I doubt that I can attend a meeting this Saturday but will throw in 2 cents for what it's worth and in the hope that my comments will be received in good faith.
The Voting Bot - I run one of these for another community and have the same problem with unused voting power. It does depend on what the purpose of the bot is - To just support members, or to support particular content the community likes or maybe both. The previous TA bots have been primarily about members so you could just use excess power to support on-chain engagement by voting comments on members posts.
Volunteers - The biggest issue with pure volunteers is they get burnout so to maintain a regular production of posts a team is best to share the load, but then you don't want them treading on each others toes. I'd suggest getting volunteers to post about their initiatives or projects within the community. eg, one Volunteer just posts about recruitment, another about meetups, or competitions etc. Also, its worth talking about what is the "grow" objective - Is it about accumulating wealth, followers, influence or something else?
Ownership - Probably the most important issue and maybe the agenda item to start with as it can affect the others (well it does for me anyway). I personally prefer "Decentralised Governance" over "No Governance" because the latter has a tendency to blow everything up and cause a schism when a misunderstanding or disagreement occurs down the road and there is nothing in place to handle it. With the current technological limitations of this blockchain I like the idea of having a "Custodian" of the key(s) that is entrusted by the community to manage things on behalf of the community and is chosen in a democratic way. I know this might seem an over-the-top suggestion so early in the piece when the thing is worth peanuts, but I've seen what happens when stuff like this isn't in place and the thing becomes worth real moneys over time. NOTE - I personally do see HA as a rebranding/rejuvination of TA, not a blank slate so the core community is already atleast 4 years old and does have some maturity and capacity to be able to evolve in this direction.
I'd also like to re-iterate what I said in Discord. I am not trying to be divisive but for important votes (eg, Ownership) I'd like to see the votes conducted on-chain so that the vote can be more transparent and inclusive for members who can't attend the discord meetings. I believe that the risk of having big decisions made only in a Discord Caucas will lead to some members (like me) inevitably falling through the cracks and becoming disenfrachised.
All excellent points bugg and I'll make sure to paste this during the meet tomorrow.
All good advice, i totally agree with the important of 2. and 3.