Given that the Oakland City Council hearing on December 9 is expected to be a major effort as you say Tracy, perhaps our best bet would be to schedule a BACLC meeting beforehand to help us get organized for that action, for instance preparing fliers, signs or other materials for distribution or display, exchanging ideas on talking points, etc.?
More vital than what we end up deciding here though, I think, is our commitment to having good process.
Of course people may have different thoughts on what good process is, and I would encourage people to share those thoughts. My sense of it is roughly as follows: Anytime a decision gets made about which people have different views or preferences, it should be made according to transparent and consistent procedures that we've established ahead of time and which group members generally feel are fair and in accord with democratic or consensus-based values. Making a sub-optimal decision from time to time is probably less harmful to coalitions and other grassroots groups than for decisions to happen by fait accompli or be made over objections in ways that some members might perceive as arbitrary or unfair.
For a relatively small group, such decision-making procedures need not be very detailed -- indeed it's probably better if they are not. If people keep the group in the loop about stuff they're working on that relates to the group as activism or procedural stuff is kept moving, so that there's an opportunity for others to weigh in on pending decisions before they are made, formal procedure may not even be needed except when a situation or matter arises where different members favor different courses of action.
Regarding the Riseup list, I figured it was probably something like that. Not a big deal, but glad we're on the same page on getting the names matching.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))