World Service Conference of Cocaine Anonymous Daily Minutes – Day 1 – Thursday – 3rd September 2026
Day 1 Thursday 3rd September 2026.
Duane M. – opens conference at 4.42pm welcome to the 40thCAWS Conference. Introductions made to the Dais. If you have a phone, please ensure it is on silent. Side conversations to a minimum. Welcome to 1st year delegates. Last year’s delegates please stand thank you for your service. 1st year World Service OƯice Board or World Service Board of Trustee’s welcome. Last year World Service Board of Trustee’s and World Service OƯice Board, thank you for your service. When you say your name please say it slowly into the mic. Participation requirements standing rule 1 and 2. There will be exceptions to standing rule if you serve in a subcommittee. Duane m. reads Standing rule 5. Alternate delegates are able to participate this year. This will change next year. Russell S is thanked for his service. Roll call is explained. Seating chart will be created during roll call.
Robyn G – Announcements regarding the hotel. – When we are here, we are representing the fellowship of C.A.. Treat hotel staƯ with kindness and do not be rude. If you have treated staƯ poorly, please make amends. The staƯ go above and beyond for us. We will not tolerate rudeness to staff. Wi-Fi password Marriott2026. One device ONLY!!!! No smoking or vaping in hotel. Please dispose of cigarette butts correctly. We don’t want to pick up after you! The oƯice will be closed during sessions. It will be open during break. Anything regarding your individual room, see hotel anything else see Robyn. If you are selling memorabilia do not leave unattended.
Duane M. – Stevie ray – do not contact him or disturb him.
Stevie R – When you come to mic please step up to mic and speak directly into the mic.
Duane M. – Start roll call
Denise r – Read serenity prayer in German.
Simone M. – Reads serenity prayer.
Tom B. – Reads Who is a C.A. Member in Dutch Juanita Q. Reads who is a C.A. Member.
Randy M. Reads 12 Traditions Amanda G. Reads 12 Concepts Duane M We are going to petitions. 1st up is a regional petition.
Page | 1
World Service Conference of Cocaine Anonymous Daily Minutes – Day 1 – Thursday – 3rd September 2026
Motion 1: I would like to Motion to approve the formation of the Asia-Pacific & Africa region of Cocaine Anonymous.
Seconded
Any debate?
Seeing none, all those in favour. Motion passes unanimously 185 votes quorum 124 votes.
Motion 2: To ratify C.A. Online GB Area
Jenn S– Can he make a motion?
Stuart J. I would like to make a motion to ratify C.A. Online GB Area. Seconded
Richard S; Speaking against the motion.
Duane M; Reminds to speak against the motion. Lewis E; Speaking for the motion
Patrice F; Speaking against the motion
Larrissa O; Speaking against the motion
Kalob T; Speaking against the motion
Laurie G; Speaking for the motion
Shen H; Speaking for the motion
Lou B. – Question reasons why are vague. Is the Area you were part of too big to serve you. Is the area meeting in person or hybrid?
Steve P; CAUK meet bimonthly online.
Stu E. – Question. Are you guys’ part of CA online area? Not part of Online service part of CAUK
Lou B. – Since they meet online how are they too big to serve you?
Steve P; CAUK is face to face and not focused on online issues. We need an online area to address those issues.
Pardy T; speaking against the motion
David W; Question – you have a wide variety of issues that cannot be addressed, what others do you have?
Page | 2
Steve P; Safeguarding and data protection. It is more dangerous to be online. The policy’s created do not cover online.
Peter Mcg; Question should a successful petition for an online region happen would the area stay with European region or move across.
Steve P; It’s an interesting question but can’t give a clear answer.
Sophie H; question specific examples of how CAUK have not supported you.
Steve P; I must be careful as CAUK are here. They are only able to focus on face-to-face meetings. We have asked for meeting to be hybrid, but this has been rejected. We didn’t include all the issues pertaining to online for the safeguarding policies.
