Sep 3, 2010 – Day 4 – Daily Summary S&B Closing Report – Documents Archive for Cocaine Anonymous

Kevin Murphy: Please get ready to take your seats and come to order. We are going to get started. We are reconvening at 7:42 pm on Friday night. The first thing on the agenda is a motion to reconsider pending. It was a motion made before the dinner break. Motion to reconsider the 2011-12 H&I budget increase from $340 to $1,240. Second.

Approved Page 36 of 84

Susan Bredau: I made the Motion to reconsider because I believe this committee and this body has other options. We have options to choose our chairs. Do we think it is a sound collective conscience with a committee of 20 that in the entire context there is only one person who can fill this position?

Kevin Murphy: You are arguing the underlying motion. We don’t discuss the underlying unless the motion to reconsider is passed.

Susan Bredau: I believe that the committee has other options.

Dathan Martin: Read parliamentary procedure regarding controlling and manipulating a group away from its original intentions to unjustly influence the group conscience.

Kevin Murphy: I would prefer to not demonstrate for certain speakers and not denigrate peoples motives.

Earnest Martin: speak against this motion. It is unfair because there are several committees that the same situation has arisen. Concept 9 states that good service leaders…

Kevin Murphy: why do you believe the motion should not be reconsidered? Earnest Martin: It is unfair. There are two committees that this effects but we are only discussing one.

Kevin Murphy: I see no further debate. This requires a majority vote. Motion fails with substantial unanimity.

Susan Bredau: 5^th Concept Statement. We have $45,000 of inventory of HFCII. There are 20 members of the H&I committee. If each committee bought 3 books personally, they could pay for their chair to come back without having the Office have to pay the cost.

Marjie Mineard: MOTION to reconsider the Finance Committee budget from $50 to $990. Second.

Kevin Murphy: Did you vote on the prevailing side?

Marjie Mineard: Yes I did. There are other options.

Kevin Murphy: Any debate? Motion to reconsider the Finance budget from $50 to $990. Prepare yourselves to vote. Motion fails with substantial unanimity.

Approved Page 37 of 84

The next item of business is the Structure & Bylaws report.

CLOSING REPORT

C.A. WORLD SERVICE CONFERENCE 2010

STRUCTURE AND BYLAWS REPORT

OPENING COMMENTS

Structure & Bylaws would like to start by thanking this body for the opportunity to serve you. This year our committee was committed to bringing you our “best”! We would like to acknowledge everyone that took the time and energy to craft a referral to our committee and express that due diligence went into every referral we received this year. From the work done on this committee, we are bringing forth with 9 motions. Once again, it has been an honor to be a part of the collective concerns of this conference. We thank each member that took the time, energy, and love to send this committee a referral and give the fellowship an opportunity to hear your voice.

Committee Introductions:

Nick Alexander, Chair
Duane Miller, Vice Chair
Janice Whitted, Co-secretary
Joan Johnson,Co-secretary
Nicholas Lynn, Trustee
Cynthia Scheible
Robert Smith
Ronald Washington
Hal Kelly
Xavier Salinas

Approved Page 38 of 84

Clarence Moran
Earl Henderson
Krista Bailey
Mike Schelin
Bryan Seid
Robert Briggs
Eric Thorn
Kenny Williams
Benjamin Lackey
Greg Trahan
Valerie Cote
Deborah Wilbert
Teresa Neighbors

REFERRALS THAT RESULTED IN MOTIONS

Referral #5173

Create a guideline with timeline on what S&B does timeline on what S&B does/do they want a handbook? Let’s explain what we do and how we do it. Statement of purpose in manual page 31

MOTION: To create a stand-alone document entitled “Structure & Bylaws Guidelines” to be inserted into the Delegate notebook:

Structure and Bylaws Guidelines

Statement of Purpose

Approved Page 39 of 84

The Structure and Bylaws Committee (S & B) is to formulate bylaws, guidelines and structures by which Cocaine Anonymous can operate day-to-day, at Conferences, Regions, Areas and elsewhere around the World. We execute with great diligence the task of being of maximum service to our fellowship, by introducing new verbiage into a comprehensive World Service Manual (WSM) in the first quarter of the year following our conference, allowing our fellowship to grow and flourish.

Functions

At the World Service Conference (WSC) and other times during the year, the Structure and Bylaws committee is asked to investigate concerns regarding our current World Service Manual and either challenge the request by identifying a current solution or create new verbiage to accommodate the referral.

When creating new verbiage, careful deliberation is undertaken in finding a solution that considers functionality and longevity.

Timeline

This section of the document is a procedural timeline for what happens at the WSC and subsequent to distribution of the updated WSM:

Referrals are received at the WSC and motions are made when applicable, to add clarity and simplicity to the WSM during the S & B breakout session.
After passing on the conference floor, the S & B secretary makes the appropriate changes to the WSM and sends out a modified copy (1^st

Approved Page 40 of 84

draft) of the WSM to the Committee within 21 days from the close of the Conference.

A 14 day period is allowed for responses from the committee with changes or approval.
If changes are necessary, the S & B secretary makes the changes within 7 days from the due time of the last notification and sends out a revised copy allowing 14 days for responses from the committee with changes or approvals.
This process is repeated until no changes are needed.
If no changes are needed, the WSM is considered to be a final draft copy and is sent to the appropriate Trustee for ratification approval.
After ratification approval the draft is now considered finalized.
A copy is sent to the World Service Office for distribution to the fellowship.

Referrals that are held in committee shall be distributed to the Committee, in electronic form, 21 days after the close of the Conference.

Referrals received post conference shall be distributed to the Committee, in electronic form, 30 days from the date the chair receives them from the Conference Committee.

The Structure and Bylaws Committee will meet via conference calls and online throughout the year.

Second.

Kevin Murphy: Before I state the motion, I need to address something here. The transcripts are useful but not necessarily for the reports. Those are better served by using the Daily Summaries. It makes the text illegible. I am not going to read all the punctutation points. If we had to go to the transcript to figure something

Approved Page 41 of 84

out about punctuation, we are screwed. Hard to follow. A motion has been made and seconded. Would you like to speak to your motion?

Ben Lachey: If you have been following this referral, we have been working on it for the last 6 years. This is our personal guidelines and actually says what we do and what takes place on the committee.

Earnest Martin: There are 2 places where it discusses transmitting the referrals by electronic forms.

Ben Lachey: If delegates cannot work out of the conference, it should not stop us from doing the work.

Earnest Martin: Isn’t this all inclusive

Alan Shields: Friendly amendment to strike word “verbiage” in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 and insert the word “language.”

Ben Lachey: We will talk about it. While we appreciate the friendly amendment, we are using the same language currently used in the WSM.

Trevor Scheible: Friendly amendment – the word “ratification” striken and changed to “approval.”

Ben Lachey: We will accept the amendment.

Cynthia Cronkhite: Would these be committee guidelines that will be subject to Conference approval for any changes?

Kevin Murphy: Are these purely internal guidelines? I am going to rule this motion to be moot. It is internal and not needed to be brought to the Floor. This does not affect anything but the internal workings of this committee and they do not have to ask us for permission to change how they govern their committee.

Michael Averill: Rendering the motion moot, does that take away from allowing the document to be placed into the Delegate Notebook?

Kevin Murphy: My Vice Chair believes that I am incorrect. That if it is going into the Delegate Notebook, it needs to be approved by this body.

Cynthia Cronkhite: speak against the motion as presented. I would hate for the committee to be bound by certain timelines in an approved document that could be a more informal process handled within the committee.

