Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
U.S.
Environment & Forest Defense
Global Justice & Anti-Capitalism
Health, Housing & Public Services
The Slow Decline of a Dying Rhizome
This Tuesday, the Rhizome Collective will begin to die its slow death. All residents and backspace organizations have been forced to vacate. Many fear the blow of losing one's home will taper any gained momentum to save the space.
UNOFICIAL, COPYLEFT RELEASE
Please Circulate
13th of Friday, 2009
This Tuesday, the Rhizome Collective will begin to die its slow death. All residents and backspace organizations have been forced to vacate. Many fear the blow of losing one's home will taper any gained momentum to save the space.
Last night, we sat in a room with many collective members and the Allen Street Rhizome Warehouse private property owners—Scott Kellogg and Stacy Pettigrew. Kellogg and Pettigrew have been members of the Rhizome Collective and sometimes residents of Austin, TX. They legally own the warehouse property through Sustainable Revolution Inc. Kellogg and Pettigrew have built a career through their work with the Rhizome Collective—creating a sustainability consulting/training seminar called RUST and published a book entitled Toolbox for a Sustainable Revolution. Over nine years, Kellogg and Pettigrew and countless others built the Rhizome together.
On 2/16/09, Kellogg and Pettigrew informed the collective of their intent to sell the warehouse property in six months. They listed an asking price of $390,000 and asked the collective to make an offer. When asked if sweat equity would be valued, they firmly responded, “no.” People questioned making this transaction using capitalist economic values. Kellogg purchased the warehouse with an inheritance of an unknown amount. Kellogg and Pettigrew also own property in New York State.
On 3/3/09, City of Austin Code Enforcement cited the property owners with a number of violations. Kellogg and Pettigrew received this information and informed us that we needed to vacate and the building would be sealed 3/17. Through collective pressure, Kellogg and Pettigrew reluctantly pressured the City and asked questions about the exact nature of the violations. They achieved a 30 day extension to pull permits and deal with the violations. Kellogg and Pettigrew asked all to vacate, regardless. Conveniently, the community organizations and housing residents are being shuffled out the door.
Members of the collective questioned Kellogg and Pettigrew about their intentions for dealing with the code violations. The question was asked if they are planning on pulling the permits with the understanding that the collective would purchase the space. They said they didn't know. Their options were to pull permits or sell within 30 days. Someone in the group offered to collectively share the costs of code violations. Kellogg and Pettigrew were hesitant about such an idea. Kellogg and Pettigrew in effect told the collective that from here on out they'd go it alone. It seemed silly, then, to waste our time pretending to work together. Clearly, there is an unequal power relationship between the landlord and tenants. Why pull permits if ownership is not to be transfered?
If we were working together, I'd understand temporarily leaving the space to deal with permits. But, the vague non-commitment was a de facto admission of what would happen post-permit. Nothing. The space will be sold on the open market—maybe to the collective, maybe not. This all begs a larger question, was the intention ever to transfer ownership to the collective? Why were calls to rent-to-own through owner financing not heeded by the landlords years ago? Why is the conversation revolving around money and loans, and not community cultural capital and anti-capitalist views of property?
Many who've lived in the community of Austin and have seen the day to day operations of the Rhizome and the long-term trends, have recognized the power imbalance of the situation. Fundamentally, collective space should reside in collective hands. There was a social contract of peaceable transfer power. Yet, the behavior and attitudes of Kellogg and Pettigrew always reflected their special case status. Not to mention their personal fiscal, material, and professional benefits under the guise of non-profit status and collective community building. Nor, their responsibility within the collective of building un-permitted structures for their own personal benefit and supposed community benefit. We have been co-dependent on the supposed benevolence of gift-giving from a privileged person. Frankly, we needed the space. And despite knowing that this day would come, we went ahead because we had nowhere else to go. We hastily relied on the good intentions of vastly more privileged people. Attempts were made to take good intentions out of the equation through the transfer of power—only to be stymied time and time again.
Now, I'm having a huge wake up call about the so-called community. Not so much about Kellogg and Pettigrew. I've seen them act like Queen and King of the Rhizome Castle for years. But, now, I see the meeting dynamics shake out like a bad anti-oppression workshop skit. Lip-service is given to a collective, consensus-based process when two people really run the show, their cadre of supporters seem well-intentioned yet politically fair weather, others can't deal with conflict and the elephant continues to sit in the room, voices are silenced because they are called too emotional, and people of color and marginalized folks are going to feel the brunt of the eviction. One sentiment I've heard a couple people throw out has illuminated this situation for me. Folks have said, “This is the United States, we can't just...” Its seems as though many folks in that room would stand up for somebody half way across the world out of guilt or some such motivation, rather than fight for their own home. In a classic display of privilege, folks are bouncing out of this community leaving the folks who actually live here to pick up the pieces and build again. Similar stories play out across the nation in these radical subcultures keeping them in their bubbles—never to reach out to people outside their activist playhouses.
Why am I putting this shit on blast? Well, because I think the situation is fucked up and I feel some sort of obligation to tell my version of the sequence of events. This piece will surely stir some controversy and hopefully spark some dialog. I've gone back and forth and had much self-doubt about how to approach this situation. I know this will piss some people off. I'm no stranger to controversy and firmly believe if actions cannot be held up to public scrutiny then something is amiss. I also think conflict is inevitable—especially when there is an power imbalance. We need to deal with it head on or not at all. Kellogg and Pettigrew have stated their intention to do as they please. So, either we wait for their word or pressure them to make the concessions that are politically and culturally ours. As long as Kellogg and Pettigrew continue their work creating “sustainable revolution” in New York and beyond, they must be held accountable for the sustainability of the Allen Street Warehouse and I hope this article aids in that.
Perhaps, there's still hope to make an offer to transfer the building in collective hands and for Kellogg and Pettigrew to do the right thing. Maybe this piece will ruin it. It should happen soon, if at all, because Kellogg and Pettigrew are leaving Texas once everyone's out and won't be looking back. What I heard last night, in not so many words, was there was no plan to pull permits and thusly no plan for collective purchase. I wonder why would they care once they leave this town? Sometimes, I think, its just not worth it. So, for now, I will no longer wait for the whims of the landlords or the illusion of collective process.
If Kellogg and Pettigrew choose not to transfer ownership to the collective, then the question is what's the community's cut?
This Saturday and Sunday there is a estate sale happening at the Rhizome. People are packing their bags and selling off community property. Come on down to the Rhizome to see it all go down.
Good Night and Adieu,
-Brent Perdue
Please Circulate
13th of Friday, 2009
This Tuesday, the Rhizome Collective will begin to die its slow death. All residents and backspace organizations have been forced to vacate. Many fear the blow of losing one's home will taper any gained momentum to save the space.
Last night, we sat in a room with many collective members and the Allen Street Rhizome Warehouse private property owners—Scott Kellogg and Stacy Pettigrew. Kellogg and Pettigrew have been members of the Rhizome Collective and sometimes residents of Austin, TX. They legally own the warehouse property through Sustainable Revolution Inc. Kellogg and Pettigrew have built a career through their work with the Rhizome Collective—creating a sustainability consulting/training seminar called RUST and published a book entitled Toolbox for a Sustainable Revolution. Over nine years, Kellogg and Pettigrew and countless others built the Rhizome together.
On 2/16/09, Kellogg and Pettigrew informed the collective of their intent to sell the warehouse property in six months. They listed an asking price of $390,000 and asked the collective to make an offer. When asked if sweat equity would be valued, they firmly responded, “no.” People questioned making this transaction using capitalist economic values. Kellogg purchased the warehouse with an inheritance of an unknown amount. Kellogg and Pettigrew also own property in New York State.
On 3/3/09, City of Austin Code Enforcement cited the property owners with a number of violations. Kellogg and Pettigrew received this information and informed us that we needed to vacate and the building would be sealed 3/17. Through collective pressure, Kellogg and Pettigrew reluctantly pressured the City and asked questions about the exact nature of the violations. They achieved a 30 day extension to pull permits and deal with the violations. Kellogg and Pettigrew asked all to vacate, regardless. Conveniently, the community organizations and housing residents are being shuffled out the door.
Members of the collective questioned Kellogg and Pettigrew about their intentions for dealing with the code violations. The question was asked if they are planning on pulling the permits with the understanding that the collective would purchase the space. They said they didn't know. Their options were to pull permits or sell within 30 days. Someone in the group offered to collectively share the costs of code violations. Kellogg and Pettigrew were hesitant about such an idea. Kellogg and Pettigrew in effect told the collective that from here on out they'd go it alone. It seemed silly, then, to waste our time pretending to work together. Clearly, there is an unequal power relationship between the landlord and tenants. Why pull permits if ownership is not to be transfered?
If we were working together, I'd understand temporarily leaving the space to deal with permits. But, the vague non-commitment was a de facto admission of what would happen post-permit. Nothing. The space will be sold on the open market—maybe to the collective, maybe not. This all begs a larger question, was the intention ever to transfer ownership to the collective? Why were calls to rent-to-own through owner financing not heeded by the landlords years ago? Why is the conversation revolving around money and loans, and not community cultural capital and anti-capitalist views of property?
Many who've lived in the community of Austin and have seen the day to day operations of the Rhizome and the long-term trends, have recognized the power imbalance of the situation. Fundamentally, collective space should reside in collective hands. There was a social contract of peaceable transfer power. Yet, the behavior and attitudes of Kellogg and Pettigrew always reflected their special case status. Not to mention their personal fiscal, material, and professional benefits under the guise of non-profit status and collective community building. Nor, their responsibility within the collective of building un-permitted structures for their own personal benefit and supposed community benefit. We have been co-dependent on the supposed benevolence of gift-giving from a privileged person. Frankly, we needed the space. And despite knowing that this day would come, we went ahead because we had nowhere else to go. We hastily relied on the good intentions of vastly more privileged people. Attempts were made to take good intentions out of the equation through the transfer of power—only to be stymied time and time again.
Now, I'm having a huge wake up call about the so-called community. Not so much about Kellogg and Pettigrew. I've seen them act like Queen and King of the Rhizome Castle for years. But, now, I see the meeting dynamics shake out like a bad anti-oppression workshop skit. Lip-service is given to a collective, consensus-based process when two people really run the show, their cadre of supporters seem well-intentioned yet politically fair weather, others can't deal with conflict and the elephant continues to sit in the room, voices are silenced because they are called too emotional, and people of color and marginalized folks are going to feel the brunt of the eviction. One sentiment I've heard a couple people throw out has illuminated this situation for me. Folks have said, “This is the United States, we can't just...” Its seems as though many folks in that room would stand up for somebody half way across the world out of guilt or some such motivation, rather than fight for their own home. In a classic display of privilege, folks are bouncing out of this community leaving the folks who actually live here to pick up the pieces and build again. Similar stories play out across the nation in these radical subcultures keeping them in their bubbles—never to reach out to people outside their activist playhouses.
Why am I putting this shit on blast? Well, because I think the situation is fucked up and I feel some sort of obligation to tell my version of the sequence of events. This piece will surely stir some controversy and hopefully spark some dialog. I've gone back and forth and had much self-doubt about how to approach this situation. I know this will piss some people off. I'm no stranger to controversy and firmly believe if actions cannot be held up to public scrutiny then something is amiss. I also think conflict is inevitable—especially when there is an power imbalance. We need to deal with it head on or not at all. Kellogg and Pettigrew have stated their intention to do as they please. So, either we wait for their word or pressure them to make the concessions that are politically and culturally ours. As long as Kellogg and Pettigrew continue their work creating “sustainable revolution” in New York and beyond, they must be held accountable for the sustainability of the Allen Street Warehouse and I hope this article aids in that.
Perhaps, there's still hope to make an offer to transfer the building in collective hands and for Kellogg and Pettigrew to do the right thing. Maybe this piece will ruin it. It should happen soon, if at all, because Kellogg and Pettigrew are leaving Texas once everyone's out and won't be looking back. What I heard last night, in not so many words, was there was no plan to pull permits and thusly no plan for collective purchase. I wonder why would they care once they leave this town? Sometimes, I think, its just not worth it. So, for now, I will no longer wait for the whims of the landlords or the illusion of collective process.
If Kellogg and Pettigrew choose not to transfer ownership to the collective, then the question is what's the community's cut?