Larrisa O; Point of Personal privilege; it’s too noisy
Duane M; please keep side conversation low or step outside. Bryan W; speaking against the motion
Stuart J; Speaking for the motion
Eric H; Question As you stated you have created new safeguarding policy, did CAUK accept this.
Steve P; CAUK had separate policies which fit their needs. A new policy has been written for the new area, but we are happy to share it.
Sydney P; speaking for the motion
Harlan F; Could you clarify whether the proposed area is already operating in practice terms, as a separate service body from its current area even though it has not yet formally been recognised as such?
Randy G; Motion 3; Motion to table Seconded
Randy G; Speaking for the motion
Daniel S; speaking for the motion
Denise R; speaking for the motion
Pardy T; can you explain the motion to table. Does it come back next year. Duane M; It can be back tomorrow if next year it would be old business.
Bryan W; speaking for the motion
Peter Mcg – Point of Order
Pg 87 motion to table is not debatable. Duane M We will check that.
We needed to clarify his attempt was to postpone indefinitely. No objection to previous debate. Continue to debate the motion.
Stu E; Speaking for the motion
Duane M; Seeing no further debate please prepare yourself to vote
Page | 3
Motion passes with minor opposition. Dinner break at 6.19pm
Be back at 7.19pm
Return to session: 7.24pm
Duane M; Close the doors, thank you for your patience and participation.
Jacqueline R; Leads the floor in with the Serenity Prayer.
Duane M; we had a motion to lay on the table.
We now have a fifth concept. Laurie G;
Laurie Glancy
Sussex Area Delegate 2 votes Concept 5 statement
I feel that the decision to table the Petition for C.A. Online GB Area was premature.
I believe the reason I I felt compelled to share my minority opinion is because I am part of an Area that left CAUK and has been through this process.
For a very brief context, CAUK is the name of the very first Area within the UK to be recognised by Cocaine Anonymous- at the 13th WSC in 1996.
Since then, It has grown and grown and grown!
From that original one area in the UK, there are now 8 within that same geographical space, and yet despite this the original CAUK area of Cocaine Anonymous still has 14 districts and…. Wait for it- 452 meetings. They have their Area meetings every other month for 4 hours.
Let me just break that down some more. If they had a DSR for every 10 meetings, that’s 45 DSR’s. Their one H&I, PI, Unity committees have to serve a huge area. They have a huge storage hub with thousands and thousands of pounds of literature that gets sent out across the country by post. I could go on and on. But I think you must be able to see what I am getting at already.
Page | 4
Let’s Keep This Simple….The original CAUK area is NOT serving their districts. It’s just simply too big. I believe the proposed ‘C.A. Online GB Area’ deserve the right to become an area. Everyone is thinking about the fact that it’s ‘online’ and complicating everything. Their petition is detailed and gives the information pertinent to making the right decision, this conference is just over- complicating it.
You gave us, Sussex (which is a tiny little geographical area at the bottom of the UK the right to become an area of Cocaine Anonymous 5 years ago when we were in the same position. Now the right thing to have done, would have been to let this district (proposed C.A. Online GB Area) of that same overrun CAUK area have their freedom and thus- their growth.
Thank you for allowing me to speak.
Nadz L; Motion 4: Motion to rescind the motion to table the petition to ratify the C.A. Online GB Area
Nadz L; speaking for the motion
Melanie R; Speaking for the motion
Duane M; Reminds the floor to speak to the motion on the floor.
Denise R; Speaking against the motion.
Maarten de H; Speaking against the motion
Jesse Go; Question is this rescind or a motion to reconsider. Duane M
Jesse Go; following a 5th concept it should have been a motion to reconsider.
Duane M; I don’t think you are wrong
Jesse Go; I’m never wrong I could be wrong.
Duane M; When you kill main motion it is dead.
If there is no objection, I have no problem as putting the motion to rescind as a motion to reconsider.