Approved Page 42 of 84

Bryan Seid: speak in favor of the motion. The necessity to have the guidelines put in place is to give the committee to have something to work on. When we leave this conference, this is the timeline we set for ourselves. If the modifications continue to be necessary, we consider the procedure. There have been years that the manual didn’t get out until April. The days and amount of time will happen but there are things out of our control that could affect the timelines.

Trevor Scheible: Parliamentary Inquiry – are you aware that we have the transcripts are signed off prior to changes made to the WSM are approved by the Trustee.

Kevin Murphy: That is one of the reasons why you go to the transcript to get exact language if the daily summary is incorrect. I believe you may be correct. Elizabeth Saldebar: Speak in favor of motion because it puts forward a process that would allow the Office to get the WSM to the fellowship more quickly.

Vonya Quarles: Speak for the motion because it is crafted by committee that plans to use it. Provides ranges and timeframes and would like to make friendly amendment.

Nick Alexander: Point of Order – I heard debate and then a friendly amendment. Kevin Murphy: That is correct. You cannot debate and offer a friendly amendment.

Hal Kelly: Speak in favor of motion. This is an attempt by committee to set up guidelines for themselves. We are simply trying to be expedient as to how we do business.

Trevor Scheible: Speak against the motion. It is clear that the committee is desiring to hold themselves accountable to getting the WSM out in a timely manner. You have not mentioned the transcripts and I mention SR13 regarding work that effects other committee, then the WSBT will need to have the transcripts before the document can be approved. I speak against.

Ben Lachey: Parliamentary Inquiry – he has brought up some points, how as the maker of the motion, I can respond.

Approved Page 43 of 84

Kevin Murphy: you cannot.

Marc Harvey: Call to question.

Second.

Kevin Murphy: there is a motion on the floor.

MOTION: To create a stand-alone document entitled “Structure & Bylaws Guidelines” to be inserted into the Delegate notebook:

Structure and Bylaws Guidelines

Statement of Purpose

Functions

When creating new verbiage, careful deliberation is undertaken in finding a solution that considers functionality and longevity.

Approved Page 404 of 84

Timeline

This section of the document is a procedural timeline for what happens at the WSC and subsequent to distribution of the updated WSM:

Referrals are received at the WSC and motions are made when applicable, to add clarity and simplicity to the WSM during the S & B breakout session.
After passing on the conference floor, the S & B secretary makes the appropriate changes to the WSM and sends out a modified copy (1^st draft) of the WSM to the Committee within 21 days from the close of the Conference.
A 14 day period is allowed for responses from the committee with changes or approval.
If changes are necessary, the S & B secretary makes the changes within 7 days from the due time of the last notification and sends out a revised copy allowing 14 days for responses from the committee with changes or approvals.
This process is repeated until no changes are needed.
If no changes are needed, the WSM is considered to be a final draft copy and is sent to the appropriate Trustee for ratification approval.
After ratification approval the draft is now considered finalized.
A copy is sent to the World Service Office for distribution to the fellowship.

Referrals that are held in committee shall be distributed to the Committee, in electronic form, 21 days after the close of the Conference.

Approved Page 45 of 84

Referrals received post conference shall be distributed to the Committee, in electronic form, 30 days from the date the chair receives them from the Conference Committee.

The Structure and Bylaws Committee will meet via conference calls and online throughout the year.

Second.

Trevor Scheible: Point of Order – I raised the question about SR13 and I am awaiting a response.

Kevin Murphy: As I read this, there is no time given for the Trustee approval process. Simply given to the Trustee and you approval. You may take however long you want for your approval, then they proceed with their process. I should have stated that the call to question was out of order because there was no further debate. Prepare yourselves to vote. Motion passes with some opposition with substantial unanimity.

Referral #6627 – GSR

On Page 16 of WSM under GSR Position, please consider changing the 1^st sentence “The GSR position is probably the most important service position…” While I feel it is highly important, I disagree it is the most important.

MOTION: Insert on page 16 of the WSM under GSR position: The GSR position is probably the most a very important service position for which a member can be elected. Second.

Tony Drake: Motion made and seconded. Would you like to speak to your motion?

Xavier Salinas: It is my opinion that the are very important service positions and probably not MOST important service positions.

Approved Page 46 of 84

Jane Sisson: Friendly amendment – for which a member be elected verbiage to remain.

Xavier Salinas: We accept.

Tony Drake: any further debate? Prepare yourselves to vote. Motion passes with minor opposition.

Referral #6663 – Sobriety Time

Page 16 under “GSR” change “Suggested Sober Time” to “Suggested Sobriety Time”. Same on Page 17 under Treasurer and Secretary. Sober is a term associated with alcoholism.

MOTION: Insert on page 17 of WSM, under heading Secretary: Suggested sober time abstinence from cocaine and all other mind-altering substances.

Second.

Note: Upon approval of this motion, any reference to sober or sobriety time in the WSM will be changed to “abstinence from cocaine and all other mind-altering substances”.

Tony Drake: Is the note a part of your motion?

Joan Johnson: No

Tony Drake: would you like to speak to your motion?

Joan Johnson: While “cocaine and all other mind altering substances” we think of CA. This is the way to get our manual consistent.

Marc Harvey: Point of Order – under the motion, there is a note that was not read.

Tony Drake: I asked if the note was a part of the motion and the answer was no.

Approved Page 47 of 84

Rose Jones: Page 16 it says GSR and on Page 17 it says Secretary so you are going to change everything in the manual.

Joan Johnson: Yes

Sally Shamberger: How can we take it out of the format?

Joan Johnson: We are asking to put in, not out.

Rose Jones: Friendly Amendment instead of saying abstinence and all other mind altering substances, can we say clean and sober time?

Earl Henderson: We appreciate the spirit, no.

Nick Alexander: I speak in favor of the motion. I love CA. When I look at the 1^st step it says free from cocaine and all other mind altering substances. If this motion passes, we are going to talk about cocaine and all other mind altering substances.

Hal Kelly: I speak in favor of the motion. There was an inconsistency in the manual. That’s the first step to get some consistency. CA has come to age. Time for us to come forward.

Alan Shields: I was taught there was a distinction between being clean and sober.

Elizabeth Wise: Friendly Amendment – abstinence from cocaine and all other mind altering substances for a period of six months. I would like to withdraw my Friendly Amendment thank you.

Mike Seden: I speak against the motion. To me it’s like saying I’m here and free for six months. I don’t like the word abstinent.

Mark Carpenter: I speak against the motion, I did 12 years without picking up a drink or drug and was not sober.

Donald Hume: I speak against it. If you want to put it throughout the manual then do that. Put it all on there.

Approved Page 48 of 84

Carl Warlick: If I had a vote, I would vote against this motion. If we were going to be independent, we would stop using all of AA literature. If we are going to uniformity, we need to stop 12X12, stop using the Big Book, then we can be CA, not just when we want to put something in, let’s do it for everything.

Marc Harvey: Friendly Amendment – To remove the period at the end of the new language.

Joan Johnson: No thank you it’s a housekeeping issue.

Nicholas Lynn: Sober is device and abstinence is a fact. I hear what the ex-trustee says and welcome the comments. We are not the step-child, we are CA. As a fellowship we are slowly, carefully growing up and it’s still going to take time. We would be here for hours to try to change the whole thing. The intent is whether you are open to the idea to step slightly away from AA.

I attend meetings that ask me if I’m sober. In CA we are interested in abstinence. Have you stopped. It is not 1935, it is 2010 and I ask you to move on.