This Saturday and Sunday there is a estate sale happening at the Rhizome. People are packing their bags and selling off community property. Come on down to the Rhizome to see it all go down.
Good Night and Adieu,
-Brent Perdue
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
I received the press release the other day and spread the word based on that. I think this is a typical dependency situation that is a feudal hold over in a capitalist culture. A do-gooder with some money develops a temporary interest in a community. The community becomes dependent on the good will of this benefactor. The benefactor looses interest and the community flounders because the whole relationship is based on a semi-feudal liege system within a capitalist economy. It may be a temporary low rent situation or an illusion of a democratic environment but like in all such situations when the good will is gone if you don't have legal rights you are screwed.
Real power comes from struggle. If it is worth it you will fight for it if it is just another do-gooder effort then it will dissolve like er dust in the wind, or was that a castle made of sand?
Real power comes from struggle. If it is worth it you will fight for it if it is just another do-gooder effort then it will dissolve like er dust in the wind, or was that a castle made of sand?
For more information:
http://Garyrumor.com
What plan do you propose for the Collective to purchase the space?
I'm also glad that you added there near the end that this is your opinion.
Personally, I don't think that demonizing Scott and Stacy is the right thing to do, or productive. But that's just my opinion. One of the reasons Scott and Stacy are leaving is because they feel like people in Austin hate them.
It is a shame that the collective and S&S weren't able to move towards a transfer of the property before it was a crisis situation, but I believe that blame for that is rightly shared between the collective and the owners. Neither is solely to blame.
So there's another perspective on the situation.
-Adam
I'm also glad that you added there near the end that this is your opinion.
Personally, I don't think that demonizing Scott and Stacy is the right thing to do, or productive. But that's just my opinion. One of the reasons Scott and Stacy are leaving is because they feel like people in Austin hate them.
It is a shame that the collective and S&S weren't able to move towards a transfer of the property before it was a crisis situation, but I believe that blame for that is rightly shared between the collective and the owners. Neither is solely to blame.
So there's another perspective on the situation.
-Adam
as a former member of a collective housed in the rhizome, now living in a city that starves for a space like it, this is truly sad. the left in this country sorely lacks stable institutional residences, cultural spaces, and gathering places, and its sad to see one go down.
but it also raises the question many have raised over the years about the role of the rhizome in the gentrification of east austin. if power-holders at a space lack deep commitment to the community, shit like this happens way too often. and i hate to think that condos might be built on the site. there were many people and organizations that did amazing work that were based at the rhizome, and i don't want to diminish that at all, but this raises some hard questions about the impact that locating projects like the rhizome in poor communities of color really has in cities across the country. what does solidarity really mean? how can we build real alliances and relationships without reproducing colonial logics? without real community accountability, this is bound to happen over and over again.
i miss my austin folks so much, and am sad that we will have one less place to celebrate and make trouble.
but it also raises the question many have raised over the years about the role of the rhizome in the gentrification of east austin. if power-holders at a space lack deep commitment to the community, shit like this happens way too often. and i hate to think that condos might be built on the site. there were many people and organizations that did amazing work that were based at the rhizome, and i don't want to diminish that at all, but this raises some hard questions about the impact that locating projects like the rhizome in poor communities of color really has in cities across the country. what does solidarity really mean? how can we build real alliances and relationships without reproducing colonial logics? without real community accountability, this is bound to happen over and over again.
i miss my austin folks so much, and am sad that we will have one less place to celebrate and make trouble.
I do not know much about this issue, and am ready to be convinced that Kellogg and Pettigrew deserve to be blamed, but this article failed to convince me of anything. Blaming is not the most interesting reaction to adversity under any circumstances, and an article in which an author points the finger at others and fails to discuss his/her own roles, responsibilities, failings, and possible alternatives is dubious. If the collective decided to write such a letter, and there were signatures of a majority of current residents, I would have had a much different reaction, but this comes across like one disgruntled person. If it's true that "many who've lived in the community of Austin" agree about these charges, why aren't there signatories?
If blame really needs to be determined here, I would first and foremost like to see acknowledged that the system of land-ownership / capitalism is lousy and tends to lead towards these sorts of outcomes for collectively run properties. I would like to see a criticism of gentrification on the East Side of Austin. I would like to see a criticism of the system of permits and inspections.
Even if all of that is to be taken for granted, and we are merely criticizing the ways in which collective members play the cards they are dealt (i.e. the system as it is), then there should be more discussion of what other members of the collective did or didn't do. Or better yet, instead of writing a blame article, an article about what to do to save this situation, how to do better for other collectives, or to honor the struggle of those who have kicked ass for many years doing all that the Rhizome does.
If blame really needs to be determined here, I would first and foremost like to see acknowledged that the system of land-ownership / capitalism is lousy and tends to lead towards these sorts of outcomes for collectively run properties. I would like to see a criticism of gentrification on the East Side of Austin. I would like to see a criticism of the system of permits and inspections.
Even if all of that is to be taken for granted, and we are merely criticizing the ways in which collective members play the cards they are dealt (i.e. the system as it is), then there should be more discussion of what other members of the collective did or didn't do. Or better yet, instead of writing a blame article, an article about what to do to save this situation, how to do better for other collectives, or to honor the struggle of those who have kicked ass for many years doing all that the Rhizome does.
For more information:
http://nickcooper.com
I came to Austin several years ago and Rhizome was the first place I went to as a young person seeking an outlet for my growing skepticism and ideas and interest for action. I hardly took two steps into that place before I was made to feel like an outsider. The sense that a fucked up social hierarchy existed there based on how "radical" one appeared to be was quickly evident. The way things are going down now seems to me to be a reflection of that sentiment. Rhizome, as its social elites were concerned, was never meant to be a space that brought about real social change but rather as a means to stroke their own egos and goof off in their radical playground as I think Brent put it. Over time, however, I met a lot of the people that either lived or worked at Rhizome and even did a little work there myself. Projects like KPWR and IBP and Food not Bombs and Indy Media and Bikes Across Borders have actually contributed to building community and my hope is now that they can finally strip themselves of that radical elite filter that hangs over Rhizome their ideas and messages can really take off.
Our community has recently undergone a massive wake-up call and been reminded of the dangers and liabilities of looking up to and deferring to the loudest, coolest, or most accredited activists in the room. I think it would be best for us to take all of these lessons and build our movements and institutional spaces to open access to beyond those within our limited comfort zones.
Also, right on Brent for saying your piece. The point about decisions not being able to stand up to scrutiny being suspect is right on the money.
Our community has recently undergone a massive wake-up call and been reminded of the dangers and liabilities of looking up to and deferring to the loudest, coolest, or most accredited activists in the room. I think it would be best for us to take all of these lessons and build our movements and institutional spaces to open access to beyond those within our limited comfort zones.
Also, right on Brent for saying your piece. The point about decisions not being able to stand up to scrutiny being suspect is right on the money.
if you visit the travis county tax apparaisal website above you'll see the property is only valued at 147k. Kellogg appears to have bought it for about 80k.
not only are they phonies, they are trying to juke the collective by about a quarter mill.
not only are they phonies, they are trying to juke the collective by about a quarter mill.
For more information:
http://www.traviscad.org/t_list.php
sorry about the url. try this one.
For more information:
http://www.traviscad.org/travisdetail.php?...
jojo, if you had been at any of the rhizome collective meetings where this was discussed, you would know that they bought it for about $175k, and that the TCAD numbers reflect that (properties are usually appraised at about %80 of the sales price when newly bought). So in this case, calling them liars is not correct.
As to them wanting $390k for the place now, that's another question. They have never said that's what they bough it for. It it worth that much? By who's estimate? According to what values? This is something worth discussing. Some of the realators they spoke with said they'd put it on the market for $500k.
As to them wanting $390k for the place now, that's another question. They have never said that's what they bough it for. It it worth that much? By who's estimate? According to what values? This is something worth discussing. Some of the realators they spoke with said they'd put it on the market for $500k.
i'm not sure that i called them liars. if you go back to 2001 you'll see an appraisal for 80,500. if the property was bought in 2000 that should be pretty close to the purchase price. am i wrong that it was bought back then? i definitely wasn't at the meeting. i hate polygraphs.
adam, you know me and i'd love to talk to you more about this if you want to email me.
adam, you know me and i'd love to talk to you more about this if you want to email me.
please take brent seriously when he takes responsibility for this article being his opinion - not the opinion of the individuals involved or of the rhizome collective. it is important for everyone reading this to hold brent accountable for airing misinformation and for his aggressive accusations without acknowledgment of all the facts or realities of the situation.
to imply that stacy and skotty are forcing the collective to leave is untrue. i stood in a meeting, personally, with the head of the code enforcement department to hear him tell a group of us that we had to vacate by the stated deadline. this is just one example of the numerous mistakes brent makes in his slanderous editorial.
as usual, i encourage us all to be conscious of our news sources. personal opinions do not necessarily represent the facts or the entire story.
to imply that stacy and skotty are forcing the collective to leave is untrue. i stood in a meeting, personally, with the head of the code enforcement department to hear him tell a group of us that we had to vacate by the stated deadline. this is just one example of the numerous mistakes brent makes in his slanderous editorial.
as usual, i encourage us all to be conscious of our news sources. personal opinions do not necessarily represent the facts or the entire story.
Eleventh Hour for the Rhizome Collective
Hi folks. This letter is not meant to be a challenge to anyone beyond an explicit invitation to work in a solely constructive vein while it is still possible for the Rhizome Collective Warehouse in Austin to remain in the hands of the community that lives and works in it and be safeguarded for those that might live or work there in the future. I remind you that the national economic situation is dire and we cannot expect to be able to replace community space in a time when it will likely be desperately needed. So everybody better cool out and straighten up.
I have been in contact with Baku, Skotty, and a few other folks who have standing in this negotiation. There is a bunch of organizing work that remains to be done and those that have power in this situation have a responsibility to do that work, responsibly. I feel that the degree of responsibility corresponds to the degree of power, so am trying to get a clear sense from Skotty and Stacy as to what they are willing to offer in terms of transparency, on a local and national level, and under what conditions they may be willing to continue to negotiate the sale of the Warehouse at 300 Allen St.
Skotty is saying that he is very busy with possibly being saddled with a $30k / day fine, starting in a month or similar time period, and trying to respond to dealing with this recent crisis of code violations and fire marshalls and shitstorm that has hit the fan, as well as trying to relocate the resident organizations like inside books, KPWR, etc. and is just trying to get his head above water and address this issue in a non-reactionary way in the next few days. I feel that that is a responsible position considering the heat the house is under from the Authorities.
SOME other parties are asking that the long-standing agreement that the Rhizome Collective, with or without Skotty and Stacy, would have a Right of First Refusal to buy the collective be honored immediately and that they be given a reasonable time to raise the money. This time period and/or cost may be affected by the current interference from the City of Austin, but that interference can likely be folded into a series of contingencies in the sale contract.
Next Steps: A clear offer on the part of the collective, or members thereof, must be made to Scott Kellogg. A real-estate attorney must be contracted and made to explain the options for a contract, which will likely include the willingness of the collective to take on whatever fines, legal or permit issues, etc. that are still withstanding as the property goes into contract and closing.
The long-standing offer on Skotty and Stacy's part has been to sell the warehouse and constituent land to the Rhizome Collective 501(c)3 at the price Skotty payed for it. Skotty has stated this amount to be $175,000, plus an increase equal to the inflation of that figure over the past eight years. That inflation rate can be irrefutably substantiated by any number of accountants or other finance professionals. I suggest that the collective offer the high end of the inflation-range if there is one. The request has also been to include the price of whatever improvements they, Skotty and Stacy, have paid for for the building that they can substantiate, including the new apartment on the 2nd floor. This latter item may have to be removed as the apartment and other additions may prove to be much greater a liability than an asset. The cost should clearly be adjusted accordingly.
All of this shit and more can go into a legally binding sale agreement. "The buyer agrees to purchase X property at X price on X date, putting X downpayment into esgrot on X date, providing that the following contingencies are satisfied:
- The seller has clear title
- X
- X
- X
signed, buyer X, signed, seller X.
Obviously if a different quantity seems equitable to all parties, that's up to them. Personally i think folks will be hard pressed to raise the maybe $60K that they'll need for the up to %30 downpayment, contract and closing costs, title search, and so forth. But i am not technically a party in this.
