and thereby change the day we would see the Mime Troupe, the one thing that was in stone and on the schedule for months.

Sea, just saying that folks are unfamiliar and what they are unfamiliar with, does nothing to clarify to the wider group or the public looking for details, what to expect at NatGat.

I would suggest folks with concrete info either join the spkrs group, propose them on the main email list or loomio or the tons of other platforms.

It is disrespectful of other organizers' time and energies to not have everything proposed on the table at this point.

@oswgwhe - I challenge your assertion that "the only place where all of this has been discussed is on Loomio." Other than from you, I can find very little from anyone, including Niki, Laura, and Les. (Since Laura's initial post several weeks ago about Friday ideas, I've seen no follow-up from her.) I've combed many discussions, looking for concrete things; they simply aren't there. If Les is planning something, Sea, I request that you ask him (and anyone else planning anything definite) to email [email protected] with the specifics.

People interested in NatGat are wanting to know what the schedule is. In putting together the schedule, the spkrs-structure WG is needing to know as much as can be known about:
- What people are planning to do (and when).
- The likelihood that those things are going to happen.
I'll echo what Jackie says:
If you know either of those things, kindly let us know right away: mailto: [email protected]

I also heard Brother Carter state that he was not planning any events. In agreement that Sat at the capitol was never on the books. got to run; more later perhaps.

@laurarubalcaba @nikiv @les @oswgwhe @delphinebrody @donnapiranha1 Please let us know here and at [email protected] what definite plans are being worked on, so that they can get onto the schedule with others; the speakers group is on a call as I type this and wondering! We are trying to balance large events with open-space time in a noncompetitive way.

Sally, do I have to keep mentioning the Training on July 30?

The training is of course on the schedule as Delphine requested long ago, to be promoted with the NatGat dates.

What the group could use is
Time
Location
Duration

We will be updating maps and FAQ this week.

Unless you are saying you don't want the training promoted?

Of course it should be promoted. The details haven't been clear for three reasons. It took Delphine time to locate the trainers who have been named and will train on the date stated. The duration of the training and its exact details depend on whether we use a familiar Occupy location, or whether a major church in Sacramento will host the event. It will last all day and all night. That uncertainty has changed with the change in Sacramento. The third reason is that there has been very little discussion and bye-in from the usual NatGat planners, on Loomio or elsewhere. If the usual NatGat planners don't start discussing it and don't decide to attend, then the rest of the Gather will be discolored thereby. So the promotion should be the promotion for people to get on board. Their reluctance will be a negative factor affecting the possibility of success, in light of the Changes which also need to be discussed. Part of the Training will be a training by 99Rise.

I am attending. I have not been asked for any specific help before I get there. What more is wanted? I do not see anyone making negative remarks, other than “you are not doing enough”, without specifics as to what that “enough” looks like. I am planning to arrive in Sacramento Tuesday night, maybe meet some folks if it is not too late, get settled, and come to the training on Wed.

Sadly, Sally, very few Occupiers have your attitude or perhaps your ability.

Surely most Occupiers would remember the split between 99% and Occupy, that continues to weaken us. With 99Rise, we can reunite. The Training will involve reuniting with 99Rise and with all people who have less privilege that "white" people, particularly "white" male people. The thing that is going to get Sacramento as a whole behind us, is the belief that we are going to do something about the basic inequality, which arises from surplus value being stolen by "white" people, usually male.

If we have the NLG and the ACLU on a call and strategize -- we might even be able to have tents on the grounds. It's our constitutional right as a federal judge ruled in Idaho last month. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/us-usa-protests-idaho-idUSKBN0EN2SA20140612

This 99Rise reminds me of "99 Percent Declaration" who had something the first year in Philly '12. They ended up coming to the NatGat after their events and having a great time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99_Percent_Declaration

I suggest we do the duties that lie before us and get our head in the game.

Tomorrow, Tuesday 7/8 1pm EST is going to be an outreach party

If there is a schedule, even a rough schedule, I can work with fellow NLG and ACLU legal types here and see what we can do in advance re: an injunction. But, frankly, it's hard to get "hard" facts...when and where, and what (can be rough). We can't brief this to the court unless we know what you want (to stay on Capitol grounds x, y or z, or in a park, etc. Thanks.

LR's, Cathy's, and Lisa's efforts to get permits will be said at the Wednesday conference call, according to Cathy.. But I fear than even then the plans won't be firm, because interoccupy.net which holds the "final" schedule, is but loosely connected to what people are doing. Cathy said that they expect to get permits at the Capitol for Thu, Fri, and Sunday -- yes I said Sunday.