Ben Lackey: Call the question. Second.

Tony Drake: Prepare to vote. We will count this.

Motion to call the question requires 2/3 majority. The motion passes with a clear 2/3 majority.

Please prepare to vote on the original motion. Motion passes with noted opposition.

Referral # 6667 – SR 7

Standing Rule 7 is incorrectly stated. Change ending sentence to read “Sessions begin with roll call and end with adjournment of that session.”

Approved Page 49 of 84

MOTION: Insert on page 37 of WSM, Standing Rule 7: There may be up to three Conference Sessions (Morning, Afternoon and Evening) in the Conference Day. Conference Sessions begin with roll call and end with an adjournment of that session, day or Conference. Second.

Kevin Murphy: This motion changes a stand rule and requires 2/3 vote.

Would you like to speak to the motion?

Clarence Moran: Not at this time.

Susan Bredau: Does this require each session to have a roll call?

Clarence Moran: No, it does not.

Aurora Lopez: I speak against the motion. As I read it says conference sessions will begin with roll call and end with adjournment. It’s unclear.

Clarence Moran: If you notice—

Cynthia Cronkhite: Point of Order. That was debate.

Kevin Murphy: You cannot respond to debate.

Brian Tenenbaum: The way it reads to me you are going to have roll call each session. It reads incorrectly.

Hal Kelly: I believe we’d allow to read more than exists. We are defining adjournment. Lunch is a break. If we have a break in the middle of debate, that’s not adjournment of the end of the session. This is to help the Chair to fully define adjourn.

Kevin Murphy: I would interpret it as make a motion for adjourn and we adjourn.

We break for dinner not adjourn.

Stu Estebo: My concern, I speak against the motion because I think the motion as written is vague again, while the interpretation may be clear, in 5 or 10 years it may be interpreted differently. That’s why it’s important we are as clear as possible for the future.

Approved Page 50 of 84

Rose Jones: Point of Order: Standing Rule 7, if we are not going to adjourn three times a day, all we are saying is morning, afternoon, what’s wrong with how it stands now?

Kevin Murphy: That’s debate, not point of order.

Rose Jones: What about parliamentary inquiry?

Kevin Murphy: I have no answer without debating it myself.

Mona Ibrahim: Isn’t it true that any changes and amendments to SR are stand-alone document and you have to change the whole thing?

Kevin Murphy: They require a 2/3 vote but they can be changed, added or deleted in any one of them.

Mona Ibrahim: Where is that?

Kevin Murphy: I don’t see it, but I have been here for 19 years and that is the procedure that we have followed.

Mona Ibrahim: Where is this written?

Kevin Murphy: I will tell you the traditional way.

Mona Ibrahim: What is tradition.

Kevin Murphy: It is in the Charter, Point 9, Paragraph 2.

Siobhan Ayer: I speak against the motion as written. I don’t think the wording is necessary.

Ira Land: Friendly Amendment – Last line. The first session of the day begins with a roll call and all sessions end with an adjournment of that session, day, or conference.

Clarence Moran: We accept.

Jason Laurence: It appears we are re-writing the motion from the floor.

Kevin Murphy: It’s permissible.

Approved Page 51 of 84

Kellie Federici: That fact that we talked about conference session in three ways. Friendly Amendment – strike the word sessions and replace with the word segment.

Clarence Moran: We decline. Thank you.

Teresa Reed: MOTION to table. Second.

Kevin Murphy: Because we meet annually , we cannot use Motion to Table to defeat a motion, we need a time to table or possibly, refer back to committee.

Teresa Reed: It’s my intent to refer back to committee. MOTION to table this motion and refer back to committee. Second.

Kevin Murphy: This is debatable. Simple majority required and you are debating why it should or should not be sent back.

Jason Laurence: I understand that the line actually bring to light lack of clarity and should go back to committee.

Wesley Blount: I speak in favor of the motion. The wording is going all over and the committee just needs to clarify what it needs to clarify.

Teresa Reed: I make this motion because I feel it’s not the Conference floor’s job to write the motion and amend the motion.

Jennifer Searl: I speak in favor of the motion.

Tom Phelan: I speak against the motion. I believe the friendly amendment fixed it and we can vote on it.

Vonya Quarles: I speak against the motion. We have invested a lot of time I’d like to see it be concluded.

Sally Shamberger: Call the question. Second.

Kevin Murphy: There is no further debate, so we will vote on the motion to refer back to committee.

Kevin Murphy: The motion to refer back to committee fails.

Approved Page 52 of 84

Trevor Scheible: I speak in favor of the motion. I can’t understand what the big deal is. This book we use says to close the meeting. To break is a break. Adjournment is the close of the day or conference. It’s a standing rule and people get uptight about it. It’s not rocket science.

Bill Hood: My original intent was to vote for the motion as originally presented. The original wording made sense to me, the amendment does not. We would have the same number of votes from the morning session, regardless of who returns, etc.

Michael Averill: Call the question. Second.

Kevin Murphy: The motion passes to close debate with substantial unanimity thereby meeting the 2/3 vote. Again the main motion requires a 2/3 vote. With some opposition the motion passes with 2/3 vote.

Referral #6470 – TEC Election Process

To be inserted – Page 43 – Trustee Nominee Selection and Election Process and Trustee term.

Trustee Election Committee – insert after Trustee Election Committee. Before duties.

In the event a Standing WSOT is not ratified though the ratification process for Trustee, yet has been submitted for slate consideration/ratification the TEC Chair will notify the WSOB Chair and request that the candidate be removed from the slate.

MOTION: Insert on page 43 of the WSM under the heading of Trustee Election

Committee, after sentence ending in ‘not already a Trustee: In the event a Standing WSOT is not ratified through the ratification process for Trustee, yet has been submitted for slate consideration/ratification, the TEC Chair will notify the WSOB Chair and request that the candidate be removed from the slate.

Second.

Approved Page 53 of 84

Kevin Murphy: Would you like to speak to your motion?

Robert Briggs: We feel the slate should be accurate.

Kevin Murphy: Any debate?

Jennifer Searl: The WSM in the notebook is page 43.

Robert Briggs: One is electronic and one is printed.

Elizabeth Saldebar: I will ask a question first and then get in the line and debate. My question is, why this would not include all trustees and why it’s specific to the WSOT and why wouldn’t it include the ratification.

Robert Briggs: Which would you like answered?

Elizabeth Saldebar: All.

Robert Briggs: If you look at the manual it’s where the WSOT.

Kevin Murphy: WSOT is the only trustee can be a sitting trustee and on the slate.

Elizabeth Saldebar: I get it.

Cynthia Cronkhite: I would like to offer a friendly amendment that this language be inserted in paragraph three of WSOT.

Robert Briggs: We accept.

Kevin Murphy: Instead of being page 43 it moves down the page for WSOT new point three.

Elizabeth Saldebar: What happens to the directors that are also not ratified potentially?

Robert Briggs: That is a separate issue.

Elizabeth Saldebar: How is it a separate issue?

Duane Miller: Because this amendment is under a specific heading which is the WSOT. It’s relocated to a different heading.

Approved Page 54 of 84

Kevin Murphy: Any further debate?

Motion carries unanimously.

Referral #6475 – TEC Election Process

In the event a candidate for slate consideration/ratification (Regional Trustee, WST, TAL, Non-Addict Trustee) declines the opportunity to interview, the TEC Chair will notify the Regional Trustee and request that their name be removed from the slate.