I am willing to work on it, and there's alot of work to be done.
Please get a hold of me and help me to put a clear picture together to make sure that noone gets character assassinated and that justice and equity are served at this crucial point. I am attempting to set myself up as an ad hoc mediator and info clearing house in this debate as i do have a lot of history with most of the people involved and have been intimatley acquainted with the real estate negotiations, offers, etc., from both sides, especially for the past 3 or four years.
I am writing to this list to remind everyone that it's not too late to try to negotiate in good faith with each other, since that is lkely the only effective place to begin a straightforward process. There has been a process in the works around collective ownership of the warehouse and "horizontalizing" the organizational structure for some time, but because of the accusations leveled and the great stakes of gaining or losing this great organizing space, the process now needs to have tranparency for whoever wants to know, like me, until such time that there is consensus from all parties that things are running smoothly and monitoring is no longer needed.
The situation for both the owners, the collective, and the residents is clearly complex. Housing security, big-ticket liabiltity, sweat equity, and the ethics of everyone involved are on the line.
The risk for the rest of the national "community", or movement, is also great. The Rhizome Collective is a very prominent example, nationally and even internationally (if only because it's in the US) of many important things. Consensus-based or Anarchist principles, "Low-tech, Low-cost Urban Sustainability", the anti-neoliberal movement, collective living, and on and on.
While people have varying experiences with how robustly any of these ideals was actually in play at the rhizome at a given time, it still remains that Rhizome has been a symbol of these and related struggles, messages, and work for nearly a decade. And while the whole world may not be watching, our whole world will hear and feel how this shit goes down. For those of you who question the existence or importance "any more" of the movement, or of the revolution, i know a couple billion concerned individuals who would like a word with you.
As for the rest of us, let's get cracking. We need a real estate attorney and need to craft an offer that can address the immediate financial concerns due to the code violations. Somebody needs to contract this attorney, we can probably get pretty far on four- or five-hundred bucks.
you can reach me at henrydoit [at] gmail.com
peace.
ps - please give a recognizable name if you are going to post shit to this list. we don't need disrupters or provacateurs.
Hi folks. This letter is not meant to be a challenge to anyone beyond an explicit invitation to work in a solely constructive vein while it is still possible for the Rhizome Collective Warehouse in Austin to remain in the hands of the community that lives and works in it and be safeguarded for those that might live or work there in the future. I remind you that the national economic situation is dire and we cannot expect to be able to replace community space in a time when it will likely be desperately needed. So everybody better cool out and straighten up.
I have been in contact with Baku, Skotty, and a few other folks who have standing in this negotiation. There is a bunch of organizing work that remains to be done and those that have power in this situation have a responsibility to do that work, responsibly. I feel that the degree of responsibility corresponds to the degree of power, so am trying to get a clear sense from Skotty and Stacy as to what they are willing to offer in terms of transparency, on a local and national level, and under what conditions they may be willing to continue to negotiate the sale of the Warehouse at 300 Allen St.
Skotty is saying that he is very busy with possibly being saddled with a $30k / day fine, starting in a month or similar time period, and trying to respond to dealing with this recent crisis of code violations and fire marshalls and shitstorm that has hit the fan, as well as trying to relocate the resident organizations like inside books, KPWR, etc. and is just trying to get his head above water and address this issue in a non-reactionary way in the next few days. I feel that that is a responsible position considering the heat the house is under from the Authorities.
SOME other parties are asking that the long-standing agreement that the Rhizome Collective, with or without Skotty and Stacy, would have a Right of First Refusal to buy the collective be honored immediately and that they be given a reasonable time to raise the money. This time period and/or cost may be affected by the current interference from the City of Austin, but that interference can likely be folded into a series of contingencies in the sale contract.
Next Steps: A clear offer on the part of the collective, or members thereof, must be made to Scott Kellogg. A real-estate attorney must be contracted and made to explain the options for a contract, which will likely include the willingness of the collective to take on whatever fines, legal or permit issues, etc. that are still withstanding as the property goes into contract and closing.
The long-standing offer on Skotty and Stacy's part has been to sell the warehouse and constituent land to the Rhizome Collective 501(c)3 at the price Skotty payed for it. Skotty has stated this amount to be $175,000, plus an increase equal to the inflation of that figure over the past eight years. That inflation rate can be irrefutably substantiated by any number of accountants or other finance professionals. I suggest that the collective offer the high end of the inflation-range if there is one. The request has also been to include the price of whatever improvements they, Skotty and Stacy, have paid for for the building that they can substantiate, including the new apartment on the 2nd floor. This latter item may have to be removed as the apartment and other additions may prove to be much greater a liability than an asset. The cost should clearly be adjusted accordingly.
All of this shit and more can go into a legally binding sale agreement. "The buyer agrees to purchase X property at X price on X date, putting X downpayment into esgrot on X date, providing that the following contingencies are satisfied:
- The seller has clear title
- X
- X
- X
signed, buyer X, signed, seller X.
Obviously if a different quantity seems equitable to all parties, that's up to them. Personally i think folks will be hard pressed to raise the maybe $60K that they'll need for the up to %30 downpayment, contract and closing costs, title search, and so forth. But i am not technically a party in this.
I am willing to work on it, and there's alot of work to be done.
Please get a hold of me and help me to put a clear picture together to make sure that noone gets character assassinated and that justice and equity are served at this crucial point. I am attempting to set myself up as an ad hoc mediator and info clearing house in this debate as i do have a lot of history with most of the people involved and have been intimatley acquainted with the real estate negotiations, offers, etc., from both sides, especially for the past 3 or four years.
I am writing to this list to remind everyone that it's not too late to try to negotiate in good faith with each other, since that is lkely the only effective place to begin a straightforward process. There has been a process in the works around collective ownership of the warehouse and "horizontalizing" the organizational structure for some time, but because of the accusations leveled and the great stakes of gaining or losing this great organizing space, the process now needs to have tranparency for whoever wants to know, like me, until such time that there is consensus from all parties that things are running smoothly and monitoring is no longer needed.
The situation for both the owners, the collective, and the residents is clearly complex. Housing security, big-ticket liabiltity, sweat equity, and the ethics of everyone involved are on the line.
The risk for the rest of the national "community", or movement, is also great. The Rhizome Collective is a very prominent example, nationally and even internationally (if only because it's in the US) of many important things. Consensus-based or Anarchist principles, "Low-tech, Low-cost Urban Sustainability", the anti-neoliberal movement, collective living, and on and on.
While people have varying experiences with how robustly any of these ideals was actually in play at the rhizome at a given time, it still remains that Rhizome has been a symbol of these and related struggles, messages, and work for nearly a decade. And while the whole world may not be watching, our whole world will hear and feel how this shit goes down. For those of you who question the existence or importance "any more" of the movement, or of the revolution, i know a couple billion concerned individuals who would like a word with you.
As for the rest of us, let's get cracking. We need a real estate attorney and need to craft an offer that can address the immediate financial concerns due to the code violations. Somebody needs to contract this attorney, we can probably get pretty far on four- or five-hundred bucks.
you can reach me at henrydoit [at] gmail.com
peace.
ps - please give a recognizable name if you are going to post shit to this list. we don't need disrupters or provacateurs.
yes sir, sir!
wow brent, not only was your little tirade irresponsible and ignorant but it was filled with false accusations and straight-up lies.
let me begin by saying that on wednesday, at a meeting to address, among other things, scotty and susannah's conversation with austin code enforcement, that the collective unanimously picked, and asked scotty to represent us in front of the city council. and after consensing on various talking points, we empowered him to write a short defense of the rhizome, and the collectives that work out of rhizome. you weren't at that meeting.
the next day, at the city council meeting, scotty, stacy, and at least 6 of us who were at the previous nights' meeting, met with the head of code enforcement for the city. you weren't at that city council meeting eit! her, nor were you there when we met with the head of code enforcement.....so how do you know what he said? i'm guessing you made it up or are going on heresay.
either way, bud, let me fill you in on what he actually DID say:
he said that the city's forced eviction of the rhizome by tuesday, march 17th still stood.
he also gave us 30 extra days to pull the necessary permits to bring the space back up to code, if scotty so chose to do.
should i say that again? here, let me scream it, since you might not have heard it the first time:
THE HEAD OF AUSTIN'S CODE ENFORCEMENT SAID THAT EVERYONE HAD TO VACATE THE RHIZOME BY THURSDAY, MARCH 17th, OR FACE SEVERE FINES. fines that i'm sure you aren't volunteering to pony-up to cover.
your accusation that the city gave us 30 extra days to stay in the space, and that scotty is still trying to enforce a march 17th eviction that was lifted to force everyone out is FALSE.
among many ! of the other things you said in your little diatribe.
look, this sh it is hard enough on all of us, without you trying to divide everyone and make us fight amongst each other. it's a lot more complicated than you make it seem, and i'm sorry it doesn't fit into the ideological slant you're taking.
having to bitch you out on an email listserve is not something i looked forward to doing, but since you went to such extremes to publicize your bullshit lies, i figured you deserved it.
and you're also making it really, REALLY hard for me to like you right now.
so, cut it out, and back off. -skot
let me begin by saying that on wednesday, at a meeting to address, among other things, scotty and susannah's conversation with austin code enforcement, that the collective unanimously picked, and asked scotty to represent us in front of the city council. and after consensing on various talking points, we empowered him to write a short defense of the rhizome, and the collectives that work out of rhizome. you weren't at that meeting.
the next day, at the city council meeting, scotty, stacy, and at least 6 of us who were at the previous nights' meeting, met with the head of code enforcement for the city. you weren't at that city council meeting eit! her, nor were you there when we met with the head of code enforcement.....so how do you know what he said? i'm guessing you made it up or are going on heresay.
either way, bud, let me fill you in on what he actually DID say:
he said that the city's forced eviction of the rhizome by tuesday, march 17th still stood.
he also gave us 30 extra days to pull the necessary permits to bring the space back up to code, if scotty so chose to do.
should i say that again? here, let me scream it, since you might not have heard it the first time:
THE HEAD OF AUSTIN'S CODE ENFORCEMENT SAID THAT EVERYONE HAD TO VACATE THE RHIZOME BY THURSDAY, MARCH 17th, OR FACE SEVERE FINES. fines that i'm sure you aren't volunteering to pony-up to cover.
your accusation that the city gave us 30 extra days to stay in the space, and that scotty is still trying to enforce a march 17th eviction that was lifted to force everyone out is FALSE.
among many ! of the other things you said in your little diatribe.
look, this sh it is hard enough on all of us, without you trying to divide everyone and make us fight amongst each other. it's a lot more complicated than you make it seem, and i'm sorry it doesn't fit into the ideological slant you're taking.
having to bitch you out on an email listserve is not something i looked forward to doing, but since you went to such extremes to publicize your bullshit lies, i figured you deserved it.
and you're also making it really, REALLY hard for me to like you right now.
so, cut it out, and back off. -skot
scotty and stacy stand to make a profit off the rhizome.
they have publicly stated they want to make a profit.
they have created a co-dependency to their financial privilege.
they have refused to participate in any type of transfer of power over the nine year history of the rhizome. (oh, and offers to sell the building to the collective is not the same as PARTICIPATING in the process)
They will not sell the building to the the rhizome collective because they do not feel the collective is responsible or capable of handling the process.
scotty bought the rhizome with money that was given to him (possibly by another white privileged man who made his money the way most white privileged males have historically made their money through capitalist abuse and accumulation, possibly.)
they have refused offers to share responsibility over the code violations.
they knowingly participated in illegal construction, which they also enjoyed the benefits of, along with the rest of the collective.
they stepped outside of the collective process and continued to participate in this illegal activity putting the rhizome at further risk, by building structures for their own personal use.
as someone who has been involved with the rhizome for over six years i have personally seen both the hard work that EVERYONE (including stacy and scotty) has put into the rhizome as well as the disrespect that scotty and stacy have shown to the collective, to any collective decision making process, and now to the community that will be further gentrified when they decide to sell to the highest bidder and not to the rhizome collective.
THE RHIZOME HAS GIVEN YOU A SPACE NOW WE MUST GIVE RHIZOME THEIR SPACE!!!!
SELL TO THE COLLECTIVE!!
LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!
EVERYTHING FOR EVERYONE AND NOTHING FOR OURSELVES!
they have publicly stated they want to make a profit.
they have created a co-dependency to their financial privilege.
they have refused to participate in any type of transfer of power over the nine year history of the rhizome. (oh, and offers to sell the building to the collective is not the same as PARTICIPATING in the process)
They will not sell the building to the the rhizome collective because they do not feel the collective is responsible or capable of handling the process.
scotty bought the rhizome with money that was given to him (possibly by another white privileged man who made his money the way most white privileged males have historically made their money through capitalist abuse and accumulation, possibly.)
they have refused offers to share responsibility over the code violations.
they knowingly participated in illegal construction, which they also enjoyed the benefits of, along with the rest of the collective.
they stepped outside of the collective process and continued to participate in this illegal activity putting the rhizome at further risk, by building structures for their own personal use.
as someone who has been involved with the rhizome for over six years i have personally seen both the hard work that EVERYONE (including stacy and scotty) has put into the rhizome as well as the disrespect that scotty and stacy have shown to the collective, to any collective decision making process, and now to the community that will be further gentrified when they decide to sell to the highest bidder and not to the rhizome collective.
THE RHIZOME HAS GIVEN YOU A SPACE NOW WE MUST GIVE RHIZOME THEIR SPACE!!!!
SELL TO THE COLLECTIVE!!
LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!
EVERYTHING FOR EVERYONE AND NOTHING FOR OURSELVES!
I think another thing that will taper any gained momentum to save the space or transition to the brownfield is fighting amongst ourselves. the city is closing our space, not skotty and stacy. skotty and stacy have allowed us to operate here for 9 years with no economic gain for themselves personally off of our donations for the space, how does that make them evil landlords? stacy handles the nonprofit legal stuff and taxes as a volunteer collective member while she is out of town.
brent, where have you been the past year during collective meetings? you are taking advantage of collective process by speaking excessively at meetings when rhizome consensus decision making policy states that if you are not participating then you must be silent and listen to active members! i've never seen you until a week ago man. i think you need to take a step back and reexamine what you think you know.
i've only heard some of the least active members voice the opinion you expressed in your office. indy media is completely inactive. kpwr has not been doing office hours regularly since paseo left. kpwr has not even taken out the garbage can full of construction debris from installing a new window. many kpwr members only come to meetings when they are wanting to schedule an event. these people, you know who you are. and my love to the many kpwr members who in no way fit this description, i do not mean to offend.
we are all losing our space here, and most members are working to protect what is valuable to rhizome collective and the other collectives, not split us apart due to personal issues. i really respect that work and hope to work with all these people again sometime in the near future.
peace
brent, where have you been the past year during collective meetings? you are taking advantage of collective process by speaking excessively at meetings when rhizome consensus decision making policy states that if you are not participating then you must be silent and listen to active members! i've never seen you until a week ago man. i think you need to take a step back and reexamine what you think you know.
i've only heard some of the least active members voice the opinion you expressed in your office. indy media is completely inactive. kpwr has not been doing office hours regularly since paseo left. kpwr has not even taken out the garbage can full of construction debris from installing a new window. many kpwr members only come to meetings when they are wanting to schedule an event. these people, you know who you are. and my love to the many kpwr members who in no way fit this description, i do not mean to offend.
we are all losing our space here, and most members are working to protect what is valuable to rhizome collective and the other collectives, not split us apart due to personal issues. i really respect that work and hope to work with all these people again sometime in the near future.
peace
So, The first I heard of this was a communique that came on behalf of Rolando from the the Rhizome, and I believe the collective member who deserves the bulk of credit for maintaining the rhizome itself, and a standard of ethic with which the collective was to engage with the local community.
The communique read as follows:
(*continued at bottom)
Cafe Rhizome "El Pipirulapa"
Every Sunday 10am -2:30pm
Rhizome Collective
300 Allen St. Austin, TX 78702
Food! Drinks! KPWR DJs! and more!
The "Cafe Rhizome" will be open every Sunday serving food and drink to help raise funds for the purchasing of the Rhizome warehouse. If you or your organization would like to help by providing donations or other support please email us at p_mendoza79 [at] yahoo.com
The Rhizome Collective has recently been informed that their building will be put up for sale in six months. The Collective has begun a public campaign to help in the purchasing of the building. Many important community organizations as well as Rhizome house residents will be forced out of the Rhizome if the requested $390,000 is not raised to purchase the building. Over the past 9 years the Rhizome collective has been an important part of the Austin and specifically the East Austin activist community and history, and we cannot let it end now. Please help us by participating in the campaign to help buy our building by supporting the many organizations and people that work in and out of the Rhizome.
Please keep an eye open for any bulletins, benefits, fundraisers, and gatherings that you can help us with, also tell everyone you know to help spread the word.
Help the Rhizome Collective buy its own building!
Stop the gentrification of the East side!
Don't let developers get their hands on the Rhizome!
(*continued)
After this initial communique, then the Building Inspector Issue came up. Interesting.
Now I am no stranger to flying off the handle when shit hits the fan, and I applaud Baku for not censoring himself, however difficult the things he brings up, are to palette.
Two more concerns.
Over the years the building inspectors, and fire inspectors have come through the Rhizome, and never ever gave a forced eviction notice????? What was different now? What structural difference made the inspector wild out this time? Was it the second story add-on? hmmmm. ta cabron, but I smell a big fucking dead fish. I am not on the ground, but I assure you that I am in constant communication with some of the collective members who built KPWR, and the collective members from the global south who needed the rhizome to live in peace.
two:
When I moved into the rhizome, I was specifically recruited to do work around keeping the Rhizome from being a gentrigying force. Rolando and I did door to door "walking by asking" in the local community, and we engaged in a series of 'teaching by learning" workshops revolving around a horizontal Zapatista framwork.
Today, original threat of sale express by the Rolando Bake Sale communique, would without doubt lead to further gentrification of East Austin, no doubt. Can't wait for the new studio art space for the next wave of white hipsters to open up. Can't wait for the barrage of VIce parties, and SXSW mayhem to come. This is something everyone, back in the day swore would and could never happen.
I feel skot! and adam's pain too, and y'all know you are my homies, but baku is not the enemy, nor the problem. The divisions in the matter are economical, poilitcal, and historical, and could not possibly be exacerbated by and indymedia post. Sometimes flying off the handle is the only way to get a real good conversation started. Remeber when Medea got Pied at the USSF? lol.
Selling the building, should include half the profit for the backspace collectives who have consistently provided the legitimizing base for the Rhizome Idea. But no matter what the compas in the back space should avoid ending up with yet another cacique (land barron).
As some one who left Austin in a haste, I have very little voice in the matter, but between this and the Brandon Darby shit, looks like I left right on time. My heart goes out to Rolando and Las Krudas, and the countless others whose work legitimized the rhizome on the block it occupied.
The communique read as follows:
(*continued at bottom)
Cafe Rhizome "El Pipirulapa"
Every Sunday 10am -2:30pm
Rhizome Collective
300 Allen St. Austin, TX 78702
Food! Drinks! KPWR DJs! and more!
The "Cafe Rhizome" will be open every Sunday serving food and drink to help raise funds for the purchasing of the Rhizome warehouse. If you or your organization would like to help by providing donations or other support please email us at p_mendoza79 [at] yahoo.com
The Rhizome Collective has recently been informed that their building will be put up for sale in six months. The Collective has begun a public campaign to help in the purchasing of the building. Many important community organizations as well as Rhizome house residents will be forced out of the Rhizome if the requested $390,000 is not raised to purchase the building. Over the past 9 years the Rhizome collective has been an important part of the Austin and specifically the East Austin activist community and history, and we cannot let it end now. Please help us by participating in the campaign to help buy our building by supporting the many organizations and people that work in and out of the Rhizome.
Please keep an eye open for any bulletins, benefits, fundraisers, and gatherings that you can help us with, also tell everyone you know to help spread the word.
Help the Rhizome Collective buy its own building!
Stop the gentrification of the East side!
Don't let developers get their hands on the Rhizome!
(*continued)
After this initial communique, then the Building Inspector Issue came up. Interesting.
Now I am no stranger to flying off the handle when shit hits the fan, and I applaud Baku for not censoring himself, however difficult the things he brings up, are to palette.
Two more concerns.
Over the years the building inspectors, and fire inspectors have come through the Rhizome, and never ever gave a forced eviction notice????? What was different now? What structural difference made the inspector wild out this time? Was it the second story add-on? hmmmm. ta cabron, but I smell a big fucking dead fish. I am not on the ground, but I assure you that I am in constant communication with some of the collective members who built KPWR, and the collective members from the global south who needed the rhizome to live in peace.
two:
When I moved into the rhizome, I was specifically recruited to do work around keeping the Rhizome from being a gentrigying force. Rolando and I did door to door "walking by asking" in the local community, and we engaged in a series of 'teaching by learning" workshops revolving around a horizontal Zapatista framwork.
Today, original threat of sale express by the Rolando Bake Sale communique, would without doubt lead to further gentrification of East Austin, no doubt. Can't wait for the new studio art space for the next wave of white hipsters to open up. Can't wait for the barrage of VIce parties, and SXSW mayhem to come. This is something everyone, back in the day swore would and could never happen.
I feel skot! and adam's pain too, and y'all know you are my homies, but baku is not the enemy, nor the problem. The divisions in the matter are economical, poilitcal, and historical, and could not possibly be exacerbated by and indymedia post. Sometimes flying off the handle is the only way to get a real good conversation started. Remeber when Medea got Pied at the USSF? lol.
Selling the building, should include half the profit for the backspace collectives who have consistently provided the legitimizing base for the Rhizome Idea. But no matter what the compas in the back space should avoid ending up with yet another cacique (land barron).
As some one who left Austin in a haste, I have very little voice in the matter, but between this and the Brandon Darby shit, looks like I left right on time. My heart goes out to Rolando and Las Krudas, and the countless others whose work legitimized the rhizome on the block it occupied.
Scotty and Stacy don't have a choice as to whether or not they should pull permits. The City of Austin is REQUIRING them to pull permits within 30 days or to face daily fines. What if they did transfer ownership to the "collective" like you suggest? Then the "collective" would have to foot the bill of all the upcoming fines that are inevitable with the impossibly short time frame of 30 days to pull permits and begin the all the necessary work to get up to code. First off, who is the "collective?" Secondly, did anyone in the "collective" ever speak up that they would take on such an endeavor. If you knew anything at all about the permit process, you would know that 30 days is insufficient time to complete the process let alone begin it. If you put your own personal issues of entitlement aside and actually listened and had the capacity to understand the complexity of the situation, you would know that Scotty and Stacy don't have a choice in the matter. IT IS MANDATORY THAT THEY PULL PERMITS WITHIN 30 DAYS OR THEY WILL FACE DAILY FINES. It's not the "collective" that faces fines. It's Scotty and Stacy that are liable so it's rather confusing as to why you are kicking someone when they're already down. You had an opportunity to gather all the facts of the situation and publish widely what's actually happening while you chose, instead, to ignorantly and aggressively widely publish a sequence of lies and personal, bitter attacks. This isn't journalism. You're taking advantage of your role with IndyMedia to publish your own divisive, personal opinions that are more harmful than helpful to anyone. This isn't your personal blog space. This is a news source and you're discrediting any validity it has by publishing your personal rant.
I know many people are extremely frustrated about the recent events surrounding the Rhizome. It has always been a space of dreams and frustrations. I think everyone reading can agree on a few things. Rhizome is an important space that must be saved from capitalist development. It is a hub of radical community participation and a bed of resistance within North America. Thousands of people have walked through its doors and gained inspiration about what is possible, and many have stuck around to do the work to help make those inspirations reality.
