OccupyOakland Statement on Temporary Deposit of 20K Funds @ Wells Fargo!

[sabrina 1]

The news that OccupyOakland had decided at its General Assembly meeting to deposit a $20,000 donation from OccupyWallStreet in a Wells Fargo Account has raised questions from many people.

This is their statement regarding the decision:

Status of $20,000 Donated by OWS Press Release

Status of $20,000 Donated by OWS Press Release
November 8, 2011 in Media/Press Subcommittee, Press Releases

OAKLAND, Calif.

Since the October 26 announcement of a donation following the police
raid on Occupy Oakland, some have wondered how these funds are being
handled. At Monday night’s General Assembly, Occupy Oakland voted on
the next steps needed to make use of the $20,000 which Occupy Wall
Street donated to the Oakland encampment. Resulting from that
consensus vote, Occupy Oakland is in the process of opening an
unincorporated association in its name in the state of California.

The money is temporarily being placed into the Wells Fargo trust fund
of lawyer Timothy Fong. It will stay there for less than two weeks
while Occupy Oakland establishes the new, unincorporated account with
either a credit union or a community bank. Timothy Fong himself is in .
the process of moving his accounts out of Wells Fargo–and he– as well
as Occupy Oakland as a whole — urges other people to leave the multinational
banks as well

Apparently they were given the money to help bail out those who were in jail after the police raided their encampment.

At the General Assembly they discussed how best to make the money available as quickly as possible HERE

Emergency Finance Proposal: This concerns the $20,000 OWS donation. We propose that until we finalize the OO bank account, the lawyer, Mr. Fong, will hold it in a trust fund. This would be accessible by 3 people on the finance team. This money would be allocated for bail and medical support as our capacity allows.

Clarifying Questions and Answers

When the money was first donated, what was it to be used for? – OWS specified that it be used for legal and medical aid.

Which bank will the trust be in? – Wells Fargo. I understand that people aren’t comfortable with that, but this is a time sensitive issue.

Can other options be considered? – Yes, but it takes time to transfer funds to a credit union. We need to help people in jail now.

Is there a deadline or a maximum amount of time we would allow the money to stay in the Wells Fargo trust fund account? – I had to go to Sacramento to file papers with the state to declare OO as an unincorporated association. We are waiting for that to be finalized. It would take no more than two weeks for this process to be finalized so that we can open an account in a credit union.

(More information regarding the trust fund Mr. Fong is describing http://www.iolta.org/grants/)

Pros

We need to go ahead and do this.

This is time sensitive! People are in jail and need help!

OWS wants us to put this money to good use
.
We have a priority to keep people safe.

Cons

We shouldn’t wait until arraignment. We should get them out now, and not wait for bail to be lowered.

Money shouldn’t be used for medical and bail needs. We have daily operations that need to be addressed here at the camp.

I just want to remind everyone of what the proposal says. The money is earmarked for medical/legal use from OWS. That is the stipulation.

You can only bail one person out with that money. We need to deepen our relationship with the National Lawyers Guild. We need to stage demonstrations and mobilize to get people out of jail…we need to be careful about just giving our money to Babylon.

VOTING RESULTS

97.7% Approval: THIS PROPOSAL HAS PASSED.

Yes: 162

No: 8

Abstain: 16

So it looks like it was an emergency decision to use the existing Trust Fund account which the attorney already had established at Wells Fargo, until they get all the paperwork straightened out to open up an account in a Credit Union or Local Community Bank.

Here is an explanation of the kind of account the attorney was recommending in order to get the money into use quickly:

Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts (IOLTA)

Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts (IOLTA) is a unique and innovative way to increase access to justice for individuals and families living in poverty and to improve our justice system. Without taxing the public, and at no cost to lawyers or their clients, interest from lawyer trust accounts is pooled to provide civil legal aid to the poor and support improvements to the justice system.

A lawyer who receives funds that belong to a client must place those funds in a trust account separate from the lawyer's own money. Client funds are deposited in an IOLTA account when the funds cannot otherwise earn enough income for the client to be more than the cost of securing that income. The client - and not the IOLTA program - receives the interest if the funds are large enough or will be held for a long enough period of time to generate net interest that is sufficient to allocate directly to the client.