MOTION: Insert on page 44 of the WSM under “Regional and World Service

Trustees” after #5: #6 In the event a candidate for slate consideration/ratification (Regional Trustee, WST, TAL, Non-Addict Trustee) declines the opportunity to interview, the TEC Chair will notify the Regional Trustee and request that said candidate’s name be removed from the slate.

Second.

Kevin Murphy: Would you like to speak to your motion?

Robert Smith: Yes. I’d like to refer to my chair.

Nicholas Lynn: This is for people who change their mind, don’t turn up and we want to clarify.

Trevor Schieble: I’d like to offer a friendly amendment strike it out as number six and insert between 3 and 4 to make it a new point 4 to clean up the timeline and renumber the points thereafter.

Nicholas Lynn: We accept.

Mike Seden: Will this take care of the problem we had when the interviewee didn’t show up?

Nicholas Lynn: That’s the idea.

Approved Page 55 of 84

James Parrish: In our conference, we had a problem that arose about this issue.

I speak in favor of this motion.

Wesley Blount: I have a question. As I am reading this, they are going to notify the Region when they decline to be interviewed but not disqualified?

Kevin Murphy: Not as a result of this motion.

Joy Hutcheson: The answer to Mike’s question is no. This speaks for the people that decline to be interviewed but have been ratified by their Region.

Rose Jones: Call the question. Second.

The motion to end debate passes with substantial unanimity thereby meeting the 2/3 requirement.

The original motion carries unanimously.

Referral #6406 – CAWSO Board Member

Page 50, Paragraph 1, Sentence 5 – For the purpose of this paragraph, the term “CAWSO Board Member” shall not include the Paid Director, the Pacific South Regional Trustee, nor the World Service Trustee.

New Language: For purpose of this paragraph the term “CAWSO Board Member” shall not include the Paid Director(s), the World Service Service Office Trustee, nor the World Service Trustee. Note: The Pacific South Regional Trustee is no longer considered a CAWSO Board Member.

MOTION A: On page 47 of the WSM, change the following: CAWSO BOARD QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES CHAIRPERSON

Elected by vote of the Board of Trustees from one of the existing Directors, excluding Paid Director, Pacific South Regional Trustee, World Service Office Trustee and World Service Trustee. Second.

Approved Page 56 of 84

Kevin Murphy: would you care to speak to your motion?

Greg Trahan: We called the maker of motion, the WSO Chair, the Pacific South Regional Trustee, they all consider the Pacific South Regional Trustee is no longer a CAWSO Board Member. Any further debate? See none, prepare yourselves to vote. Motion passes unanimously.

Motion B: on page 49 of the WSM:

For the purposes of this paragraph the term “CAWSO Board member” shall not include the paid Director, the Pacific South Regional Trustee Paid Directors nor the World Service Trustee. Second.

Kevin Murphy: Would you care to speak to your motion?

Krista Bailey: Not at this time.

Kevin Murphy: Anyone?

Susan Bredau: Friendly amendment. Would the Committee consider that the changes shall not include “the Paid Director” but include “Paid Directors.” Krista Bailey: We accept.

Kevin Murphy: Motion carries unanimously.

Referral #5776 – Adding LCF language to WSM

On page 49 of the WSM, after the sentence which reads, “The CAWSO Board as a whole shares responsibility for reviewing and publishing all WSO publications, i.e., the NewsGram, directories, etc.,” please add a new sentence as follows: “New and revised literature shall be published in a timely manner pursuant to guidelines established by the World Service Conference.” The LCF Guidelines say “… the goal being to complete publication within 90 days following delivery of the piece by LCF. If this 90-day timeline proves unfeasible, the WSO and LCF will determine a mutually agreed alternative timeline.” There is currently a backlog of pieces dating back to 2004 that are still not published in their proper form in hard copy and/or online. My hope is that adding this language to the

Approved Page 57 of 84

WSM will make it more clear how important it is that this publication responsibility be carried out in a timely manner in order to help fulfill our primary purpose.

MOTION: Insert on page 49 of the WSM after the sentence The CAWSO Board as a whole shares responsibility for reviewing and publishing all WSO publications, i.e., the Newsgram, directories, etc. New and revised literature shall be published pursuant to the timelines (if at all possible) established by the World Service Conference (e.g. LCF Guidelines). Second.

Kevin Murphy: Would you care to speak to your motion?

Eric Thorn: In the LCF guidelines, there exists a timeline for pamphlet publications in anticipation of the future, whereas C.A. might have its own books, to draw attention to the pieces we have unpublished, yet have passed the approval process, to signify the importance of this process and to continue encouraging communication between the WSO and LCF, we crafted this motion.

Tom Phelan: Appreciate the spirit of the motion, it overlooks practicalities. Sometimes there are staffing issues, the WSOB could be disbanded. I speak against the motion because I believe it is too open ended. The guidelines are already there and this is redundant and impractical.

Cynthia Cronkhite: speak in favor of the motion. This is my referral. With all love and respect for WSOB and understand the issues with staffing problems. There are publications that have made it through the process and they need to get out the fellowship in a timely manner. The WSO needs to step up and give us the tools necessary to support our primary purpose.

Tom Phelan: speaks strongly against the motion. This is classical Concept 10 violation in which we delegate responsibility and don’t follow up with authority to carry it out.

Kevin Murphy: further debate?

Approved Page 58 of 84

Cynthia Cronkhite: speaking in favor of the motion. The WSOB and I are working cooperatively. They have one volunteer in place to handle with no staff issues to be dealt with. This is simply adding that the delegated authority to be carried out in timely manner.

Keith Froher: I speak in favor of the motion. The GLBT pamphlet was brought to the floor and now it is printed. There are publications that have been in the works for years.

Jennifer Searl: I need more information. What actually is the timeline?

Tom Phelan: Publication Point 8 – within 90 days of a fully signed off document and has been received by the WSO.

Cynthia Cronkhite: The pamphlet process, once Conference approved piece, LCF Chair has 30 days to process with goal being 90 days.

Gary Parker: Speak in favor of motion. In 2008, Conference approved a new edition of “Choosing a Sponsor” and it is still not available.

Nicholas Lynn: Speak in favor of motion. I understand Tom’s frustration. It is very difficult and some of this goes back a long time. I don’t think we are trying to crush the Office. We are asking the Office to make a start to get these pamphlets moving forward. If staff isn’t there, but I think we should be generous and I was told this was progress not perfection. We need to pass this and when the WSO can do the job and the WSO is currently struggling. Maybe we should look to ourselves.

Yvette Love: Point of Information. Would this be regarding pamphlets moving forward or pamphlets waiting since 2004?

Eric Thorn: This is speaking to pamphlets in holding pattern and also future pamphlets. This is not a condemning or punitive motion. This is continue encouraging communications.

Duane Miller: Speak in favor of motion. We don’t make this stuff up. We respond to what we have been asked to do. There is a lot of latitude. Words like

Approved Page 59 of 84

“feasible” mean “when possible.” Just have some communication. We don’t want to overburden the Office, we just want to be responsive to the fellowship so that people understand. If people understand that there isn’t enough staff, then it becomes a request of the fellowship to complete the task. This is a fellowship issue and not just the WSOB.

Siobhan Ayer: Speak in favor of motion. If we have the people in place to move the pieces forward, that’s great. If we get it done in timely manner, it’s our responsibility to do so. If the Office is not in a position to do, then it becomes an issue for the Chair to attempt to solve the problem. Communication is essential to getting these pieces moving forward.