I would like to clarify a few things to people reading this that have no connection to Rhizome, as well as address the collective with my perspective. It is a warehouse located in east Austin a short bike ride from downtown. It was bought at the height of mass resistance to corporate globalization within the U.S. by Skotty, who inherited the money. An act of selflessness that I think cannot be overstated and should not be disparaged. This space was made available to people and organizations to use for radical organizing. Through the years various groups have taken up residence at Rhizome and have done profoundly important work. There has always been an allure about what happens there, but its all really quite simple; people working either collectively or individually to resist forces of oppression and injustice. I have heard from many people on many occasions that they never felt comfortable at the space, nor did I at first. For me, I soon found out those feelings were unfounded and that it only took determination to find my niche to work on projects I cared about. That said, there have always been unbalanced power relations at the space that truly bothered some and didn't really matter to others. From my perspective, the imbalance was more related to people's commitment to the space then who owned what, as that had never been an issue until more recent years. Obviously, Skotty and Stacy's commitment to Rhizome was total while they lived there and their contributions were integral to what Rhizome has become. At first the fact that “the collective” did not own the space was actually helpful to different groups in a lot of important ways.
A few years back dynamics at the Rhizome began to change. Collectives working within the Rhizome began showing more interest to make decisions and run the day to day of the space, which had became a 501(c)3 and acquired more land further east through a truly rad brownfeild cleanup project. During this time Skotty and Stacy left Austin for the majority of the time and started a family. The way the operation of the space was left did not make the attempts to horizontalize the space easy with the long absences of Skotty and Stacy who had a lot of sway over important decisions. But, it must be said, the internal workings and individual commitments of people seeking to horizontalize were not totally up to the task of what this actually meant, most especially on the financial/book keeping end of things. This, coupled with what Brent calls Skotty's and Stacy's “special case status” was a concrete reminder that this collective did not control its own space. During this time a lot of animosity built up over this dynamic. As did fears of the place being sold, which to me at the time seemed unfounded. After about two years of trying to “horizontalize” the broader Rhizome collective to little end long time and/or committed participants left in frustration. Something that was deeply troubling but talked about little. (It must be said that this is the time that I moved out of Austin, so what follows is based on my perceptions of whats going on, although I have read all meeting notes and collective decision messages since my departure. Also, efforts to horizontalize have not stopped and the collective has taken on more and more responsibilities over this time).
Fast forward to recent events.
It is difficult to gauge whats going on, but even from afar it is plainly obvious that there has been much confusion about the wish to sell the Rhizome. Collective meeting notes have been vague to put it kindly. This is the pertinent part from the 2/16/09 meeting: “Stacy and Skotty have given the collective 6 months to make them an offer and they want the collective to buy the building. They have had a realtor appraise the warehouse who said he would sell it for $390,000.” To me this implies that they are seeking a comparable offer, which is something that realistically cannot be afforded. However, it implies something else, that Skotty and Stacy are seeking to make a substantial profit off the space. Fairly or unfairly, true or false, thats what one would get from reading these notes and I'm sure gossip around the Rhizome is backing that reading up, as well a stirrup up a lot of anger. I did not wish to bring this up now, but after Brent's release and the current crisis with the city it has become obvious that everything must be on the table and all the caveats to what will transpire must be brought into light. I was intending to wait until after the current code infraction crisis subsided to weigh in, but Brent is right, especially now after making his thoughts known on this forum, this must stand up to public scrutiny. I will also say as an aside that there are many who have participated deeply with Rhizome over the years that feel the same way he does, for whatever that is worth. Rhizome is a space of resistance, and profoundly anti-capitalist. I truly wish no profit is made off its sale.
I support the aim of Henry for the collective to make a concrete offer, once the code infraction cost is accessed. Henry's contribution is well thought out and a good starting point. Yes, Skotty and Stacy have poured their hearts into this project over many years, but so have others--many others. Even then I have my doubts about the feasibility of the cost, but this space has always been owned by Skotty and its his choice. Thats the reality of the situation. This all could become moot depending on the true nature and cost of the code infractions, which have not been listed in meeting notes and I think are yet to be accurately determined.
I ask a few things of Skotty and Stacy to help clarify and mitigate the situation. It is up to you all to make it solely to the collective or include it publicly, but the confusions must be addressed and people should base their reactions on that offer, not on what they have heard, or even read in meeting notes.
Things I wish to see included in this statement:
1)What was the price initially paid and when was it purchased?
2)Do you seek any kind of profit? If so, how much?
3)If the collective shows serious determination and ability to purchase the building will you give them more time to raise the capital. If so, what is the maximum time you are willing to give?
I hope this serves to get you all talking openly and honestly with one another. Ill will for Skotty buying the place is unfounded. Currently, the city is forcing people to vacate, not Skotty and Stacy. The anger bubbling up has been brewing for years and revolves around power, both real and perceived, and how the space will be sold. The situation is daunting but not hopeless and, if all goes well, could end up with a profoundly stronger Rhizome collective. Regardless of what happens remember rhizomes produce shoots and new root systems and are extremely difficult to kill. Whatever happens, we are still a community dedicated to making positive change and will have to work together if we are going to truly affect anything.
I love you all,
~erock
I would like to clarify a few things to people reading this that have no connection to Rhizome, as well as address the collective with my perspective. It is a warehouse located in east Austin a short bike ride from downtown. It was bought at the height of mass resistance to corporate globalization within the U.S. by Skotty, who inherited the money. An act of selflessness that I think cannot be overstated and should not be disparaged. This space was made available to people and organizations to use for radical organizing. Through the years various groups have taken up residence at Rhizome and have done profoundly important work. There has always been an allure about what happens there, but its all really quite simple; people working either collectively or individually to resist forces of oppression and injustice. I have heard from many people on many occasions that they never felt comfortable at the space, nor did I at first. For me, I soon found out those feelings were unfounded and that it only took determination to find my niche to work on projects I cared about. That said, there have always been unbalanced power relations at the space that truly bothered some and didn't really matter to others. From my perspective, the imbalance was more related to people's commitment to the space then who owned what, as that had never been an issue until more recent years. Obviously, Skotty and Stacy's commitment to Rhizome was total while they lived there and their contributions were integral to what Rhizome has become. At first the fact that “the collective” did not own the space was actually helpful to different groups in a lot of important ways.
A few years back dynamics at the Rhizome began to change. Collectives working within the Rhizome began showing more interest to make decisions and run the day to day of the space, which had became a 501(c)3 and acquired more land further east through a truly rad brownfeild cleanup project. During this time Skotty and Stacy left Austin for the majority of the time and started a family. The way the operation of the space was left did not make the attempts to horizontalize the space easy with the long absences of Skotty and Stacy who had a lot of sway over important decisions. But, it must be said, the internal workings and individual commitments of people seeking to horizontalize were not totally up to the task of what this actually meant, most especially on the financial/book keeping end of things. This, coupled with what Brent calls Skotty's and Stacy's “special case status” was a concrete reminder that this collective did not control its own space. During this time a lot of animosity built up over this dynamic. As did fears of the place being sold, which to me at the time seemed unfounded. After about two years of trying to “horizontalize” the broader Rhizome collective to little end long time and/or committed participants left in frustration. Something that was deeply troubling but talked about little. (It must be said that this is the time that I moved out of Austin, so what follows is based on my perceptions of whats going on, although I have read all meeting notes and collective decision messages since my departure. Also, efforts to horizontalize have not stopped and the collective has taken on more and more responsibilities over this time).
Fast forward to recent events.
It is difficult to gauge whats going on, but even from afar it is plainly obvious that there has been much confusion about the wish to sell the Rhizome. Collective meeting notes have been vague to put it kindly. This is the pertinent part from the 2/16/09 meeting: “Stacy and Skotty have given the collective 6 months to make them an offer and they want the collective to buy the building. They have had a realtor appraise the warehouse who said he would sell it for $390,000.” To me this implies that they are seeking a comparable offer, which is something that realistically cannot be afforded. However, it implies something else, that Skotty and Stacy are seeking to make a substantial profit off the space. Fairly or unfairly, true or false, thats what one would get from reading these notes and I'm sure gossip around the Rhizome is backing that reading up, as well a stirrup up a lot of anger. I did not wish to bring this up now, but after Brent's release and the current crisis with the city it has become obvious that everything must be on the table and all the caveats to what will transpire must be brought into light. I was intending to wait until after the current code infraction crisis subsided to weigh in, but Brent is right, especially now after making his thoughts known on this forum, this must stand up to public scrutiny. I will also say as an aside that there are many who have participated deeply with Rhizome over the years that feel the same way he does, for whatever that is worth. Rhizome is a space of resistance, and profoundly anti-capitalist. I truly wish no profit is made off its sale.
I support the aim of Henry for the collective to make a concrete offer, once the code infraction cost is accessed. Henry's contribution is well thought out and a good starting point. Yes, Skotty and Stacy have poured their hearts into this project over many years, but so have others--many others. Even then I have my doubts about the feasibility of the cost, but this space has always been owned by Skotty and its his choice. Thats the reality of the situation. This all could become moot depending on the true nature and cost of the code infractions, which have not been listed in meeting notes and I think are yet to be accurately determined.
I ask a few things of Skotty and Stacy to help clarify and mitigate the situation. It is up to you all to make it solely to the collective or include it publicly, but the confusions must be addressed and people should base their reactions on that offer, not on what they have heard, or even read in meeting notes.
Things I wish to see included in this statement:
1)What was the price initially paid and when was it purchased?
2)Do you seek any kind of profit? If so, how much?
3)If the collective shows serious determination and ability to purchase the building will you give them more time to raise the capital. If so, what is the maximum time you are willing to give?
I hope this serves to get you all talking openly and honestly with one another. Ill will for Skotty buying the place is unfounded. Currently, the city is forcing people to vacate, not Skotty and Stacy. The anger bubbling up has been brewing for years and revolves around power, both real and perceived, and how the space will be sold. The situation is daunting but not hopeless and, if all goes well, could end up with a profoundly stronger Rhizome collective. Regardless of what happens remember rhizomes produce shoots and new root systems and are extremely difficult to kill. Whatever happens, we are still a community dedicated to making positive change and will have to work together if we are going to truly affect anything.
I love you all,
~erock
For more information:
http://partners.guidestar.org/controller/s...
Kudos to baku for speaking his mind and posting this up.
The Rhizome has been called a community space, but the community is not being engaged in this process - not the community at large, not even the groups and individuals who have worked for years on Rhizome-based radical projects.
I've volunteered at the 'zome for two or three years, including up to last Sunday, but this post is the first thorough explanation I've seen of what the hell is going on. The collective's official press release links to a donations page but says nothing about how folks in Austin can help out in ways not involving money (can somebody please address that?). This piece, however imperfectly, at least makes this process more transparent and accountable to people outside the collective. Big thanks.
That said, I think we should avoid attacking the motivations of anyone, whether it be Scott, Stacy, or the author of this piece. All the folks I've known to be involved with maintaining the Rhizome on a day-to-day basis are hella hard-working, really nice, and passionate about social justice. Casting any of them as profit-driven jerks or angry provocateurs isn't productive. Everyone's probably doing their best and messing up.
The Rhizome has been called a community space, but the community is not being engaged in this process - not the community at large, not even the groups and individuals who have worked for years on Rhizome-based radical projects.
I've volunteered at the 'zome for two or three years, including up to last Sunday, but this post is the first thorough explanation I've seen of what the hell is going on. The collective's official press release links to a donations page but says nothing about how folks in Austin can help out in ways not involving money (can somebody please address that?). This piece, however imperfectly, at least makes this process more transparent and accountable to people outside the collective. Big thanks.
That said, I think we should avoid attacking the motivations of anyone, whether it be Scott, Stacy, or the author of this piece. All the folks I've known to be involved with maintaining the Rhizome on a day-to-day basis are hella hard-working, really nice, and passionate about social justice. Casting any of them as profit-driven jerks or angry provocateurs isn't productive. Everyone's probably doing their best and messing up.
Well having just returned from downtown, at a fundraiser for the Rhizome, I wondered why Scotty and Stacey where not there....
now i GET THE BIGGER PICTURE...
it seems that capitolism indeed RUSTS the collective from the inside out, eating away at the foundation that allowed the RUST to learn how to begin to eat, in the way chickens eat their eggs, and worms start from the inside and work their way out...
I'm sure the RUST folks have made decent money at the warehouse, and via the book sales, and seminars over the years, and it appears they have RUSTED out their humble roots, the educational crucible that gave them that kick start... the countless HOURS of FREE TIME, given in love that helped make the Rhizome the Rhizomorphic learning incubator that helped gel the RUST concept into full blown capiltalistic decay.....
