Tony D; If everyone would find their seats.
Elizabeth S: I am the 2014 Opportunity person, I have 50 tickets left.
Heidi J: I have release forms left; come see me.
Tony D: Next we have elections. Please round up everyone.
The position of Conference Co-Secretary
Tony reads qualification and description of duties.
Susan B: I nominate Ruby L
Brian Tenenbaum: I nominate Kim S
Both Ruby and Kim accept nominations and both give brief verbal resumes. Voting commences.
Tony D: Let’s congratulate Ruby L.
New Business:
Valerie C:
Motion: to suspend the rules to consider the Montreal Quebec bid for the 2018 World Service Convention.
Second. Motion passes
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 112 of 124
Kellie F: Isn’t there another rule that needs to be suspended? Can two rules be suspended at the same time?
Tony D: The standing rule you are referring to ?. This motion is out of order as it is blocking any other area from bidding.
Richard L:
Motion: challenge the chair.
Second. Debate
Richard L: speaks for the motion as the vote was so close and they went back to their Area
Vonya Q: I speak in favor of the chair’s ruling. Other Areas should have the opportunity to bid.
Michael A: ditto Vonya
Kevin M: What about some Area out there doing the legwork and not knowing that the bid was short circuited and they did not know about it.
Gary M: I speak against the chair’s decision. The Convention is in the West for the next 4 years and would love to see it in the East. We have worked hard on this bid.
Rob W: I speak in favor of the chair’s decision.
Kellie F: Speaks in favor of the chair’s decision. I would not want anyone to miss out on the opportunity to bid as well.
Trevor S: We will close debate
Tony D: The vote was very close. I understand…. I do not want to take away the right for other
Areas to have the opportunity to bid.
Trevor S: The decision of the chair stands.
Suzanne V:
Motion: Please consider giving CA Holland the opportunity to produce a Dutch language Storybook along the lines of CA’s Hope, Faith, and Courage book.
Our proposal is to put together the content for a book that consists of 6 parts;
- Translation of Preface
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 113 of 124
- Translation To The Newcomer
- Translation of; Our Hope Faith and Courage; (the early days of CA as experienced by two of its members)
- Translation of selection of stories of the English CA HFC books I and II (selection to be made by CAWSO/ CAWSC or whoever is in charge of that); amount of existing stories to be translated: 6 or 7, preferable those that reflect the founding of CA.)
- Selection of Dutch stories, written by Dutch CA members, and approved by CA Holland (a selection procedure is included in Appendix A)
- Translated text of Appendices (pamphlets and readings) Second. Debate
Tony D: This is ruled Out of Order as it has not been brought before the proper committees prudent to SR13. Although the maker of the motion did absolutely everything she was asked to do.
Tom P:
Motion: to appeal the chair’s decision.
Trevor S: The chair waives his right to debate
Jason L: I think the chair is just being mean. I think this would be a nice thing to do.
John M: I am speaking again the chair’s ruling.
Stu E: I speak against the chair’s ruling. The Area should not be held liable for the system failing.
Trevor S: ?
Tom P: The spirit of SR 13….
Maria M: I would like to speak in favor of the chair’s decision as there is a process and believe it should be followed.
Craig Acorn: I speak against the chair’s decision as this motion does not affect CA as a whole; putting it off another year is wrong.
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 114 of 124
Cynthia C: Can I see the 1st paragraph of the motion again?
Kevin Murphy: I speak in favor of the appeal. This will have a significant effect on CA Holland…for a year longer.
Dwanna R: I speak for the chair’s decision. We need to go through the process to insure no mistakes are made.
Anthony S: Call the question.
Second. Motion passes
Trevor S: Chair waives right of debate.
All those in favor. All opposed. The motion to appeal failed.
Motion: Please consider giving CA Holland the opportunity to produce a Dutch language Storybook along the lines of CA’s Hope, Faith, and Courage book.