Trevor Scheible: What you are asking us to allow you to put in here, “timelines established by the World Service Conference (eg LCF Guidelines). We are asking them to do something within a timeline but if you can’t, it gets a little frustration. I wish we didn’t need this but it gets a little closer to where we need to be but not fully. A lot of times committee work gets set aside and this is asking for that not to take place anymore. It helps the WSO with a little guidance with what they are supposed to do. If they can’t communicate with the committee, then they can come to the WSBT and see if they can help solve the problem.

Kevin Murphy: We have been debated this for 45 minutes and I have lost my dream of a break. If we could somehow speed this up, it would be great.

Marc Harvey: Friendly amendment. After “timelines” to include “(if at all possible).”

Eric Thorn: We accept.

Approved Page 60 of 84

Randy Groen: Speak against the motion. It doesn’t change anything. It just says, you need to do it as it says within the guidelines. It’s just restating it at a different place.

Dwight Johnson: Speak against the motion. I had a chance to fly out here and see the inventory and the staff can’t handle all the work that is required of them. We are sitting with the largest membership of the fellowship within miles and they should come and help.

Elizabeth Saldebar: Speak against the motion because what this body doesn’t know is that the WSOB had created 2 leads to help LCF move literature forward. This body decided to have a 2 director format and we don’t have that in place. We are currently understaffed and it is not prudent that this body at this particular time, to approve something like this. It does not create a win-win. The timeline of 90 days is incredibly tight but it really ties our hands. Yes, we have pamphlets that are waiting to move forward. If we could just be patient and allow us to get us to get caught up this year.

Peter DeRaeffaele – Call to question. Second.

Kevin Murphy: prepare to vote. Motion passes with substantial unanimity. Prepare yourselves to vote on main motion. Motion fails 34 in favor, 80 against. At this point, we are going to take a break even though there is only one motion left. This will be a 20 minute break. It is 10:29 pm.

BREAK

Tony Drake: Please take your seats.

Kevin Murphy: We have more business. It is 10:59 and we are back in session.

Trevor Schieble: Motion: To suspend the rules to extend the agenda. Second.

Jennifer Searl: Was there a time on that?

Kevin Murphy: We don’t know yet. It is not debatable. The motion carries unanimously.

Approved Page 61 of 84

Trevor Schieble: Motion: to extend the time until midnight tonight.

Kevin Murphy: Would you like to speak to your motion?

Trevor: Yes would like to see us finish S&B and any other motions that arise tonight.

Kevin: Motion passes unanimously.

COMMITTEE WORK THAT RESULTED IN MOTIONS

MOTION: Insert on pg 43 of the WSM, under Conference-approved slate: The candidates nominated from each region shall be submitted to WSC for ratification by two-thirds vote of the WSC, except in the case where written notice is received from a potential Trustee candidate that the said candidate is withdrawing from the election process. Upon receiving such notice, the TEC shall remove the name of the withdrawing candidate from the regional slate prior to such slate being presented to the conference floor for ratification.

Second.

Kevin Murphy: Would you like to speak to your motion?

Cynthia Schieble: Yes. When the conference floor is ratifying the slate all the candidates are actually proceeding through the process.

Cynthia Cronkhite: Would like to add a friendly amendment to strike the word “regional”.

Kevin Murphy: Please don’t Twitter, Facebook. Announcements about CA business should be made by the proper people.

Cynthia Schieble: Yes, we accept.

Approved Page 62 of 84

Randy Groen: I speak against the motion. It allows the trustee to go back and get them removed. It’s the regions slate.

Kevin Murphy: Any further debate?

Joy Hucheson: Point of order.

Kevin Murphy: I should not have said regional. I will re-read the motion.

The motion passes with substantial unanimity.

REFERRALS OR ITEMS TABLED UNTIL NEXT YEAR; AND ITEMS THE COMMITTEE WILL CONTINUE WORKING ON THROUGH THE YEAR

Referral # 6255

On page 17 please delete current wording under group treasurer and replace with “Attached A”

On page 19 please delete current wording under district treasurer and replace with “Attached B”

On page 22 please delete current wording under area treasurer and replace with “Attached C”

This concept would keep the written descriptions current with the approved Finance Guidelines.

GROUP/MEETING

GROUP TREASURER QUALIFICATIONS

Suggested sober time: One Year
Suggested prior service time: Six months
Term: One year.
Gainfully employed and/or financially solvent

Approved Page 63 of 84

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:

Keeps an accurate bookkeeping system (See the “Group

Treasurer’s Record” form.)

2) When applicable, maintains Group bank account(s) with checks requiring two signatures.

3) Gives financial reports to the Group regularly on a monthly basis.

4) Pays all Groups expenses

5) Passes on contributions to the District/Area and/or the World Service Office.

6) Collects and documents 7th Tradition money.

7) Collects and documents the H&I money (if H&I cans are passed at that meeting), and passes the H&I money onto the District or Area Treasurer, distinguished as H&I money.

8) For Money Handling Techniques, refer to Financial Guidelines for Groups, Distracts, Areas of Cocaine Anonymous.

DISTRICT

DISTRICT TREASURER QUALIFICATIONS

Two year of continuous sobriety.
One year commitment
One year of active service in your C.A.
Gainfully employed and/or financially stable

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:

Approved Page 64 of 84

Receives and deposits contributions from meetings and special events.
Keeps an accurate bookkeeping system.
Maintains bank account(s) with checks requiring two (2) signatures.
Gives monthly financial report with a copy of the District Bank Statement (account numbers blacked out).
Pays all expenses.
Passes on contributions to Area and World Services according to the 70/30 plan.
Forwards yearly district reconciliation to the Area Treasurer for the purpose of Area Reports to regulatory agencies.

AREA

AREA TREASURER QUALIFICATIONS

Two years of continuous sobriety.
Two year commitment
One year of active service in your Area
Gainfully employed and/or financially solvent
Bookkeeping or Accounting experience preferred.

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:

Receives and deposits contributions from meetings districts and special events.
Keeps an accurate bookkeeping system.
Maintains bank account(s) with checks requiring two (2) signatures.
Gives monthly financial report with a copy of the Area Bank Statement (with account numbers blacked out).

Approved Page 65 of 84

Timely reporting with regulatory agencies, federal and state. To protect the Area’s non-profit status yearly filings are required. It is recommended that these filings be done by an independent accountant.
Pays all expenses.
Passes on contributions to Area and World Services.
For Money Handling Techniques, refer to Financial Guidelines for Groups, Distracts, Areas of Cocaine Anonymous.

Referral #6126

Please add guideline link/site details to each of the committee sections, as listed in the WSC committee statement of purpose page 32&33 of the 2009 edition of the WSM.

Referral #6701 – TEC Slate

Please clarify whether it is acceptable for Trustee slates to contain candidate(s) who do not meet the requirements in the WSM. If it is, should the TEC be required to inform the Conference Floor which candidates(s) do not meet which requirement(s) when submitting the slate for ratification? Where is the line ultimately drawn at the nomination, at slate ratification or in the TEC? Based on this year’s precedent, my concern is that future slates (and TEC interview schedules) may be flooded with candidates who do not meet the requirements.

REFERRALS OR ITEMS REFERRED TO OTHER COMMITTEES; WORLD SERVICE OFFICE, OR BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Approved Page 66 of 84

Referral #6089 – REFERRED TO WSO

Add to the present petition: Have the GSR’s of the area from which the district wishes to move from agreed in writing to the change. Have the GSR’s of the Area to which the district is going to move agreed to in writing to the change. Has the area to which the district wishes to move submitted an SR14 petition to have an expanded area. Have the GSR’s of an area which borders the district change been contacted and agreed to in writing. Have 2/3 of all the GSRs from the district or 2/3 of the member of the GSRs approved this petition in writing. Submit written documentation. Is it necessary in #4 and #5 to have the total populations of each area?