I gave money tonight at the door, thinking it would help the Rhizome, and wish now I had just given my few coins to bikes Across Borders, as they are truly what the spirit is about...
not some RUSTY IDEA that uses people to learn, write books and profit, later to be cast aside as a RUSTED OUT implement on the way to success!
great community follow through!
now i GET THE BIGGER PICTURE...
it seems that capitolism indeed RUSTS the collective from the inside out, eating away at the foundation that allowed the RUST to learn how to begin to eat, in the way chickens eat their eggs, and worms start from the inside and work their way out...
I'm sure the RUST folks have made decent money at the warehouse, and via the book sales, and seminars over the years, and it appears they have RUSTED out their humble roots, the educational crucible that gave them that kick start... the countless HOURS of FREE TIME, given in love that helped make the Rhizome the Rhizomorphic learning incubator that helped gel the RUST concept into full blown capiltalistic decay.....
I gave money tonight at the door, thinking it would help the Rhizome, and wish now I had just given my few coins to bikes Across Borders, as they are truly what the spirit is about...
not some RUSTY IDEA that uses people to learn, write books and profit, later to be cast aside as a RUSTED OUT implement on the way to success!
great community follow through!
UNOFFICIAL, COPYLEFT RELEASE
Please Circulate
13th of Friday, 2009
This Tuesday, the Rhizome Collective will begin to die its slow death. All residents and backspace organizations have been forced to vacate. Many fear the blow of losing one's home will taper any gained momentum to save the space.
Last night, we sat in a room with many collective members and the Allen Street Rhizome Warehouse private property owners—Scott Kellogg and Stacy Pettigrew. Kellogg and Pettigrew have been members of the Rhizome Collective and sometimes residents of Austin, TX. They legally own the warehouse property through Sustainable Revolution Inc. Kellogg and Pettigrew have built a career through their work with the Rhizome Collective—creating a sustainability consulting/training seminar called RUST and published a book entitled Toolbox for a Sustainable Revolution. Over nine years, Kellogg and Pettigrew and countless others built the Rhizome together.
On 2/16/09, Kellogg and Pettigrew informed the collective of their intent to sell the warehouse property in six months. They listed an asking price of $390,000 and asked the collective to make an offer. When asked if sweat equity would be valued, they firmly responded, “no.” People questioned making this transaction using capitalist economic values. Kellogg purchased the warehouse with an inheritance of an unknown amount. Kellogg and Pettigrew also own property in New York State.
Read the rest of the article here:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/03/13/18576757.php
Please Circulate
13th of Friday, 2009
This Tuesday, the Rhizome Collective will begin to die its slow death. All residents and backspace organizations have been forced to vacate. Many fear the blow of losing one's home will taper any gained momentum to save the space.
Last night, we sat in a room with many collective members and the Allen Street Rhizome Warehouse private property owners—Scott Kellogg and Stacy Pettigrew. Kellogg and Pettigrew have been members of the Rhizome Collective and sometimes residents of Austin, TX. They legally own the warehouse property through Sustainable Revolution Inc. Kellogg and Pettigrew have built a career through their work with the Rhizome Collective—creating a sustainability consulting/training seminar called RUST and published a book entitled Toolbox for a Sustainable Revolution. Over nine years, Kellogg and Pettigrew and countless others built the Rhizome together.
On 2/16/09, Kellogg and Pettigrew informed the collective of their intent to sell the warehouse property in six months. They listed an asking price of $390,000 and asked the collective to make an offer. When asked if sweat equity would be valued, they firmly responded, “no.” People questioned making this transaction using capitalist economic values. Kellogg purchased the warehouse with an inheritance of an unknown amount. Kellogg and Pettigrew also own property in New York State.
Read the rest of the article here:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/03/13/18576757.php
On Thursday March 12th Scott Kellogg, founding member of the Rhizome Collective, spoke to the City Council on behalf of the organizations based at the Allen Street warehouse. Kellogg was accompanied by active members of the Collective. At a meeting the night before, he was asked to represent the Collective at the meeting.
“While, as the property owner, I take full responsibility for the code violations, I am here to speak on behalf of the Rhizome Collective,” he began. He went on to describe the important work that has been done at the Collective and to ask the City to give assistance to the organizations operating out of the warehouse: IBP, BAB. I was there.
Members of councilmember Mike Martinez’s staff also met with collective members. A staff member promised to work with the Collective to find a location where some of the organizations could potentially move. Some members have expressed doubts about this offer, as it would clearly detract from our move towards autonomy that everyone would like to see. He contacted me to ask how much square footage Inside Books and Bikes Across Borders would need on Friday. I have not responded at this time.
Scott and Stacy Pettigrew have offered their assistance to us all at this difficult time. They have been an integral part of the work that takes place here for all eight years of its existence. Stacy has volunteered her accounting services from afar even when family called in Albany. The purchase of the warehouse by the collective was frequently discussed because she and Scotty brought it up. Never have they made a profit from the work of others. In fact, Stacy wrote the $200,000 EPA grant and made the Brownfield a reality for the collective. The Collective now owns 9.8 acres of land thanks in great part to her work. Though the Collective has worked for autonomy, members have never presented a comprehensive plan for buying the space. Scott and Stacy want the Collective to buy: how can that happen in 30 days?
It is our responsibility to turn our dream into a concrete proposal.
-DONATE NOW: http://partners.guidestar.org/controller/searchResults.gs?action_donateReport=1&partner=networkforgood&ein=26-0041254
Recently, a letter featuring the opinions of a Collective member has been published. This letter criticizes Scott and Stacy’s relationship to the Collective. These are personal opinions from an individual who, until recently, rarely attended Collective meetings. In short, Scotty and Stacy have contributed much more to the Collective than the member in question ever did. As erock said, it is sometimes an issue of who wants to do the work: who is going to work to sustain the monthly economic reality that buying something this big requires?
Ironically, his comments were published on Indymedia. Austin Indymedia’s webpage became inaccessible while he was working with the project. Collective consensus never supported his statements. They should have remained internal.
“While, as the property owner, I take full responsibility for the code violations, I am here to speak on behalf of the Rhizome Collective,” he began. He went on to describe the important work that has been done at the Collective and to ask the City to give assistance to the organizations operating out of the warehouse: IBP, BAB. I was there.
Members of councilmember Mike Martinez’s staff also met with collective members. A staff member promised to work with the Collective to find a location where some of the organizations could potentially move. Some members have expressed doubts about this offer, as it would clearly detract from our move towards autonomy that everyone would like to see. He contacted me to ask how much square footage Inside Books and Bikes Across Borders would need on Friday. I have not responded at this time.
Scott and Stacy Pettigrew have offered their assistance to us all at this difficult time. They have been an integral part of the work that takes place here for all eight years of its existence. Stacy has volunteered her accounting services from afar even when family called in Albany. The purchase of the warehouse by the collective was frequently discussed because she and Scotty brought it up. Never have they made a profit from the work of others. In fact, Stacy wrote the $200,000 EPA grant and made the Brownfield a reality for the collective. The Collective now owns 9.8 acres of land thanks in great part to her work. Though the Collective has worked for autonomy, members have never presented a comprehensive plan for buying the space. Scott and Stacy want the Collective to buy: how can that happen in 30 days?
It is our responsibility to turn our dream into a concrete proposal.
-DONATE NOW: http://partners.guidestar.org/controller/searchResults.gs?action_donateReport=1&partner=networkforgood&ein=26-0041254
Recently, a letter featuring the opinions of a Collective member has been published. This letter criticizes Scott and Stacy’s relationship to the Collective. These are personal opinions from an individual who, until recently, rarely attended Collective meetings. In short, Scotty and Stacy have contributed much more to the Collective than the member in question ever did. As erock said, it is sometimes an issue of who wants to do the work: who is going to work to sustain the monthly economic reality that buying something this big requires?
Ironically, his comments were published on Indymedia. Austin Indymedia’s webpage became inaccessible while he was working with the project. Collective consensus never supported his statements. They should have remained internal.
I, for one, thank Brent for having the courage to publically name a power disparity that has been whispered about for years- in some cases by the same folks hanging Brent out to dry for airing his concerns. There are those who criticize Brent for taking too radical a stance in this scenario (many of whom also refuse to participate in an electoral system that insists we politely petition the overly privileged to share their power through selective allocations…) preferring to tacitly legitimizing the economic privilege of their friends rather than risk social suicide. Has the Austin radical community really devolved into just another social scene that places more value on popularity than politics? Or has it just been so long since we’ve actually confronted power that we’ve forgotten how to do so? Thank you Brent for holding this community accountable and reminding us all that the personal is political. And complicated.
“Where he gets his money from doesn't matter.”
Really? Um..okay?. Does that go for everyone or just people who are down?
“Also, other folks in Austin are "property owners" -- so what if they own property in New York?”
I agree that conversations regarding responsible property ownership need to happen here and in all communities. However, I hope that we are nuanced enough to identify the distinctions between personal and private property. Personal being those things that one uses on a semi-daily basis (your toothbrush, your computer, the home that you live in…) and private property being those that you do not routinely use but maintain ownership over in order to generate economic revenue (a factory where hired labor produces a good and the owner retains the majority of profits, a landlord who does not live in the building they own but charges others to do so…). Most folks in Austin’s radical community own personal property in once sense or another, but private property is generally the exception and not the rule.
“If the point of the article is to foment "dialog" then why aren't you doing that where it counts? What's the point of putting this on "blast" on the internet -- what are YOU doing locally to gather the "community" together and talk this through? Or, is it just easier to lash out at folks?”
Seems to me that he is implementing step two in Organizing 101 (step one being to negotiate in good faith and if there isn’t good faith at the table, state your concerns). His editorial is agitating for community support and publicly exposing the vast distance between the landlord’s actions and their words. I agree that if there’s one thing this community could use more of, it’s more organizing and less self aggrandizing.
Props to erock and henry for their efforts to acknowledge the plurality of truths in this convoluted situation. Many have posed the question “Is the Rhizome worth saving?”. In the wake of all the shit that’s gone down lately seems like the more appropriate question is “Is the Austin ‘radical community’ worth saving?”.
Heather
“Where he gets his money from doesn't matter.”
Really? Um..okay?. Does that go for everyone or just people who are down?
“Also, other folks in Austin are "property owners" -- so what if they own property in New York?”
I agree that conversations regarding responsible property ownership need to happen here and in all communities. However, I hope that we are nuanced enough to identify the distinctions between personal and private property. Personal being those things that one uses on a semi-daily basis (your toothbrush, your computer, the home that you live in…) and private property being those that you do not routinely use but maintain ownership over in order to generate economic revenue (a factory where hired labor produces a good and the owner retains the majority of profits, a landlord who does not live in the building they own but charges others to do so…). Most folks in Austin’s radical community own personal property in once sense or another, but private property is generally the exception and not the rule.
“If the point of the article is to foment "dialog" then why aren't you doing that where it counts? What's the point of putting this on "blast" on the internet -- what are YOU doing locally to gather the "community" together and talk this through? Or, is it just easier to lash out at folks?”
Seems to me that he is implementing step two in Organizing 101 (step one being to negotiate in good faith and if there isn’t good faith at the table, state your concerns). His editorial is agitating for community support and publicly exposing the vast distance between the landlord’s actions and their words. I agree that if there’s one thing this community could use more of, it’s more organizing and less self aggrandizing.
Props to erock and henry for their efforts to acknowledge the plurality of truths in this convoluted situation. Many have posed the question “Is the Rhizome worth saving?”. In the wake of all the shit that’s gone down lately seems like the more appropriate question is “Is the Austin ‘radical community’ worth saving?”.
Heather
This is an update on the current situation of the Rhizome Collective warehouse.
As per Thursday's meeting with Willie Rhodes, head of Austin's code enforcement department, we, Stacy and Skotty, have been granted an extension on the period of time we would be given to pull the needed permits, and to complete the work required to bring the warehouse up to code. As of Thursday, March 12th, we will be given 30 days to pull all required permits. After permits are pulled, we will be granted an additional 60 days to complete all the required work on the building. If the permits have not been pulled by April 11th, we will be taken to court, and be legally forced to complete the needed work, or be fined $30,000 per day for every day after the 60 day period that the work remains uncompleted. The potential also exists for criminal charges to be filed against us. We have begun the process of retaining a lawyer for our own personal protection.