IMHO, I don't think we will know until, the "Planning for the Training" is given more credence. That's because it may deal with patriarchy and white privilege. Those, and Sacramento's GA have been chief culprits in discombobulating our plans, regarding the Capitol, x, y, z, the park, etc.

To wit. There is a communication gap between interoccupy.net and what actual Occupiers (with or without 99Rise) want to do. I only mean to assign blame to the Sacramento GA.

I hope these comments are helpful, re: what I see as a quagmire facing us between now and July 30 -- yes I said July 30. If I'm pessimistic I'm sorry. Its what I feel, hear and read.

The fact is a rough schedule is being drafted and should be available shortly.
Never fear.

Cal, regarding your post above "I challenge your assertioin" ... and "very little has been heard" regarding things people are doing, i.e. not posted on Loomio, why hasn't the Structures WG not posted events on Loomio? It would help us in Sacramento. interoccupy.net was set up to be a way to put info in so interoccupy.net could use it, instead of being a way for interoccupy.net to provide us with information, so we could use it. Am I wrong? What "boots on the ground" info has interoccupy.net posted on Loomio recently.

The structures group does not create events; it gleans information from other sources and melds them into the 4 days (with a 5th for training!) in a way that seems to make sense, then presents it to the Wednesday call for approval, modification, etc. Titanpads have been constructed sequentially; here are the 3 for the speakers/structure group: Spkrs-Program-Structure WG Main Pad http://natgat2014.titanpad.com/59

Spkrs-Prog-Structure WG Agenda http://natgat2014.titanpad.com/60
Activities Confirmed, in the works and suggested https://natgat2014.titanpad.com/82

The first of these, pad 59, starts with a list of links to nontitanpad documents, reproduced here—including a link to 2013 and 2012 information, respectively, for purposes of comparison:
To coordinate and organize the structure of the event
Email list: [email protected]
Subscribe to email list: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ng-2014-spkrs-program-wg
Agenda
http://natgat2014.titanpad.com/60
Docs:
2014
NatGat2014 Contacts
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ah3I8WTDRzzpdEpDUVF2TDNyQWNRTWtLTFVEZDg0d1E#gid=0
NatGat3 Draft Schedule Template
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ah3I8WTDRzzpdExpdElWbUNiNHlBM2tmZVVnT3lXMFE&usp=drive_web#gid=0
Activity Creators, Participants, Presenters, Speakers - NG3
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ah3I8WTDRzzpdGlYYVFOQWVya0YxSG5CenNMdGloblE&usp=drive_web#gid=0
Volunteer Submissions - Outreach
https://calc.mayfirst.org/Volunteer_Submissions
Occupy Sacramento NatGat3 Scrounge list
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ah3I8WTDRzzpdDdMV05IWnJhX3ozWUI3blZfRTNwTFE#gid=0
2013
Draft NatGat2 Schedule Template
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ah3I8WTDRzzpdGRQMmZ2WVlmQm1PWTBMaFNQVnFzcXc#gid=0
this doc had both schedule and speakers
2012
Speakers List
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At9uCvYdJclydFU2VkVYM1JVb1NTUnJOM1h6MFdaZEE&usp=drive_web#gid=5
this doc organized speakers, but there were many more actvites [sic] going on
The first link at the top of that page is how to get on that group’s e-mail list—a link that may also be found on interoccupy.net/natgat2014, at a button that says “help plan”. It is annoyingly ironic to be accused of NOT providing information when it has been out there since the beginning, being filled in as we learn of it.

WHOA! Hold on. DISPEL THIS MYTH IMMEDIATELY!

InterOccupy.net holds nothing, has no part in the planning end of natgat. IO offers TOOLS. Free, movement -based and -created TOOLS.

Talk about creating hierarchy around every corner, sheesh! - people seem to want to assume that IO has something to do with planning these natgats. All tools provided by IO for any action, call series, campaign, etc. are the responsibility of that effort. IO will offer training in how to use the tools, but it is assumed the group requesting these tools will handle them.
http://interoccupy.net/about/statement-of-autonomy/

Cal and myself, who are part of IO, joined the natgat planning effort quite independent of IO, and quite independent of each other, fyi. A couple of tech end folks help with the tech end when there is something I don't know how to do.

The IO tools were offered early on and decided by the group to use. The group could have chosen any tools they wanted.

nah. If you are referring to speakers group, Sally just gave all that info. The speakers group consists of Gandalf, Cal, Delphine, Donna, Jackie, Sally, Tricia and of course, previously, Lisa and Br. Carter, making 4 Sac folks, 6 Calif folks, and 3 online East Coasters.

DISPEL THIS MYTH IMMEDIATELY!

#COMMS FLOW