Referral #6280 – REFERRED TO WSO

To revisit the “Petition for an Area to Change Regions” and make changes to make simpler and to ensure the necessary and important information for the delegates to make an informed and educated decision. I had a hard time filling out the form and found the required info confusing and unnecessary.

Referral #6132 – TEC Reform – REFERRED TO WSBT

The time for TEC reform has come. My experience as an ex-delegate and TEC member together with strong views expressed in my Area lead me to believe this issue can no longer be side-stepped or buried by the Trustees. I made a referral last year but heard nothing.

Referral #6300 – REFERRED TO WSBT

To require that the Regional Trustee be elected by a secret ballot by the region they represent.

Referral #6672 – TEC Guidelines – REFERRED TO WSBT

Approved Page 67 of 84

Refine and clarify guidelines for Trustee Election

REFERRALS THAT DID NOT RESULT IN MOTIONS

Referral #3874

Remove the necessity to use the transcripts of the Conference to validate the next year’s WSM. The minutes taken by the Conference secretary are read directly before the vote and with today’s technology we can trust what the Chair says and is typed correctly.

NO ACTION TAKEN – This is an important check and balance.

Referral # 5534

Again this year I have heard numerous comments regarding small areas with 3 votes. Consider some other vote assignment for very small areas. Ex: less than 5 meetings = 1 vote; less than 10 meetings (but 5 or more) = 2 votes.

NO ACTION TAKEN – This keeps small areas from having less representation simply because they are small.

Referral #5586

One Person, One Vote. This is a spiritual fellowship, not a government, and the person and their voice should be far more important than squabbling over votes.

NO ACTION TAKEN – Not feasible, not appropriate to take away an area’s right of participation by taking away their proxy.

Approved Page 68 of 84

Referral #6142

Remove the paragraph on Page 4 of WSM about this manual being a suggestion. The Conference has created this manual to guide the fellowship.

NO ACTION TAKEN – The spirit of the WSM is that of suggestion.

Referral #6301 That the Conference consider formation of a new Conference Committee titled “Fundraising & Entertainment” and for this Committee to be adopted at World, Area & District levels. Please include officer’s duties and qualifications and clearly defined responsibilities.

NO ACTION TAKEN – Fundraising is the responsibility of the Finance Committee and entertainment is the responsibility of the Unity and Convention Committees.

Referral #6409 – Group Inventory

Referral 6409 is respectfully submitted to the Structure and Bylaws Committee. The referral itself is in italics. The remainder is simply supporting information / ideas / suggestions should you find them useful.

This referral is a request that the Structure and Bylaws Committee take a group inventory of itself in the spirit of assessing how well the committee helps the Conference to fulfill its purpose and to identify what action(s) the committee could take to improve the committee’s ability to better help the Conference fulfill its purpose.

Should the Structure and Bylaws Committee opt to take no action on this referral either at the 2010 Conference or as a post-Conference activity throughout the 2010 / 2011 year, please be kind enough to cite the Structure and Bylaws

Approved Page 69 of 84

Committee’s reason(s) for not undertaking such action in the Structure and Bylaws Committee’s closing Conference report.

Rationale (aka debate):

As individuals we undertake a personal inventory to uncover and discover things about ourselves and begin the process of growing spiritually. We continue to take personal inventories to perfect and enlarge our fit spiritual conditions.

Many CA Groups find that taking a regular inventory is healthy for the Spiritual well being of the Group and to assess how well the Group is fulfilling its primary purpose. Inventory helps the Group:

Have a clear sense of itself and its primary purpose
Gauge its success in fulfilling its primary purpose
Evaluate its ability to successfully carry its message
Ponder whether it is it right sized in its perception of itself
Appraise its role in contributing financially
Consider how CA is improved by the group’s existence

Extending the self-examination practice of inventory to the District and Area has also proven to be a effective means to keep these bodies focused, efficient, effective, and on track Spiritually.

“A business which takes no regular inventory usually goes broke. Taking a commercial inventory is a fact-finding and a fact-facing process. It is an effort to discover the truth about the stock-in-trade. One object is to disclose damaged or unsalable goods, to get rid of them promptly and without regret. If the owner of the business is to be successful, he cannot fool himself about values.” [Alcoholics Anonymous, pg. 64].

Approved Page 70 of 84

The Big Book uses the metaphor of a business inventory as a means to underscore its suggestion that there is value in the inventory process. Then it applies the concept of taking an inventory to the personal level as a means to recover spiritually. Most CA members would agree the process of taking inventory has personal value. The Conference and its committees are the ‘business’ of CA and applying inventory at the ‘business level’ of CA becomes more than a simple metaphor; group inventory will help keep CA from going ‘broke’ spiritually, financially or in other ways. Don’t we owe the Fellowship that effort?

There are those who would argue that taking inventory at the level of Conference committees or the Conference itself is not necessary. They might argue that AA or NA don’t do this. When faced with such flawed reasoning, it might be fair to consider the size of CA’s membership relative to these other Fellowships and ask, if we are not in some need of improving ourselves, our methods, our effectiveness then why is CA’s membership comparatively so much smaller? If the answer is that there are simply fewer cocaine addicts than alcoholics or addicts in general then an inventory might cause us to ask, is it really efficient, effective, and in the best interests of CA as a whole to support and maintain the very large infrastructure that CA presently has in order to sustain our much smaller Fellowship? Undeniably, these are difficult questions. No one is suggesting that the inventory process will necessarily be easy though it may be.

Some would argue the inventory process is too cumbersome to perform at the Conference committee level. Is it too burdensome if the process helps us improve such that we reach out and save ten more lives this year than we did last year? Can this committee be a small part of that improvement or is it perfect as it is? Tradition Two in Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions offers for consideration that sometimes the good is the enemy of the best; is this

Approved Page 71 of 84

committee functioning at it best? Consider Tradition Two again – “For our group purpose, there is but one ultimate authority – a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience.” Does this committee specifically consider how well it functions by taking a group conscience (i.e. a group inventory)? If God expresses Him/Her Self in the group conscience then where is God in all this if there is no group conscience?

Others will point out that a referral similar to this was submitted at the 2008 Conference. They are right. The referral was submitted to a single committee for action. Effectively, no action was taken. That submission unwisely placed a very vital point of consideration in the hands of just a few people to be decided on everyone else’s behalf. That is not stated to say those individuals did anything wrong but rather to say that you most likely did not have any voice in making that decision. Now you have a voice. It is important to note that the Conference membership changes yearly and the deliberation of any individual referral may have different outcomes in any given year as different members with different ranges of experience consider a referral’s subject matter. Given this fact, and to account for the reality that sometimes it takes a long time to effect change, it is entirely proper to submit referrals as frequently as every year.

NO ACTION TAKEN. – In response to your request, our committee has reviewed the Traditions Group Inventory. It is our opinion that the inventory was not particularly help in assisting us to fulfill our mandate.

Referral #6238

Please address SR 14 page 39,

Approved Page 72 of 84

60 days is not enough time for areas that meet every 2 months. If an area with districts meets every 2 months and the district within that meets every month its closer to the “60day” period is not enough.

Our membership are entitled to participate and the SR14 as it stands denies participation.

Change 60 days to 90 days or 120 days.