Jesse Go; How do we do this?
Duane M; We are going to stay in motion to rescind with a 2/ 3rd vote. Peter Mcg; Speaking for the motion
Stu E; Speaking against the motion
Veronica W; Speaking for the motion to rescind the motion to table the petition to ratify the C.A. Online GB Area
Seeing no further debate
Page | 5
Prepare to vote. All those in favour. Motion failed
Milton L; Motion 5: I make a motion to combine Massachusetts area of C.A. would like to be combined with New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island and Vermont to create New England Area of Cocaine Anonymous
Seconded.
Duane M; would you like to speak to this motion Milton
Duane M; Seeing no debate Prepare to vote
Motion passes unanimously John O;
Motion 6: I would like to motion to make C.A. New Jersey district to become an area. Seconded
Duane M; Would you like to speak to your motion. Spoke to motion
Bob O; Speaking for the motion Duane M; Seeing no further debate All those in favour
Motion passes unanimously
Richard B;
Motion 7 – To make a motion to recognize Cocaine Anonymous Norway as an area. Seconded
Richard speaks to the motion. Any further debate
Seeing none Prepare to vote
Motion passes unanimously Gary P;
Motion 8: I would like to make a motion to ratify Cocaine Anonymous Online Recovery Area Seconded
Duane M; Any debate?
Caroline H; Question our area has great concern about the use of AI, what is the extent of AI here to replace human experience.
Page | 6
MJ B; We do have an AI bot that is programmed as an AI bot it is not a substitute for face-to- face sponsorship.
Pardy T; Speaking against the motion
MJ B; Speaking for the motion
Kalob T; Speaking against the motion
Denise R; Speaking against the motion
Jesse Go; Question – The group that has the chat bot are they a meeting MJ B; I am unable to answer but they are monitored.
Jesse Go; I am trying to understand there is no meeting time?
MJ B; no
Jesse Go; We determine something based off meetings. Is it a meeting?
MJ B; No
Stu E; Speaking against the motion
Shen H; Speaking for the motion
Garrett M; Speaking against the motion
Stuart J; Speaking against the motion
Jesse Go; Speaking against the motion
Shen H; Speaking for the motion
Caroline H; Call the question
Duane M; Two people left to speak I’d like to hear them
Shawna C; Speaking against the motion
Veronica W; Speaking against this motion
Sophie H; Speaking for the motion
Barry He; Speaking against the motion
Gary P; Speaking against the motion
Eric H; Speaking against the motion
Duane M; Seeing no further debate, please prepare yourself to vote.
All those in favour
Motion fails.
Duane M Time is 8.20pm we are due to end at 9pm I would appreciate if we can push through.
I have been informed of 5th concept.
Sydney P; I stand here before the Conference to make a fifth concept petition statement regarding misconduct of the trustee at large.
Cocaine Anonymous shouldn’t be a place where women just feel safe, it should be a place where they are safe. Gary P.is the first person who told me that. That also holds true for all our fellowship and members who should never feel as though they are unable to
Page | 7
speak up or share out of fear of retaliation or ridicule. It’s unfortunate that the person whofirst introduced me to these concepts, who originally welcomed me into Cocaine Anonymous, is the person I stand before you today making a formal complaint against and the person who has made me feel unsafe in the fellowship I serve.
In August 2025, Gary P. acted upon a rumor that was brought to him from an event he did not attend. He spoke to a fellow member present about that rumor and was immediately told it was untrue. He accepted the answer, and if the story had ended there, I wouldn’t be standing here today. Unfortunately, Gary brought this rumor to the Board of Trustees — that a female delegate engaged in sexual misconduct at the Washington state area Spiritual Retreat, and from there the rumor spread like wildfire. I happen to be the only female delegate from Washington, so it is not difficult to deduce that person is me. The reason I know this was brought to the board itself is because a former trustee addressed it with another member and then myself. I will preserve the anonymity of the others involved because I have concerns about retaliatory behavior and I am unwilling to open anyone else up to that.
