2009 FINANCE COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE WORK THAT RESULTED IN MOTIONS
MOTION: To approve the PI budget of $12,500.00 for the 2010/2011 budget. Second.
Kevin Murphy: Discussion? Does the maker wish to speak to motion?
Tom Walsh: Yes, this is a more than10% increase of last year’s budget and must come to the floor for approval.
Cynthia Lauletta: speak in favor of the motion. Last year’s conference the media subcommittee worked really hard for on storyboard concept. It came to you and you approved it. We need to get this out the world and this is the next step and there are
Approved Page 7 of 52
people who are dying out there and we can’t help them unless they know there is a Cocaine Anonymous.
Elizabeth Saldebar: Question for committee. We have had a little experience in producing PSAs and videos in our history. It is exciting to see this information. Has there been a long term process or plan, how it will be distributed? Is that part of this $12,500?
Russell Sedman: No. We have an 8-point process to put PSA together. We haven’t gone that far in how to distribute to the fellowship.
Elizabeth Saldebar: Can we see where we are in the process?
Russell Sedman: I can get that but it will take a minute.
Michael Chiki: is this solely for the PSA or can you tell us what this is for?
Kurt Lynn: How can a 10% increase be reconciled with where our donations are down and so forth, how are we going to balance that?
Tom Phelan: The PI committee came to us early in process and suggested that this was going to be coming along. We were able to be meet their request for increased budget through reorganization of budget in other expense categories to accommodate.
Russell Sedman: The media will be ethically neutral. To amend and translate will be relatively simple.
Edward Moore: Differences in cultures. Neutral. Who’s the judge of that neutrality? How do we know that it will play well in Istanbul or Sweden?
Russell Sedman: we are an international committee and we will be moving forward very carefully. We do know what you are talking about and we are aware.
Kevin Murphy: We are at step 4 in the process.
8 POINT PROCESS FOR PSA’s
- Idea/Script/Storyboard
- Review by WSBT
- Approval of Idea/Script/Storyboard by Conference
- Preproduction
- Review by WSBT
- Production Edit
- Review by WSBT
- Approval by Conference
Willie Bailey – Point of Order – 10% budget should say “exceeds 10%”
Kevin Murphy: maker of motion stated it was more than 10%
Kathy Jo Rangno: How many PSAs do we have on file, how often they are used and how this PSA is unique?
Russell Sedman: I have no idea. This is unique. Outside the US, the current PSAs are very American and they may not get that identification.
Bill Burmeier: If this is greater than 10%, what is the percent of increase being requested?
Tom Walsh: The $12,000 for PSA project and $500 for expenses throughout the year.
Bill Burmeier: What percentage increase is it from last year’s budget?
Tom Walsh: it is a $11,600 increase from last year.
Bill Burmeier: That amount should be brought to the floor’s attention.
Richard Leve: speaking in favor of the motion. The budget last year reflected that they knew they weren’t going to be filming and now they have the numbers as to what the
Approved Page 8 of 52
cost. This will help bring people into the fellowship that is not drug specific. Now we are bringing this forward and strongly recommend that you consider this motion.
Julie Hampson: Last year, it was brought to the floor that the committee the make this PSA. We spent many, many hours getting this together because we want to get this message out there. We know have budget and this is what we need to move to the next level. This is 2010-2011 budget.
Brian Tenenbaum: speaks in favor of the motion. This is budget money. If we don’t have the money, it doesn’t get done. But if we do have the money, then they have the money to produce the PSA. PI can be the future to get the word out.
Joy Hutcheson: Did this process go through the 3 vendor bid process?
Russell Sedman: many more than that?
Joy Hutcheson: so the best vendor was $12,000?
Russell Sedman: yes
Michael Chiki: what is your criteria for “neutral?”
Cynthia Lauletta: Point of order – I don’t believe that we are debating the concept of the PSA.
Kevin Murphy: You are correct. What is in order is debate on the amount of money being spent. Not whether we are changing the already approved concept of the PSA.
Michael Chiki: Used the new PSA was going to be “neutral” and how that is defined.
Kevin Murphy: reaching into the concept of the PSA. You are done.
Elizabeth Wise: speak in favor of motion. This committee operates on $500 a year, year after year. We charge them with creating PSA and every once in a while, they have to produce this and this is a vote for the future of CA.
Nick Alexander: would I be out of order to call the question because there hasn’t been any debate against the motion. Call the question. Second.
Kevin Murphy: Requires 2/3 vote. Motion passes with minor opposition.
Kevin Murphy: MOTION: To approve the PI budget of $12,500 for the 2010/2011 budget. Second. Motion carries minor opposition with substantial unanimity.
Kevin Murphy: We will take a break and then hear the H&I committee report.
BREAK
Kevin Murphy: Please take your seats.
4:24 pm on September 4, 2009 and we are back from break. I want to state for the record is that was not a complete report from the Finance.
We are now going to hear the H&I committee.