NO ACTION TAKEN – Changing this to 90 days would not allow ample time for the SR14 materials to be processed. All SR14 materials must be reviewed and signed off by the Conference Committee, the Conference Chair and the WSBT before it can be sent in the delegate mailing. The deadline for areas to submit items for SR14 was moved up last year to allow sufficient time for this process.

Referral # 6328

On page 39 of the WSM #14 to change “proposed material to be reviewed by the delegates for possible consideration by the conference must be received by the WSO at least 120 days before the WSC so that all delegates can receive and review the material at least 60 days prior oth the conference”

In order to facilitate and informed group conscious change 60 days to 90 days so we can have ample time to review SR14 items.

NO ACTION TAKEN – See Ref #6238

Referral # 6333

Please revise SR14 so that delegates receive and review the material at least 90 days before the conference. The current 60 days is simply not enough time to get and informed group conscience at the area level.

NO ACTION TAKEN – See Ref #6238

Approved Page 73 of 84

Referral # 6352

Not sure how exactly to word this so please see the intent behind or within this idea:

Please limit time at the microphone to a reasonable amount of time…perhaps 5 min at a time.

I understand peoples passion for our fellowship but I also believe 10min talks are in my opinion not a proper use of the conference time.

NO ACTION TAKEN – Refer to Robert’s Rules of Order on how limit debate or speak to conference chair.

Referral #6481 – Training Packets

World approved training packet for Areas, new GSR’s, secretaries, Chair & Vice Chairs.

NO ACTION TAKEN – The WSM is set up as a suggested guideline for Qualifications, Requirements and Duties of Officers and Committee Chairs and Vice-Chairs. Every Area is autonomous and should create their own guidelines and bylaws.

Referral #6645 – Trustee slate guidelines

Can guidelines/question be crafted for the Trustees to use at the Regional Caucus when filling the Regional slate? Example: Do you service on your committee throughout the year? Do you write quarterly reports to your Trustee? Do you meet all requirements?

NO ACTION TAKEN – Refer to election procedures for the regional trustee candidates by regional assembly #1 and #2 on page 38 of the WSM.

Referral #6349 – Saskatchwan

Approved Page 74 of 84

Add Saskatchewan to the Pacific North Region in the WSM re: Motion WSConference 2008

NO ACTION TAKEN – Saskatchewan is a district, not an area, and as such is not listed in the WSM.

Referral #6457 – Trustee Slate Nominee Resumes

A brief resume, including compliance with WSM details, should be made available to the Conference body for each Trustee slate nominee prior to the ratification vote taking place. To vote on ratification without any information can

only constitute an uninformed conscience. Many delegates, particularly incoming, have no knowledge of the nominees.

NO ACTION TAKEN – Process is in place. Please refer to TEC page 43 and 44 of WSM

Referral #6666 – SR 6

Is Standing Rule 6 necessary? This is really covered in Standing Rule 5.

NO ACTION – SR6 is there to make provisions or exceptions for just cause for not being able to comply within the 120 days.

Referral #6668 – SR10

Standing Rule 10 needs to be modified for future, we may not always use an “electronic form.” See how SR11 is written.

NO ACTION TAKEN – SR10 accurately reflects the current form in which main motions are to be submitted to the Conference Chair. SR10 is consistent with SR11.

Approved Page 75 of 84

Referral #6670 – SR 15

SR 15 makes no sense and should be rewritten.

NO ACTION TAKEN – the maker of the referral read the standing rule incorrectly

Referral #6405 – World Service Trustee term

The term of service for the World Service Office Trustee should fall in line with all other Trustee terms (4 years). Each two (2) years, the World Service Office Trustee is limited in their right of participation when it comes to interviewing and voting on the WSOT position. Why is this? Pg 50, Paragraph 1, Numbers 1&2, does not express a definite term of service being 2 years. Refer to Referral 6406.

NO ACTION TAKEN – The term of service is determined by the Directors term of service on the WSO, The WSOT has full right of participation for the two year term. Any candidate on the WSOT slate should be excluded from interview question formulation and voting because a Trustee has never been in a position to vote for themselves.

Referral #6671 – Alternate Delegate term

Add verbiage to the manual to specify the term of an Alternate Delegate. It is stated clearly the term for Delegates but the term for Alternate is not.

NO ACTION TAKEN – Page 25, #4 clearly states the term limits for delegates and alternate delegates.

Referral #6674 – SR 19

Standing Rule 19 should not be a standing rule. It is a true statement and should only be in the section of what constitutes a meeting.

Approved Page 76 of 84

NO ACTION TAKEN – It is a true statement but we need it there to help determine true delegate totals for each area.

Referral #6675 – SR13

Add a sentence or two to SR 13 “This SR cannot be circumvented by making a motion to suspend the rules to hear an item not on the agenda. To make motions that effect any part of the WSC.

NO ACTION TAKEN – This referral would fetter the discretion of the Conference.

Referral #6689 – TEC Slate

Remove “Conference Approved Slate” from the Trustee Nominee Selection and selection process as there is no real purpose to the “ratification” of slates from regions that is not accomplished at the Regional level. Instead, consider replacing with an Election Committee reporting process which would present to the Conference the composition of each slate, the disposition of the nominees with it (i.e. withdrawals, disqualifications, in a general, anonymous way) and allow the Conference to approve that report and question the Committee as needed for greater transparency and a more effective process.

NO ACTION TAKEN – That is the opportunity for the Conference floor to agree or disagree with the nominees on the slate, and thus limiting their right of participation.

Referral #6712 – Page 3 of the WSM

On Page 3 of the WSM, the Cocaine Anonymous groups, meetings and service committees, should only use, display, distribute ell the following literature and materials: The WSC approved literature set forth in the appendix , books, Alcoholics Anonymous, Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions” and the “AA”

Approved Page 77 of 84

service manual, combined with the 12 Concepts for World Service, Region, Area, District and Group/Meeting approved flyers, meeting directories and add and all fund-raising materials/displaying the CA logo as described …..

NO ACTION TAKEN – The referral creates an unnecessary redundancy in our statement of policy. See Page 13.

Referral #6389

No action taken – Individual meetings & ca as a whole have & have had, permission to read adapted excerpts from the big book of alcoholics anonymous. See page 6, 7, 8, & 9 of the 2010 WSM.

In regards to “how it works”, The WSBT has issued the following opinion: Update as of December 5, 2009: It is the position of the World Service Board of Trustees that the C.A. version of How it Works is not considered C.A.-approved literature. In the spirit of unity, our common welfare, and our observance of the Twelve Traditions, we suggest that your group have a business meeting to determine the well-informed group conscience as to what readings shall be used in your meeting formats.

As a board, the Trustees have explored every avenue available to us. We have worked many long hours on this issue. We are of the opinion that the matter is now concluded. If in the future something new comes to light, we are always able to reopen the discussion. We feel, however, satisfied that a loving Higher Power who guides us all has spoken, and that any more time spent pursuing this is not in the best interest of Cocaine Anonymous.

Referral # 6317

To review and change the list of areas current in the European region. On page 26 of the WSM.

Requesting this info from the regional trustee.

This would be helpful especially to H&I committee with their map.

Approved Page 78 of 84

HOUSEKEEPING

Referral #6662 – Alphabetize

Reorganize the bullets on Page 12 in each box to be alphabetic.

HOUSEKEEPING

Referral #6664 – Statement of Purpose

On page 31 of the WSC Committees statement of purpose, item D has the word “and” at the end of the sentence. It is not necessary.