Our proposal is to put together the content for a book that consists of 6 parts;
- Translation of Preface
- Translation To The Newcomer
- Translation of; Our Hope Faith and Courage; (the early days of CA as experienced by two of its members)
- Translation of selection of stories of the English CA HFC books I and II (selection to be made by CAWSO/ CAWSC or whoever is in charge of that); amount of existing stories to be translated: 6 or 7, preferable those that reflect the founding of CA.)
- Selection of Dutch stories, written by Dutch CA members, and approved by CA Holland (a selection procedure is included in Appendix A)
- Translated text of Appendices (pamphlets and readings)
Bob C: On the basis of the point 5 we would be bypassing a critical process that we currently have in place.
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 115 of 124
Russell S: FA – to replace all points of the previous motion to reflect the following: for a Dutch translation of HFC II to allow for incorporation of Dutch members’ local stories. The project is to be referred to LCF, consistent with the CA book approval process following the proper book approval guidelines. And allowing for coordination with the WSOB Translation committee and European Regional Trustee.
FA accepted.
Tony D: Any objections. None.
Elizabeth S: my concerns are with copywrite and royalties. There is a process of translations.
Maria M: I speak against this motion. It is an exciting project and I understand the language difference. I believe it should go through the process in place.
Susan D: I would like to make a motion to divide.
Tony D: needs a second…not debatable
Motion: Approve the Dutch translations of HFC and HFC II.
Motion: To allow for incorporation of Dutch members’ local stories. The project is to be referred to LCF, consistent with the CA book approval process following the proper book approval guidelines. And allowing for coordination with the WSOB Translation committee and European Regional Trustee.
Second. Debate
Tony D: motion carries to divide the motion.
Motion: Approve the Dutch translations of HFC and HFC II.
Cynthia C: ?
Susan D: the WSOB or the WSC can approve.
PInquiry – Susan B: Is it appropriate to approve translations that have not been done?
Tony D: Yes, we are approving a translation project.
Tom P: Speaking against this motion. This body is not equipped to make this determination.
Cynthia C: I think this is out of order and is covered under other procedures.
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 116 of 124
Kellie F: Yield
P Inquiry Elizabeth S: ?
Suzanne V: Speaking against the motion. CA Holland has no desire to translate the whole HFC book. There are some parts of the book that we can and other’s we cannot.
Duane M: FA – to translate the stories from HFC and HFC II as Holland sees fit.
Accepted. Any objections from the floor.
AJ Rountree: I object
Tony D: FA is null and void
Michael C:
Motion: For the first motion to be referred to the WSOB translation committee.
Second. Debate.
Susan D: Speaks in favor of the motion.
John M: What motion is being referred to the WSOB Translation committee?
Tony D: The motion to approve the Dutch translations of HFC and HFC II
Anthony S:
Motion: to rescind the motion to divide?
Second. Debate
John M: We are going in circles. The spirit of the original motion has been lost.
Duane M: Speaks against the motion as I thought we were close to getting to what everyone wanted.
Carl R: Speaks against the motion to rescind…it was going to the committee it would have been going to.
Susan D: I speak against the motion to rescind. I thought that dividing the motion to go to the proper committees would make it easier to get it done.
Tom P: I speak in favor to rescind the motion.
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 117 of 124
Jason L: Speaks in favor of the motion to rescind. The other motion is closer to what Holland really wants.
Suzanne V: I speak for the motion to rescind. Dividing the motion gets away from what we want and are willing to work with translations and selection of stories.
Dana V:
Motion: take a 15 min recess to think about this.
Second. Motion fails
Tony D: Back to the motion to rescind the previously passed motion to divide.
Motion to rescind passes.
Tony D: 111 vote / 94 quorum
Motion: to replace all points of the previous motion to reflect the following: for a Dutch translation of HFC II to allow for incorporation of Dutch members’ local stories. The project is to be referred to LCF, consistent with the CA book approval process following the proper book approval guidelines; and allowing for coordination with the WSOB Translation committee and European Regional Trustee.