To create a rumor about anyone on a false charge of sexual misconduct is sexual harassment. In the book that we gratefully borrow from Alcoholics Anonymous, we are told “we are not the arbiter of anyone’s sex life.” To perpetuate such rumors is not practicing these principles. I choose to focus on what I have personally experienced, which is in fact, sexual harassment. This action was embarrassing, it compromised my ability to be of service, and it made me not want to show up for this fellowship. Then I remember something Gary said to me in 2019, “what are you going to do, relapse over some guy?” So, I asked myself, what am I going to do? Disappear because of some guy?” but just because I can stick around through a humiliating experience doesn’t mean the next person will.
One may ask, why wasn’t this brought to the board of trustees? It was. An anonymous complaint was submitted in December 2025. A complaint that, to this day, has been unanswered. I did receive notice on January 11 that states “please accept our apology for not responding to your original inquiry within 30 days. We are currently working on a response which will be sent to your shortly.” As of today, no additional response has been given, and to my knowledge no action has been taken.
On the monthly Structure and Bylaws meeting, a present and current Trustee informed the committee that a response had been written and sent, without knowing I was the person who would have received said response, unless he was referring to the apology and promise of a response coming shortly, I never received one. Per the WSBT minutes, a response was approved in March. The complaint was not published and the only way to
Page | 8
identify the complaint is that I know the date it was sent on, 2025-12-10. The S&B committee has submitted a motion to the conference regarding trustee feedback guidelines and timelines in hopes of preventing this situation from happening in the future.
The board of Trustees above and beyond all else, should be the most accountable to the fellowship they represent. If the Board of Trustees is unable to act regarding the chair of the Board, which is Gary P., it falls on the shoulders of the conference. Sexual harassment is wrong, retaliation is wrong, and I stand before conference to inform you all that Gary P.’s conduct was unacceptable, unaligned with the principles a trusted servant of that capacity should employ and shouldn’t be ignored by this body. I speak up as not just a concerned member of Cocaine Anonymous, but as a female whose sex life was put on blast in places it didn’t belong in, by a person who reasonably should have known that what they were saying was untrue and decided to say it anyway, causing disunity and fallout that was personal to me. This is not an isolated incident, but it is an opportunity for the Fellowship to demonstrate that this type of bullying and harassment by our members, especially our most trusted servants, cannot and will not be tolerated.
Duane M we have another 5th concept Anita L;
Good evening. I am here today to invoke the Fifth Concept not as an act of opposition, but as an act of love for this Fellowship and for the safeguards our service structure was designed to provide. The Fifth Concept is not only a right aƯorded to us, but a responsibility to ensure that minority opinions are heard and carefully considered before decisions are finalized
I respectfully submit this Fifth Concept Statement regarding the actions of the World Service Board of Trustees in the spirit of unity, humility, and the deep love I hold for Cocaine Anonymous.
My intention is not to accuse, divide, or create discord. It is to return our collective focus to spiritual principles, faithful stewardship, and the safeguards within our service structure that protect all of us.
Service has always been an act of love for me an expression of gratitude for the life restored through the Twelve Steps. That gratitude carries a responsibility to uphold the integrity of our Traditions, Concepts, and service structure, even when doing so is uncomfortable or misunderstood.
Page | 9
Throughout this process, I have sought to respond rather than react, asking my Higher Power to remove resentment, fear, and ego so that I may act with dignity, clarity, and compassion as Step Ten asks of us each day.
The Fifth Concept reminds us that minority voices are not a threat to unity. They are a safeguard of unity. This Concept exists to ensure that no trusted servant is silenced, dismissed, or removed without fairness, transparency, and adherence to spiritual principle.
I. The Events That Bring Me Here
I want to walk you through the events that bring me here today chronologically and honestly.