Every state, along with the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands, operates an IOLTA program. In 2009, the U.S. IOLTA programs generated more than $ 124.7 million nationwide. These funds, together with state and federal appropriations as well as private grants and donations, enable nonprofit legal aid providers to help low-income people with civil legal matters such as landlord/tenant issues, child custody disputes and advocacy for those with disabilities.

Since the money from OWS was allocated for legal and medical purposes, this seems to make sense. They were in a hurry as there were people still in jail (after the Oct. 25 raid) who needed to be bailed out.

The attorney's advise was to use the existing fund and then transfer everything later when the paperwork is completed, at Wells Fargo. So they made the decision to act quickly.

The reports that they were 'opening an account with Wells Fargo' were incorrect obviously.

But someone should have explained it more clearly rather than give the press and Wells Fargo the opportunity to use it as a 'told you so you can't live without Big Banks' moment.

I think if I had been there, I would have voted the way they did also.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. I think what they did makes sense.

Especially since the trust fund was already set up, and time is of the essence.

[sabrina 1]

3. I agree, California Peggy.

The reports were distorted so thought I would try to find out the facts. Thank you for your comment, what they did makes sense imo :-)

[redqueen]

2. It's disappointing that so many read the worst into their actions immediately.

Not exactly surprising, but still disappointing.

[sabrina 1]

4. I think there are some who want to believe the worst of this

movement so they naturally jump on anything that seems negative. But this was a good decision under the circumstances so nothing negative to jump on, they will have to wait for the next smear, which I'm sure won't be far in the future.

[hifiguy]

5. That is a perfectly sensible thing to do.

A lawyer's trust account is a very safe place.

[kctim]

6. Wise move

I'm protesting Wal-Mart by shopping there this evening.

[sabrina 1]

7. I don't think that analogy works here.

[kctim]

13. Convenience over principle?

Works quite well.

[redqueen]

8. And you know what? If you needed milk and that was the only place you could get it

only a very few ... certain types of people would bat an eye.

[sabrina 1]

10. Lol,

since the sig line says 1%er, the sentiment is not surprising.

And I agree, if someone had an emergency need for something they could only get at Walmart, no one would blame them :-)

[redqueen]

12. Oh my, I hadn't noticed the sig!

Thanks for pointing it out! :hi:

[kctim]

15. Sigh

As I have been around since 08, my sig line obviously has NOTHING to do with OWS beliefs.

[Wind Dancer]

20. Then what does your sig mean?

[sabrina 1]

21. I was going to ask that question also.

[kctim]

14. Still wouldn't do much for "the cause" now, would it

Telling people to not shop at Wal-Mart while shopping there yourself.
I bet that brings herds of people to support "the cause."

[sabrina 1]

16. Except they are not 'shopping' at Wells Fargo.

Did you read the links? They USED an existing account held for his clients by the lawyer, who himself is preparing to move THAT account, in an emergency situation. To set up the account they needed, (considering how the money is going to be used) would have taken two weeks. The MAIN issue was bailing people out of jail and how best to do it.

Iow, they did not, as has been claimed 'open an account' at Wells Fargo.

[kctim]

18. Why yes, I did read the links

And they, just as you have, clearly state that they are using the very company they are protesting against. They are protesting WF making money by helping them make money.

Seems to me that the MAIN issue would be about actually supporting what the protest is all about.

[sabrina 1]

19. I don't think their two-week stay, with the money being spent

anyhow, is going to contribute much to Wells Fargo. They did not 'open an account' at Wells Fargo. Had the lawyer's transfer been complete, they would have been in whatever Credit Union the account was in.

How much do you think Wells Fargo will make from this temporary arrangement? I would guess, it may even cost them.

[pinboy3niner]

9. Thanks for posting this

If OccupyOakland was doing this, I knew there had to be a method to their madness.

K&R :thumbsup:

[sabrina 1]

11. I felt the same way and it didn't take long to

confirm :-)

[slipslidingaway]

17. knr - thanks! n/t

[TheManInTheMac]

22. Wells Fargo is a sound bank.

You don't want to hand your $20,000 over to a bunch of assholes who will blow it on pizza and weed.

[dixiegrrrrl]

23. Thank you for posting this most helpful explanation of the issue.

[sabrina 1]

24. You're welcome, dixiegirrrrl!

[slackmaster]

25. I believe the term "unincorporated account" refers to one that is not owned by any organization

i.e. a personal or joint account held by one or more individuals, or by a club. I don't understand how an organization could legally open one.

Can anyone shed some light on Occupy's use of that term?