Jason L:
Motion to amend: to replace all points of the previous motion to reflect the following: for a Dutch translation of HFC and HFC II up to and including a number of stories allowing for incorporation of Dutch members’ local stories. The project is to be referred to LCF, consistent with the CA book approval process following the proper book approval guidelines; and allowing for coordination with the WSOB Translation committee and European Regional Trustee.
Second. Debate
Tony D: Debate on changing the language of the motion (the motion to amend)
Jason L: The Dutch is one of the fastest growing Areas in the European Region.
Maria M: This went out in the SR14 correct?
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 118 of 124
Tony D: All we are voting on is changing the language of the motion (the motion to amend) all those in favor. Motion passes.
Motion: to replace all points of the previous motion to reflect the following: for a Dutch translation of HFC and HFC II up to and including a number of stories allowing for incorporation of Dutch members’ local stories. The project is to be referred to LCF, consistent with the CA book approval process following the proper book approval guidelines; and allowing for coordination with the WSOB Translation committee and European Regional Trustee.
Cynthia C:
Motion: To refer to the WSOB.
Second. Debate Maker speaks to the motion.
Michael A:
Motion: to suspend the rules.
Second. Debate.
Motion passes.
Michael A:
Motion: to extend the session to finish conference agenda tonight Debate on motion to refer to WSOB.
Michael A: speak for the motion.
Suzanne V: What is the point in referring it to the WSOB?
Tony D: This motion will put your referral on the correct path it would have been on had it not been dropped.
Michelle Dickson: Call the question
Tony D: motion passes to close debate
Tony D: We are now voting on the motion to refer to WSOB. Prepare to vote.
Motion passes.
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 119 of 124
Jason L: 5th Concept statement. It seems like we just wanted to get rid of that one. I think this motion is going to disappear down the “rabbit hole”. I think we have just done Holland a disservice.
Susan B: 5th Concept statement. I thought that the office works for us…the members, the groups, the areas, and the regions. Asking for something to be done in a timely manner is not a demand….simply asking to get it done sooner rather than later.
Tom P: The original motion never got debated through all of the stuff we have gone through in the last few hours.
John M:
Motion: to reconsider
Second. Debate
Michael C: speak against the motion. It has not been rushed. It has been done a lot of things, but not rushed.
Kevin Murphy: speaks for the motion…Tom was right on!
Jason L: There was no opportunity to debate the motion at all.
Jim H: I speak in favor to reconsider. This is a very valuable piece. We should give it the consideration it deserves.
Suzanne V: I want to speak to the motion to reconsider as I never got to speak to my original motion.
Jay Finesilver: I speak against the motion to reconsider. The SR14 referral was given to the WSOB. The people that need to handle this …needs the chance to handle this.
Tony D: We are going to vote on the motion to reconsider.
Motion passes 65-45
Tony D: We are back to debate on the motion of referring to WSOB.
Jason L: If this goes back to the WSOB this can potentially not get worked on throughout the year as they have a lot on their plate.
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 120 of 124
John M: I speak against the motion for this to go to the WSOB because the entire fellowship is virtually represented here. Lets here the Dutch!
Michael C: I speak for the motion to refer to the WSOB. This motion would get the process moving…I think Suzanne would like to see the process start moving and we cannot do that if we keep bouncing it around.
Brian T: Let’s trust our trusted servants to do the job we have entrusted them to do.
Elizabeth S: Would the WSOB consider creating a special committee to work on this?
Tom P: Since there were 2 boxes checked we cannot assume that this referral would have ended up in that committee.
Susan D: The office would love to create a committee including members of the WSOB, LCF, local translation committee, and the ERT.
Eric F: Speak against the motion to refer. Desire to speak about the motion.
P Inquire – John M: will the office make the subcommittee.
Susan Danhauser: Yes., the office will make the subcommittee.
Lance D; would it be out of order to suggest and amendment to add another layer to the process.