On December 19, 2025, I was informed by the WSBT Vice Chair/European Regional Trustee (ERT) that a formal complaint had been filed against me by the Pacific North 1 Regional Trustee (PNRT). Despite multiple requests, I was never provided with the written complaint or any supporting documentation. The Fifth Concept the Right of Appeal and Minority Voice exists to prevent exactly this kind of silencing. Without access to a complaint, a trusted servant cannot meaningfully respond.
The following day, December 20th, I participated in a call with the WSBT Chair/ERT, Atlantic North Regional Trustee (ANRT), the World Service Trustee (WST), when I asked why the World Service Board of Trustees Chair/Trustee AT Large (TAL) was not conducting this call I was informed the WSBT Chair/TAL is the subject of the complaint. (Conflict of Interest being established) During this call I was verbally told about the alleged content of the complaint. I again asked for the written complaint and was told I was simply being “informed” of its contents. Concept Four protects our right to participate fully and with full information. I was expected to respond to allegations presented only through hearsay. That is not equal voice.
On December 21st, minutes of that meeting 1 were posted in a WSBT forum by the WSBT Vice Chair/ERT and those minutes included language that implied guilt before I had yet to have been provided the complaint. Tradition One calls us to unity. Publicly posting minutes that imply guilt without due process does not serve unity. It harms it!
Immediately after those minutes were posted, the World Service Board of Trustees Chair/TAL, called for a ratification vote. I want to underscore this: the WSBT Chair/TAL called for that vote. Tradition Twelve which places spiritual principles above personality reminds us that a trusted servant named in a complaint should not initiate or influence actions related to that complaint. Our Traditions protect us from decisions driven by personality rather than principle. That protection was not applied.
Page | 10
The ANRT objected stating that it was inappropriate for the WSBT Chair/TAL to call for
ratification while being the subject of the complaint, and that the Board should first discuss the matter collectively, as it had done with other complaints. 1 That objection 2 was ignored.
The World Service Manual is clear on this point. It states and I am quoting directly:
“A ratification vote can only be held during any quarterly meeting.” World Service Manual, Page 84
Despite that clear directive, the WSBT Chair/TAL attempted to schedule a Zoom call to conduct a ratification vote on January 4,2026, a date that was not a quarterly meeting. When I/SWRT, challenged this action in writing, the WSBT Chair/TAL asserted that the Board, acting as the Conference between Conferences, possessed the authority to override the World Service Manual. I am concerned that this position is inconsistent with
Tradition Two, which reminds us that trusted servants do not govern, and with Concept One, which places ultimate authority in the collective conscience of the Fellowship. The spiritual principles of humility, accountability, and integrity, together with Concept Twelve safeguards against arbitrary authority, suggest that delegated authority should be exercised within the limits established by the Fellowship. To do otherwise risks undermining confidence in the group conscience process and the unity described in Tradition One. Because that meeting would violate Conference-approved policy, I submitted a formal notice of non-attendance. My refusal to participate was not defiance. It was principled adherence to our service structure. Tradition Two reminds us that our trusted servants do not govern they serve.
On December 29th, the WSBT Vice Chair/ERT stated that the ratification had been called and passed, and requested it be added to the Q1 agenda. Concept Three the Right of Decision Within Defined Limits is clear: a vote held outside the limits defined by the Manual has no standing. Authority is limited by structure, not by personal interpretation.
Adding an invalid ratification to a quarterly agenda does not cure the defect. And at the time that ratification motion purportedly passed, I still had not been provided the complaint, any supporting documentation, any evidence, or any specific statements attributed to me.
On January 11, 2026, the Vice Chair/ERT notified the Board that the PNRT withdrew the complaint. At that moment, I still had never seen the complaint. I had never been shown any evidence. I had never been given the opportunity to respond.
Page | 11
Concept Nine defines good leadership as transparent, accountable, fair, and willing to pause and correct course. That standard was not met. The Board did not pause. It did not correct course.