While we are still awaiting exact estimates from contractors, we can say with certainty that the amount of work and money that would be required to bring this building up to code would be extraordinary. Due to the extremely vague and general wording of the actual code violations, the extent of the work required to be done on the building will be determined by the discretion of each inspector. Licensed plumbers, electricians, and structural engineers will all need to go through the building and decide what will need to be done to bring the building up to code, which will then need to be passed by the particular inspector of that field. Because the the city has not issued a clear report that lists specific problems in the building that must be fixed, we don't have a clear sense of exactly what work would need to be done, the permits required, and an approximate cost and time frame required to do it, along with a forseeable end to the amount of needed work. Instead, we are facing having to spend a potentially unlimited amount of money to remedy unspecified problems within a building which the city could arbirtraily decide to change, or ultimately refuse. Code inspectors have also made it clear that they have not even inspected the bike shop, and that before any final inspection was signed off on, a complete and thorough inspection of the entire building would be required, turning up previously unrecognized problems. In short, repairing this building is a black hole of resources with no clear exit plan. They are in effect asking us to bring a building built in 1952 up to 2009 code. Doing this may very well involve a complete rewiring and replumbing of the building as well as an undetermined amount of roof/structural repairs. The second story is particularly problematic, as it was built entirely without permits. A structural engineer will have to certify the structural integrity of the entire second floor. It is also possible that an engineer would determine that the second floor is strucutrally unsound and may require that it be removed. Structural engineering fees alone are extremely high, as they are assuming liability for whatever building they put their stamp on.
We are financially unable, and unwilling, to complete the potentially enormous number of the building's needed repairs. Even the process of pulling permits alone is going to be very expensive, as the estimates from contractors, engineers, plumbers, and electricians all need to be done before permits can be pulled, and all cost money. In addition, fees exist for getting permits themselves from the city. The only option that we have for avoiding the processs of getting permits and carrying out building repairs is to sell the building within the next 27 days. This conclusion has been reached through conversations with legal and real estate consultants.
Effectively, our hands are tied, and we have no other option than to put the building up for sale this upcoming week. If a sale is not made in the next 27 days, we will be forced to pull the permits and begin the process of repairing the building. For this reason, we must continue with the process of bringing in contractors in order to obtain estimates. The Collective will remain informed about whatever estimates we receive. Whomever ends up purchasing the building will recieve full disclosure of the code violations. They will also be required to pull permits and complete the needed work.
Since the building was purchased, it has been our goal for the Collective to buy the building. In consideration of this, we offer the Collective the asking price of $290,000. This price is $160,000 less than the price at which real estate consultants have told us that the building would first be put up for sale for. This price is being offered with the contingency that the Rhizome Collective will establish the property legally in the form of a land trust. The property will be sold only at this price only to the Rhizome Collective, and not to any individual on behalf of the Rhizome Collective. The figure is based on today's value of the cash we have invested in the building. (Purchase price, closing costs, solar panels, addition, plus inflation as calculated by the Dept. of Labor.) Below are the figures we've used to show how we've arrived at this particular asking price.
175000 building
17500 closing
192500 2000
5390 0.028 2001
3166.24 0.016 2002
4624.29 0.023 2003
7000 solar panels 2004
5742.37 0.027 2004
7426.38 0.034 2005
40000 upstairs 2006
8507.17 0.032 2006
7681.98 0.028 2007
10717.46 0.038 2008
292755.91 total
If an offer is made to us by another party for the building, we will immediately inform the collective of this, and they will be given the opportunity to present proof of available funds to us, and be given the opportunity to purchase the building irregardless of the amount of the offer made by the other party. If the Collective is unable to do this during the time that we are given to either accept or refuse the other party's offer (typically 3-4 days), we accept the other party's offer and enter into a legally binding contract with them.
We will be in Austin until Wednesday morning. Until that time, we are happy to meet face to face to answer questions with any person willing to have calm and rational discussion.
We are terribly saddened by the events of the last week and a half, particularly for the groups and residents of the Rhizome who are being displaced by the city mandated eviction. For many years, we have worked for the dream of Rhizome, and sincerely wish that it will continue on either at 300 Allen St. or elsewhere.
As per Thursday's meeting with Willie Rhodes, head of Austin's code enforcement department, we, Stacy and Skotty, have been granted an extension on the period of time we would be given to pull the needed permits, and to complete the work required to bring the warehouse up to code. As of Thursday, March 12th, we will be given 30 days to pull all required permits. After permits are pulled, we will be granted an additional 60 days to complete all the required work on the building. If the permits have not been pulled by April 11th, we will be taken to court, and be legally forced to complete the needed work, or be fined $30,000 per day for every day after the 60 day period that the work remains uncompleted. The potential also exists for criminal charges to be filed against us. We have begun the process of retaining a lawyer for our own personal protection.
While we are still awaiting exact estimates from contractors, we can say with certainty that the amount of work and money that would be required to bring this building up to code would be extraordinary. Due to the extremely vague and general wording of the actual code violations, the extent of the work required to be done on the building will be determined by the discretion of each inspector. Licensed plumbers, electricians, and structural engineers will all need to go through the building and decide what will need to be done to bring the building up to code, which will then need to be passed by the particular inspector of that field. Because the the city has not issued a clear report that lists specific problems in the building that must be fixed, we don't have a clear sense of exactly what work would need to be done, the permits required, and an approximate cost and time frame required to do it, along with a forseeable end to the amount of needed work. Instead, we are facing having to spend a potentially unlimited amount of money to remedy unspecified problems within a building which the city could arbirtraily decide to change, or ultimately refuse. Code inspectors have also made it clear that they have not even inspected the bike shop, and that before any final inspection was signed off on, a complete and thorough inspection of the entire building would be required, turning up previously unrecognized problems. In short, repairing this building is a black hole of resources with no clear exit plan. They are in effect asking us to bring a building built in 1952 up to 2009 code. Doing this may very well involve a complete rewiring and replumbing of the building as well as an undetermined amount of roof/structural repairs. The second story is particularly problematic, as it was built entirely without permits. A structural engineer will have to certify the structural integrity of the entire second floor. It is also possible that an engineer would determine that the second floor is strucutrally unsound and may require that it be removed. Structural engineering fees alone are extremely high, as they are assuming liability for whatever building they put their stamp on.
We are financially unable, and unwilling, to complete the potentially enormous number of the building's needed repairs. Even the process of pulling permits alone is going to be very expensive, as the estimates from contractors, engineers, plumbers, and electricians all need to be done before permits can be pulled, and all cost money. In addition, fees exist for getting permits themselves from the city. The only option that we have for avoiding the processs of getting permits and carrying out building repairs is to sell the building within the next 27 days. This conclusion has been reached through conversations with legal and real estate consultants.
Effectively, our hands are tied, and we have no other option than to put the building up for sale this upcoming week. If a sale is not made in the next 27 days, we will be forced to pull the permits and begin the process of repairing the building. For this reason, we must continue with the process of bringing in contractors in order to obtain estimates. The Collective will remain informed about whatever estimates we receive. Whomever ends up purchasing the building will recieve full disclosure of the code violations. They will also be required to pull permits and complete the needed work.
Since the building was purchased, it has been our goal for the Collective to buy the building. In consideration of this, we offer the Collective the asking price of $290,000. This price is $160,000 less than the price at which real estate consultants have told us that the building would first be put up for sale for. This price is being offered with the contingency that the Rhizome Collective will establish the property legally in the form of a land trust. The property will be sold only at this price only to the Rhizome Collective, and not to any individual on behalf of the Rhizome Collective. The figure is based on today's value of the cash we have invested in the building. (Purchase price, closing costs, solar panels, addition, plus inflation as calculated by the Dept. of Labor.) Below are the figures we've used to show how we've arrived at this particular asking price.
175000 building
17500 closing
192500 2000
5390 0.028 2001
3166.24 0.016 2002
4624.29 0.023 2003
7000 solar panels 2004
5742.37 0.027 2004
7426.38 0.034 2005
40000 upstairs 2006
8507.17 0.032 2006
7681.98 0.028 2007
10717.46 0.038 2008
292755.91 total
If an offer is made to us by another party for the building, we will immediately inform the collective of this, and they will be given the opportunity to present proof of available funds to us, and be given the opportunity to purchase the building irregardless of the amount of the offer made by the other party. If the Collective is unable to do this during the time that we are given to either accept or refuse the other party's offer (typically 3-4 days), we accept the other party's offer and enter into a legally binding contract with them.
We will be in Austin until Wednesday morning. Until that time, we are happy to meet face to face to answer questions with any person willing to have calm and rational discussion.
We are terribly saddened by the events of the last week and a half, particularly for the groups and residents of the Rhizome who are being displaced by the city mandated eviction. For many years, we have worked for the dream of Rhizome, and sincerely wish that it will continue on either at 300 Allen St. or elsewhere.
Maybe you haven't lived in enough collective houses. This is how everything happens. Don't waste your time complaining about human nature and politics. Instead of whining about "capitalist power struggles" maybe you should be working on finding a new place to work from. If you don't like your landlord then buy your own house (rent is theft, right?). Or squat one and obtain ownership through adverse possession. Maybe once you have the responsibility of having your name on the line you'll start to think differently about covering your ass.
BTW, I hear there's a bunch of free stuff over there.
BTW, I hear there's a bunch of free stuff over there.
No one should have to apologize for what they feel.
Regardless of what some of the other collective members have said.
Thanks to everyone who has made public their thoughts on this situation, especially Brent. Willingness to put yourself and your thoughts out there means that you can and will be held publicly accountable. I think that’s a good thing.
And the attacks against Brent? Well, aside from being rather laughable (especially if you’ve been in Austin for more than a year), they do expose the lack of any substantial argument. Brent is an easy target. There is no doubt about this; He was the first person to publically express dissent.
More have followed, and this is mine.
I’ve seen more than one member ask why some of these concerns weren’t raised at the meeting. Are you joking?
Did you not see these concerns raised and then repeatedly and consistently squashed?
I sure did. At every single meeting.
At the first sight of tension or uncomfortable conversations, the discussion would be completely shut down. Brent and others, myself included, were frequently cut short and told that they were speaking out of turn or that their thoughts were off topic (a standard arbitrarily enforced, never held to the entire group).
Our concerns were deemed inconvenient in the name of “Consensus decision-making” and thus brushed aside.
Should I not be allowed to speak because I am angry, because I feel something real, because my voice trembles when I speak? You were certainly allowed to.
Is it my turn yet? Am I on stack?
Oh but that’s right.
I’m a woman a color. No one gives a fuck what I have to say.
So let’s talk about the people of color at the Rhizome. That’s right people of color at the Rhizome. We are so marginalized that sometimes you forget we exist, don’t you?
Or are you just pretending like you forgot?
Why is there such scrutiny placed upon the people of color?
Are we too loud for your liking? Too bold? Too dark? Too crazy? Too poor?
Why have there been so many obstacles routinely placed in the way of our work/organizing? No one has as many concerns with something as they do when a person of color proposes it to the collective. Like clockwork.
And then there’s language.
The collective members that cannot participate in an English only conversation do not have the same opportunity to participate in this process. Yet some of these members have been at the Rhizome much longer than many of the current English speaking members laying claim to this space/project/collective. We should be listening to the people most directly affected, the people who are at the Rhizome year after year after year. Who live at the Rhizome because it is their home, not their vacation home.
The true caretakers.
This I mention, in part, because I took careful note at our last meeting that when the bilingual facilitator started the meeting in Spanish there was so much uncomfortable shifting around that he was drowned out until he started speaking in English.
There are some major power imbalances terrorizing this space/project/collective.
And yes, they have to do with Stacy and Skotty habitually disregarding the collective process and informing the collective after the fact about countless decisions. And yes, they have to do with Stacy and Skotty selling the building even though a year ago I was told in a collective meeting that Stacy and Skotty “would never sell the building, but if the collective wants to organize to make an offer, they would consider it”.
But they also have to do with you.
You, the members who maintain “consensus” by suppressing dissent.
You, the members who place higher value on monetary contributions than on our sweat, labor, time, and energy.
You, the members with all kinds of unchecked privilege.
You, the members whom one day when you look around and realize that all the faces you see are white and privileged won’t have to wonder why.