Kenny W; speak in favor of sending this to the WSOB; I have faith in the committees that are in place, the best of CA will prevail. I have not heard enough interest in hearing debate on the main motion – too many amendments have deferred us from that. We need to trust the process, there is an ultimate authority.
Jim S; call the question.
Second; not debatable.
Motion to close debate – motion passes.
Tony D; Underlying motion is to refer to the WSOB.
Motion passes.
Kellie F – I want to know if the original motion or the other motion is being referred to the WSOB.
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 121 of 124
Cynthia C; Didn’t you indicate that the original motion did go to the Office.
Tony D; Yes it did
Patrick P; Happy birthday Russell – 9years old!!! Cake and candles!!!
Tony D; Brian T birthday today as well.
Tony D; Back to order
Barbara N; announcements- please clear your belongings out of the breakout rooms.
There is a black laptop – Vosto – 1510 – in the office.
Fill out evaluation forms, and the conference3 duration survey.
Jason L; Apologize to the WSBT – I did have a set of the minutes that were sent out in the delegate mailing – we are considerably more up to date.
Tony D; additional new business
Stu E;
Motion that the Trustees representation be reduced to seven members on the TEC.
Second; debate:
Stu E; this has been brought several times – brought to several committees – there is an imbalance on the TEC committee. We don’t really get much interaction with the Trustees during TEC due to the time taken during the interviews. Reducing it to seven will allow for three trustees to meet with committees.
Jay F; speak against the motion; I have been here for 20 years – this has come up so many times
– I have sat on the TEC, the chair – have so familiarity with the process. The 9th Concept states that we choose the best qualified members by the best means. I have never seen the process be affected by a “block” by the delegates or the Trustees.
Elizabeth S; As a former member of the TEC and process, and has sat in the TEC interviews – it is hard to explain unless you have been there. There is something spiritual during the process. Having the opinions of all the Trustees in the process is very important.
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 122 of 124
Russell S; Speak against the motion; the teaching in the concepts clarify the process. There is trust in the room; dis-trust is outside of the room. Concepts speak to the process – it’s not broken, don’t fix it.
Maria M; Speak against the motion – reads Concept 12… Concept 7… I believe that it is balanced.
Susan B; Speak in favor of the motion – my experience was the most horrific – the process breached by many Trustees. I saw Trustees vote as a block. This motion will ensure that this won’t happen again
Tim M; Speak against the motion – I don’t believe that the process is broken. I once thought that the system wouldn’t work – and yet I saw them guide us – assist us with the process. I was able to make an honest appraisal of the process. I was told to pray on my decisions. It was a spiritual experience. It works perfectly now, my thoughts of them – the Trustees – has changed.
Michael C; Speak against this motion – there was a motion that was brought earlier and it did not get approached. It is important to bring items to the floor; we should go with the group conscience.
Terry M; speaking against the motion; there was once a point in time that I would be in favor of this – I often interviewed for the position of Trustee and didn’t make it – I wasn’t ready – the group conscience spoke. We elected 6 new trustees – the integrity of the process was upheld. The six pack kicks a$$…
John O; I speak against the motion; I have gotten to know these people – I don’t see a difference between them and myself – we all want to help the addict who still suffers. There is a power in this room – I am on TEC next year – very excited. We are all just trying to get well.
Lance D; call the question. Motion to close debate.
Tony D – Motion to close debate passes
Call for a quorum count – 108/ quorum is 98
Main motion fails.
Vonya Q; Do we had an international committee. Is there something that we can do to increase the number of Spanish speaking members.
Tony D; Are you referencing a conference committee –
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 123 of 124
Vonya Qualres – yes and no…
Tony D; Suggest that you make a referral.
Lori Penrose; the dates for the 2014 Conference is 8/27/14 – 8/31/14
Hotel is the Four Points Sheraton – room rate only goes up a bit.
Tony D; acknowledges outgoing members.
Lori Penrose – Motion to close the Conference.
Second; debate – none – motion passes
Gavel is down – September 1, 2013 – 12:31am
CAWSC 2013 – Day Four – Approved, Page 124 of 124