II. What Happened 1 in Denmark
Now I want to speak to what happened in Denmark, at the Q1 Quarterly Meeting on March 24, 2026. Despite every procedural defect I have described the undisclosed complaint, the absent evidence, the denied opportunity to respond the Board proceeded with a ratification. And as a result of that action, I was formally not ratified.
The session opened with a reading and discussion of the TwelfthTradition. I want to acknowledge that, because it is significant, reading a Tradition does not satisfy the obligation it creates. Our principles must govern our actions not merely open our meetings. The World Service Manual describes ratification as a collective voting action a process applied to the Board as a whole. What occurred in Denmark was something different. Trustees were removed from the room during their own evaluations, without the opportunity to hear concerns, clarify misunderstandings, or respond. Extended discussions occurred in their absence.
Personal matters entered the discussion. And unequal time was spent on diƯerent Trustees. ** Note n hour. **
Concept Four is clear: equal voice cannot exist when a Trustee is excluded from the very discussion that determines their continued service. I want to read you something from the World Service Manual, page 74, from the General Warranties of the Conference:
“That no Conference action ever be personally punitive or an incitement to public controversy.” World Service Manual, Page 74 General Warranties of the Conference
Ratification is a Conference-derived authority 1 exercised by the Board. When it is conducted as an individualized, closed-door evaluation of one Trustee singled out, removed from the room, discussed in their absence it risks becoming personally punitive. That warranty exists for this exact reason. I was told I was “not ratified” before the entire Board had even been presented for ratification. That is not the collective process the Manual describes. A ratification cannot be considered valid when it was incomplete, inconsistent, and not applied uniformly to all Trustees. Concept Three requires that authority be exercised uniformly and within defined structure.
III. A Second Allegation Undisclosed and Unanswered
Page | 12
During that Board session, the PNRT stated to members of the WSBT that she had another complaint to file and she had given it to WSBT Chair/TAL I was not informed. I was not given access to this alleged complaint. And yet I know with certainty that the PNRT was permitted by the WSBT Chair to read that complaint aloud to the Board while I was not in the room. This sequence of events creates questions regarding the handling of the complaint and the consistency of the process.
Those members who might have objected were ignored. The remaining members allowed personal feelings to override our structure.
Delegates, Concept Five exists for this moment. It exists to ensure that no trusted servant is subjected to undisclosed allegations without the right to respond. That right was denied to me. Concept Nine calls us to the highest standard of service leadership transparent, accountable, fairness. What was allowed to happen in that room represents the opposite of that standard. And Tradition Twelve asks us to place spiritual principles above personality. In Denmark, personal grievances were placed above principles, above Traditions, 1 above our bylaws.
I further wish to express my concern that both the withdrawn allegation from December 2025 which was never disclosed to me and the complaint submitted by the PNRT to the WSBT Chair and read during the Q1 meeting may have influenced the ratification discussion while I was absent from the room.
In the spirit of Tradition Two, an informed group conscience depends upon members having access to accurate and relevant information and those directly aƯected having a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
A withdrawn allegation, having been retracted, should carry no weight in a decision-making process. If it was considered, it may have influenced the outcome without my knowledge and without any opportunity for me to provide context or respond. Likewise, the presentation of a new complaint to the Board in my absence appears inconsistent with the spiritual 1 principle of fairness, honesty, and open communication, as I was unable to hear the concerns being raised, answer questions, or address any misunderstandings.
Consistent with Tradition Twelve call to place principles before personalities, I believe decisions should be based on transparent, reliable information that can be openly discussed and fairly considered by all parties. For these reasons, I respectfully question whether the ratification process fully reflected the spirit of an informed group conscience, unity, and procedural fairness.