I have been involved with the Rhizome collective for over four years. In spite of this, my voice in the collective process has been questioned by some of the members. (by the way Jenn, If you could refrain from referring to collective members as ‘these people’, I’d appreciated it. As much as you dislike me, I do have a name.)
If, in these past four years members have chosen not to concern themselves with the work which I was thrilled to have been involved with at the Rhizome, you sure missed out on a whole bunch of amazing shit: badass people of color, a play about gentrification in East Austin (created at the Rhizome), The Youth Liberation Network, The Coalition of Immokalee Workers/ Student Farm Worker Alliance, Austin Indymedia, Son de Madera Workshop Series and a killer radio project (even though, I know, I know. you think it’s too contentious).
I’m sorry you missed out on that, but you know what?
I actually bothered to learn about what other people were doing.
You did not single-handedly transform the Rhizome from an empty warehouse into a space for organized resistance.
No one person did. We all did.
Regardless of what some of the other collective members have said.
Thanks to everyone who has made public their thoughts on this situation, especially Brent. Willingness to put yourself and your thoughts out there means that you can and will be held publicly accountable. I think that’s a good thing.
And the attacks against Brent? Well, aside from being rather laughable (especially if you’ve been in Austin for more than a year), they do expose the lack of any substantial argument. Brent is an easy target. There is no doubt about this; He was the first person to publically express dissent.
More have followed, and this is mine.
I’ve seen more than one member ask why some of these concerns weren’t raised at the meeting. Are you joking?
Did you not see these concerns raised and then repeatedly and consistently squashed?
I sure did. At every single meeting.
At the first sight of tension or uncomfortable conversations, the discussion would be completely shut down. Brent and others, myself included, were frequently cut short and told that they were speaking out of turn or that their thoughts were off topic (a standard arbitrarily enforced, never held to the entire group).
Our concerns were deemed inconvenient in the name of “Consensus decision-making” and thus brushed aside.
Should I not be allowed to speak because I am angry, because I feel something real, because my voice trembles when I speak? You were certainly allowed to.
Is it my turn yet? Am I on stack?
Oh but that’s right.
I’m a woman a color. No one gives a fuck what I have to say.
So let’s talk about the people of color at the Rhizome. That’s right people of color at the Rhizome. We are so marginalized that sometimes you forget we exist, don’t you?
Or are you just pretending like you forgot?
Why is there such scrutiny placed upon the people of color?
Are we too loud for your liking? Too bold? Too dark? Too crazy? Too poor?
Why have there been so many obstacles routinely placed in the way of our work/organizing? No one has as many concerns with something as they do when a person of color proposes it to the collective. Like clockwork.
And then there’s language.
The collective members that cannot participate in an English only conversation do not have the same opportunity to participate in this process. Yet some of these members have been at the Rhizome much longer than many of the current English speaking members laying claim to this space/project/collective. We should be listening to the people most directly affected, the people who are at the Rhizome year after year after year. Who live at the Rhizome because it is their home, not their vacation home.
The true caretakers.
This I mention, in part, because I took careful note at our last meeting that when the bilingual facilitator started the meeting in Spanish there was so much uncomfortable shifting around that he was drowned out until he started speaking in English.
There are some major power imbalances terrorizing this space/project/collective.
And yes, they have to do with Stacy and Skotty habitually disregarding the collective process and informing the collective after the fact about countless decisions. And yes, they have to do with Stacy and Skotty selling the building even though a year ago I was told in a collective meeting that Stacy and Skotty “would never sell the building, but if the collective wants to organize to make an offer, they would consider it”.
But they also have to do with you.
You, the members who maintain “consensus” by suppressing dissent.
You, the members who place higher value on monetary contributions than on our sweat, labor, time, and energy.
You, the members with all kinds of unchecked privilege.
You, the members whom one day when you look around and realize that all the faces you see are white and privileged won’t have to wonder why.
I have been involved with the Rhizome collective for over four years. In spite of this, my voice in the collective process has been questioned by some of the members. (by the way Jenn, If you could refrain from referring to collective members as ‘these people’, I’d appreciated it. As much as you dislike me, I do have a name.)
If, in these past four years members have chosen not to concern themselves with the work which I was thrilled to have been involved with at the Rhizome, you sure missed out on a whole bunch of amazing shit: badass people of color, a play about gentrification in East Austin (created at the Rhizome), The Youth Liberation Network, The Coalition of Immokalee Workers/ Student Farm Worker Alliance, Austin Indymedia, Son de Madera Workshop Series and a killer radio project (even though, I know, I know. you think it’s too contentious).
I’m sorry you missed out on that, but you know what?
I actually bothered to learn about what other people were doing.
You did not single-handedly transform the Rhizome from an empty warehouse into a space for organized resistance.
No one person did. We all did.
scotty and stacy had told people at rhizome 2 years ago that they wanted
> to end their ties to the space- they were covering taxes, it was a legal
> liability, their lives had moved up to albany, ny , and other reasons.
> but the collective never managed to get it together enough to buy it.
> maybe the collective just thought that S&S weren't serious about
> getting ending their relationship with it, and they could float on it
> forever? i don't know, but anyway, when they returned to austin several
> months ago, they let the collective know that they were giving us 6 more
> months to come up with a plan to buy it. that didn't mean we had to have
> the entire dollar amount in those 6 months, but should have secured a
> loan, grant, or whatever and made a down payment - showed that we were
> willing to take responsibility in taking over the building. so, really,
> we had 2 1/2 years to get this right....
>
> but about two weeks after that meeting we were notified by code
> enforcement that someone called the city about violations. it was more
> than likely zeke, the neighbor who's called the city on us at least 10
> times in the past. this time he said 40 people were living there. the
> city came for a routine inspection, called us out on the illegal
> construction of the second story, said it was a liability and fire hazard,
> and gave us 14 days to get out.
> some people were upset by the dollar amount that S&S were asking,
> myself included, and basically we all starting fighting and focusing on
> that. when the city got called, i decided personally that it was time to
> forget about that for now, because it was a mute point - we had to deal
> with the city crisis first. taking energy away from that and focusing on
> S&S's $390,000 was a waste of time, in my opinion, because that was no
> longer the issue. we tried going to city council, seeing if others
> outside the collective could help us, etc. but what happened, and what
> killed 300 Allen St is NOT S&S's fault - it was the city and the fact
> that they hit us too hard and too fast. to blame them for it's death is
> untrue. they tried to work with the collective for more than 2 years to
> hand it over to us......WE didn't do enough.
> to asume that S&S's trying to get rid of 300 Allen St was a cynical
> and greedy gesture is false. S&S, more than anyone else, knew the
> balance of power that existed within a 'collective' that had as two of
> its' members the owners of the property. they were trying to end that.
> i've been trying to boycott the internet the last week because of the
> rumors and falsehoods some have been constantly circulating, but decided i
> couldn't stand it any more.
> we can bitch about the price offered all we want, but in the last 9 years,
> S&S have contributed more to radical politics in austin than most of
> us have -
> --they gave KPWR a home for the last 3 years, with cheap rent, knowing
> full-well the liability that was involved in doing that - they saw what
> happened to Free Radio and still supported it as collective members,.
> --they helped create a space that allowed probably hundreds of benefits
> and parties to happen at rediculously cheap prices, barely paying for
> utilities.
> --they allowed Inside Books to rent a 400 sq. ft. space (and probably
> another 400 sq.ft. of storage space) at $85 a month for 7 years IMPOSSIBLE
> to do anywhere else in this town.
> --Bikes Across Borders had a workspace for an equally cheap rent for at
> least 5 years
> --they engineered getting 10 acres of land for the Rhizome Collective, and
> a $200,000 grant (that many of us were paid from to work on). that 10
> acres is still ours, and they never made a dime off that and never intend
> too.
> --through out those nine years some residents of 300 Allen St exploited it
> for their own gain by either not bothering to pay their rent or explicity
> refusing (and now it's biting us in the ass) - any real 'landlord' would
> have thrown them out on the street after 30 days.
> it was only until the realism of the burden that keeping that space held
> was made a reality , that everyone got pissed at them for being 'greedy'
> and 'controlling'.
>
> i was part of that space from Day 1, and even though i did have
> disagreements about the asking price, i still defend their wishes to get
> rid of it. people didn't complain much when it was there for them to
> exploit, but look at how much we've been fighting with each other now that
> it's gone - and that fighting is going to carry over into other groups in
> austin. right now, it's affected me and i don't really want to have much
> to do with people that decided to take some final kicks at it as it was
> dying.
> brandon darby couldn't have done a better job.......skot!
>
>
>
> to end their ties to the space- they were covering taxes, it was a legal
> liability, their lives had moved up to albany, ny , and other reasons.
> but the collective never managed to get it together enough to buy it.
> maybe the collective just thought that S&S weren't serious about
> getting ending their relationship with it, and they could float on it
> forever? i don't know, but anyway, when they returned to austin several
> months ago, they let the collective know that they were giving us 6 more
> months to come up with a plan to buy it. that didn't mean we had to have
> the entire dollar amount in those 6 months, but should have secured a
> loan, grant, or whatever and made a down payment - showed that we were
> willing to take responsibility in taking over the building. so, really,
> we had 2 1/2 years to get this right....
>
> but about two weeks after that meeting we were notified by code
> enforcement that someone called the city about violations. it was more
> than likely zeke, the neighbor who's called the city on us at least 10
> times in the past. this time he said 40 people were living there. the
> city came for a routine inspection, called us out on the illegal
> construction of the second story, said it was a liability and fire hazard,
> and gave us 14 days to get out.
> some people were upset by the dollar amount that S&S were asking,
> myself included, and basically we all starting fighting and focusing on
> that. when the city got called, i decided personally that it was time to
> forget about that for now, because it was a mute point - we had to deal
> with the city crisis first. taking energy away from that and focusing on
> S&S's $390,000 was a waste of time, in my opinion, because that was no
> longer the issue. we tried going to city council, seeing if others
> outside the collective could help us, etc. but what happened, and what
> killed 300 Allen St is NOT S&S's fault - it was the city and the fact
> that they hit us too hard and too fast. to blame them for it's death is
> untrue. they tried to work with the collective for more than 2 years to
> hand it over to us......WE didn't do enough.
> to asume that S&S's trying to get rid of 300 Allen St was a cynical
> and greedy gesture is false. S&S, more than anyone else, knew the
> balance of power that existed within a 'collective' that had as two of
> its' members the owners of the property. they were trying to end that.
> i've been trying to boycott the internet the last week because of the
> rumors and falsehoods some have been constantly circulating, but decided i
> couldn't stand it any more.
> we can bitch about the price offered all we want, but in the last 9 years,
> S&S have contributed more to radical politics in austin than most of
> us have -
> --they gave KPWR a home for the last 3 years, with cheap rent, knowing
> full-well the liability that was involved in doing that - they saw what
> happened to Free Radio and still supported it as collective members,.
> --they helped create a space that allowed probably hundreds of benefits
> and parties to happen at rediculously cheap prices, barely paying for
> utilities.
> --they allowed Inside Books to rent a 400 sq. ft. space (and probably
> another 400 sq.ft. of storage space) at $85 a month for 7 years IMPOSSIBLE
> to do anywhere else in this town.
> --Bikes Across Borders had a workspace for an equally cheap rent for at
> least 5 years
> --they engineered getting 10 acres of land for the Rhizome Collective, and
> a $200,000 grant (that many of us were paid from to work on). that 10
> acres is still ours, and they never made a dime off that and never intend
> too.
> --through out those nine years some residents of 300 Allen St exploited it
> for their own gain by either not bothering to pay their rent or explicity
> refusing (and now it's biting us in the ass) - any real 'landlord' would
> have thrown them out on the street after 30 days.
> it was only until the realism of the burden that keeping that space held
> was made a reality , that everyone got pissed at them for being 'greedy'
> and 'controlling'.
>
> i was part of that space from Day 1, and even though i did have
> disagreements about the asking price, i still defend their wishes to get
> rid of it. people didn't complain much when it was there for them to
> exploit, but look at how much we've been fighting with each other now that
> it's gone - and that fighting is going to carry over into other groups in
> austin. right now, it's affected me and i don't really want to have much
> to do with people that decided to take some final kicks at it as it was
> dying.
> brandon darby couldn't have done a better job.......skot!
>
>
>
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$140.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network