HOUSEKEEPING

Referral #6665 – SR5C

Standing Rule 5C needs to have the word “area” capitalized to be “Area”

HOUSEKEEPING

Referral #6673 – Font & Text Type

Make font and text type uniform for the Table of Contents shorten by at least one page. Missing a line break or 2 in the PDF. Fix so subject headers are on the top of the page. CPC missing closing ) on page 2 of table of contents.

HOUSEKEEPING

NEW COMMITTEE STRUCTURE AS OF THIS CONFERENCE

Chair – Duane Miller

Approved Page 79 of 84

Vice-Chair – Deborah Wilbert

Co-Secretary – Cynthia Scheible and Joan Johnson

CLOSING COMMENTS

Wow, six year have flown by. I still can’t believe that six years ago I walked into this Conference and onto this Committee, with great fear, fear, fear, ohhh did I mention fear? But today I stand here knowing the power of God and what a group of people who share a common love can put together, most of the time in spite of ourselves. By the close of my first day as a delegate on this committee, I knew that I wanted an opportunity to serve. First from pride and just not knowing any better, and then from love of this committee and the work we are entrusted to do. This has been a great ride and I never want to let go, but the time has come to allow the people a helped spread their wings, and take this committee to great heights. Thank you all so very much for giving me a opportunity to serve you, this fellowship gave me a life, it gave me a purpose, it gave me something better than I ever thought was possible…a chance to be want God wants me to be.

Respectfully Submitted:

In Love and Service,

Nick Alexander, Chair

WSC Structure and Bylaws Committee 2010

Kevin Murphy: Questions, please line up behind the microphone.

Randy Groen: I would like to know the committee’s plan of action to straighten out the TEC process when someone declines or withdraws their name. I would like to make sure there is a plan.

Approved Page 80 of 84

Nick Alexander: The first motion today, if the candidate declines to interview, it’s about the interview. Whereas the second motion is if the cadidate withdraws. That’s why we had two separate motions.

Kim Sherwan: I have a question regarding the S&B guidelines. The statement of purpose is consistent and will it be consistent on the website? Nick Alexander: If we get a referral to change to stand-alone.

Elizabeth Saldebar: On the referral please remove my name. The finance guidelines we asked to put in the manual, I don’t understand.

Nick Alexander: We did receive this post-conference. We did not get a chance to get to this one because we did it numerically. Also, I put it on the backburner and forgot. We wanted to make sure we bring the best possible motion to the floor. My fault.

Jason Laurence: Ratifying trustees to go forward, I didn’t know them and found myself abstaining. I put in a referral that maybe a brief resume including details of conpliance or non-compliance such that I could make an informed decision. If there was something in place as it referred to my referral. Is it possible you didn’t understand my referral or am I missing it in the WSM?

Nick Alexander: We looked at the referrals given because we got two regarding resumes, and we spent time debating that issue. We came to the conclusion on the floor it was cumbersome to hand out resumes and it’s a long document, we didn’t feel as a committee that we wanted to bring that to the floor.

Susan Bredau: There has been confusion regarding where referrals concerning the TEC should be directed. Please get positive clarification for future referrals for TEC. I was asked to submit my referrals to the Trustees for TEC.

Nick Alexander: For the first 4 years I worked on this committee we worked on TEC until a trustee came to me and said it was Trustee business and we had no buisiness dealing with this. There is stuff in here we cannot mess with and it clearly defines that in the conference charter and bylaws. The TEC stuff should come to S&B the way I read that.

Approved Page 81 of 84

Kim Sherwan: Would you be taking your statement of purpose from page 32 on the manual and make it consistant with the website? Nick Alexander: Of course we will, Kim.

Alan Shields: Will the S&B committee try to be consistent when inserting things in the WSM? I think we need to be consistent with our literature.

Nick Alexander: The conference floor has told us what they would like to see. Stu Estebo: One of the things I like about CA is that we were above such petty considerations over the two fellowships bickering over clean/sober. We had risen above that to say we don’t care, just stay. Can the S&B committee rise above the use of clean/sober and get back the intention?

Nick Alexander: What we are going to do is what the conference floor has charged us to do which is the duty of S&B. Of course we are going to rise above the pettiness.

Dwight Johnson: I had noticed no action taken on one of the referrals until 6627 where you did an insert. The reason when I bring this up 6481, the answer there is nothing in here for GSR. There are GSR pamphlets, but if I get one trustee to train us and get another trustee we would have two different ways and there is no standardization. Why is that?

Nick Alexander: I’m looking at page 16, it tells what the duty, qualification, expectations are. We feel the WSM outlines what a GSR does. It’s a very important position. We felt the manual was sufficient at this time and training packets were unnecessary. Your home group can do as it pleases.

Wesley Blount: Regarding the election process and trying to clarify the process. The questions that have been raised about approving the slates on the first day, the people doing this don’t make an informed vote. Do you envision the WSO providing clarification on ratification that will help us get to a more informed process?

Nick Alexander: No.

Gregory Ashley: Motion to reconsider.

Kevin Murphy: which one?

Approved Page 82 of 84

Gregory Ashley: 6663 – sobriety time. Second.

Kevin Murphy: Did you vote on the prevailing side?

Gregory Ashley: Yes. After I looked at what we were doing, I went to the dictionary and looked up abstinence and sober.

Kevin Murphy: You can speak to why we should bring it back.

Greg Ashley: I don’t think we thought it through.

Duane Miller: I believe you said a motion to rescind.

Kevin Murphy: This is a motion to reconsider.

Nick Alexander: We spent ample time debating the merits of the motion.

Kevin Murphy: Kellie.

Kellie Federici: We had a lot of time. I spent 40 minutes looking it up.

Randy Groen: I speak in favor of the reconsider and the timeframe has changed people’s minds and it affects CA as a whole. This is a big decision and I would like ample time.

Patrick Potter: I speak in favor of the motion. When debate is that close, it needs reconsideration. It is a big and important issue. I myself abstained because I didn’t know what was going on.

Mona Ibrahim: I speak in favor of the motion. We should get the whole information. After listening earlier, the wording free would be in uniform. Alan Shields: I speak in favor of the motion. This is not consistent.

Kevin Murphy: That’s debate.

Alan Shields: Not consistent.

Scott Keaveny: I speak against the motion.

Dathan Martin: Call the question.

Kevin Murphy: With minor opposition the motion passes with 2/3 majority. Now we will vote on the motion to reconsider. It is passes it brings the original motion back to the floor as if it had never been presented. We need to count.

69 to 63 motion to reconsider passes.

Bryan Seid: Is it possible to extend the time to finish S&B business?

Kevin Murphy: We have a motion on the floor.

Approved Page 83 of 84

Wesley Blount: Motion to refer to committee. Second.

Kevin Murphy: The motion is debatable.

Nick Alexander: Parliamentary inquiry – at this time would it be appropriate to hold it in committee?

Kevin Murphy: It takes unanimous consent. There is an objection.

Trevor Schieble: Motion to refer?

Kevin Murphy: We are doing a motion refer. The motion to refer passes, the motion goes back to committee.

I have the chair of the IT committee has given notice they intend to bring a previously passed motion, replacing language in the workbook and would like to rephrase that.

I have another notification of a motion to rescind SR 7. Anymore questions for S&B committee?

Seeing none, thank the committee for their hard work. That concludes our business for the evening. We will reconvene at 8:00 am tomorrow. It is not 11:52 and we are adjourned.

ADJOURNED.

Approved Page 84 of 84

Leave a Reply Cancel reply