Summary of Procedural Defects
Page | 13
Because of how that process was conducted, what took place in Denmark lacked transparency, consistency, equal treatment, alignment with the World Service Manual, and adherence to the Twelfth Tradition. On March 25, 2026, while still in Denmark, I exercised my right of appeal and submitted a formal appeal to the World Service Board of Trustees in accordance with the World 1 Service Manual, page 84. I was asked to leave the meeting while the World Service Board of Trustees deliberated in my absence. After considering my appeal, and despite my concerns regarding procedural deficiencies in the process and the inclusion of personal grievances, I was informed by the Vice Chair of the WSBT that the decision not to ratify me would stand.
IV. A Personal Word
I stand before you today not to defend my position, but to protect the spiritual integrity of our process and our Fellowship. When procedures are bypassed, when documents are withheld, when decisions are made without transparency, and when trusted servants are denied the opportunity to respond we move away from the spiritual principles that bind us together and safeguard our unity. I want to be honest with you about something personal. I share this not to elicit sympathy, but because honesty is part of who I am in recovery. This experience has impacted 1 my self-esteem, my sense of integrity, and my personal recovery. I have always tried to serve with humility, diligence, and a sincere commitment to the responsibilities entrusted to me. To be removed through a process that did not reflect the World Service Manual or our shared principles has been painful and spiritually unsettling.
Delegates, if I were sitting where you are sitting receiving this information, I would want to know whether the process was consistent, fair, and aligned with our governing documents. I would want to know whether a Trustee was excluded from their own evaluation. Whether personal matters influenced the outcome. Whether the procedure was applied uniformly to all members. And if I learned it was not I would hope this body would take whatever corrective action was appropriate to restore fairness, unity, and trust.
V. Closing
I trust this Conference of Cocaine Anonymous World Service. I trust you to act in accordance with the World Service Manual, our Traditions, and the spiritual principles that guide us. My hope is that this Fifth Concept encourages thoughtful reflection and leads to a remedy that supports both the integrity of the Board and the unity of our Fellowship.
I remain committed to love and service. I remain committed to unity.
Page | 14
I remain committed to the spiritual principles that have saved my life, and the lives of countless others.
In honoring the Fifth Concept, I honor the integrity of our Fellowship ensuring every voice is heard, every process is fair, and every act of stewardship is guided by spiritual principle.
Mr. Chair,
The thumb drive I have provided contains relevant materials, including my Fifth Concept Statement and an additional folder containing the communications referenced 1 throughout this presentation.
I leave these materials in your care and trust that you will manage them as you deem appropriate.
Thank you,
Duane M; Yes
Booker B; Motion 9: Motion to reinstate Anita L as Southwest Regional Trustee. Seconded
Duane M; Just to clarify Article 4. It will take a super majority. Would you like to speak to your motion?
Booker B; not at this time Duane M; debate?
Jennifer G; Speaking for the motion
Stuart J; Speaking against the motion
Veronica W; Speaking for the motion
Harry P; Speaking for the motion
Sheree H; Speaking against the motion
Barry He; Speaking against the motion
Jenn S; speaking against the motion
Russell S Motion 10: Motion to extend session up to and not exceeding 11pm Seconded
Duane M requires 2 thirds of the vote Prepare to vote
Motion passes
Recess for 10 mins
return at 9.18pm Promptly Resume session 9.28pm
Page | 15
Duane M; waiting for all to be seated. Things can become emotional please refrain from side conversations as they are distracting, this is a business meeting. Let us remember why we are here and who we are.
We are going to resume the session Jenn S; Speaking against the motion Donna K; Speaking against the motion Peter Mcg; Question to WSBT read from Pg 83, can you confirm that the process was followed and the right to be present was granted.
Tina R; Yes, to the question. Greg T;
Duane M; You are unable to approach the mic at this time as we are debating a motion. Melanie R; Question -Do you have documentation or recording that would help us better understand what happened.
Barry He; I was tasked to produce the minutes. Recording is stopped during the executive session. To the best of my knowledge, we do not have any recordings of that process.
Richard E; Speaking against the motion
Jordan H; Speaking for the motion
Gary P; Speaking against the motion
Tai B; Question – The vote count must be counted and how they voted can this be provided? Duane M;
Tai B; According to the law which
Duane M; We have a procedure we have been following a secret ballad Duane Motion; We are not getting into this.
Stu E; Speaking against the motion
Jennifer G; Question Is there a reason the process that was agreed upon was not documented in the minutes
Tina R; I could be wrong, but I don’t remember if we said that was documented. I am the assistant secretary.
Tina R; Speaking against the motion
Jason S; Speaking against the motion
Laurie G; Speaking against the motion
Veronica W; Speaking for the motion
Bob O; Call the vote
Duane M; Can we hear one more person Axel N; Question about the minutes. Why was the
Page | 16
Stuart J. That was during mediation process
Motion 11: Call the question
All in favour in ending debate Motion clearly passes
Return to Motion 9
Motion 9: Motion to reinstate Anita L as Southwest Regional Trustee. All those in favour
Motion fails
Did not meet standard.
Motion 12: I move that we initiate a reorganisation of the World Service Board of Trustee’s pursuant to section 4 of the conference charter pg 72 of World Service Manual, specifically for the purpose of removing TAL, PNRT and MWRT from their respective positions of the board.
Seconded
Duane M we have a motion made and seconded. I am not going to tolerate any … text we will not allow proper decorum
Stu E; Motion 13 – Motion Objection to the consideration of the motion. Duane M not debatable
2 thirds to Pass
Russell S; Can you clarify what the intent of the motion of objection is.
The verbiage says occasionally a motion that is considered absurd or out of order if passes, it means the floor does not want to discuss it.
Randy G. all in favour means we go
Duane M; If 2 thirds of this body votes all in favour we will not consider the previous motion. Duane M if one third votes against the motion we will move forward with the previous motion.
Peter Mcg – the motion is in accordance with the World Service Manual You have the right to reject.
Duane M the World Service Manual says I don’t the floor does. We are not out of order.
All those in favour Motion fails.
Return to motion 12
Motion 12: I move that we initiate a reorganisation of the World Service Board of Trustee’s pursuant to section 4 of the conference charter pg 72 of World Service Manual, specifically
Page | 17
for the purpose of removing TAL, PNRT and MWRT from their respective positions of the board.
Jess GA; Motion 14: motion to divide the question. Second
Divide by each trustee TAL, PNRT and MWRT Duane M not debatable
All in favour Motion carries
Motion 12 has now split into three and can be found as Motion 15/16/17 As below;
Motion 15: I move that we initiate a reorganisation of the World Service Board of Trustee’s pursuant to section 4 of the conference charter pg 72 of World Service Manual, specifically for the purpose of removing TAL from their respective positions of the board.
Seconded
Motion 16: I move that we initiate a reorganisation of the World Service Board of Trustee’s pursuant to section 4 of the conference charter pg 72 of World Service Manual, specifically for the purpose of removing PNRT from their respective positions of the board.
Seconded
Motion 17: I move that we initiate a reorganisation of the World Service Board of Trustee’s pursuant to section 4 of the conference charter pg 72 of World Service Manual, specifically for the purpose of removing MWRT from their respective positions of the board.
Seconded
Donna k – question I believe the TAL term is ending, doesn’t this make this motion irrelevant?
Duane M correct
Motion 18: to extend the session through to the end of the Motion to remove the TAL seconded
All those in favour Motion Fails
Motion 19: Motion to adjourn this evening
Page | 18
Seconded Motion passes
Conference session ended 10.32
Page | 19
NOTE: On September 3, 2026, Two C.A. Online Areas, the Online GB Area and the Online Recovery Area seeking recognition by the Conference were, for the first time in Cocaine Anonymous’ 44 year history of Areas petitioning for ratification, were denied by the World Service Conference.