27-Mar-2017

Dear Members of the World Service Conference,

From time to time, in the review and publication of the minutes taken at our WSC, small errors can occur. While preparing the minutes of the 2016 Conference, this was unfortunately the case. Thanks to assistance from two sharp-eyed members, two small errors have been found and can now be fixed.

During the LCF Committee’s report, they presented a motion regarding a change in the content of one of our pamphlets. In the minutes, there was an error in the way the votes were recorded. On Vote 7, it was recorded in the minutes with the votes ‘for’ and ‘against’ transposed.

It should read 48 in favour with 92 opposed. Motion Fails

Day 4 Daily, Page 3 of 88 of the 2016 World Service Conference

Jason L. made a MOTION: To approve the concept of changing the “To the Newcomer” pamphlet by replacing “Who is a Cocaine Addict?” with “Who is a C.A. Member?” Seconded.

Tony D. – Do you care to speak to the motion?

Jason L. – This change is to make things more inclusive.

Tony D. – Jason, can you explain the literature process to the new delegates? Jason L. – Yes. Gave a brief explanation.

Kevin M. – I speak in opposition. I came to C.A. because I was a cocaine addict. One of the most profound thing I heard was ‘To the Newcomer.’ I would really want it to stay. I oppose.

Peter O. – I speak in favor of the motion. I think it is pretty essential to expand C.A. We do not care what drug you use. I think we are really just expanding.

Maria K. – I am not sure if I am speaking for or against. Motion seems kind of redundant. We have a reading called is ‘Who is a C.A. Member?’

Susan L. – I like to speak in favor of the motion. ‘Who is a C.A. Member?’ is one of the most important readings that we have. I think it is a good thing moving forward that we present a message that more people will understand. The use of Cocaine has changed since the beginning.

Jim S. – I speak in favor of this motion. I was a guy that did a lot of stuff. Our 3rd Tradition states cocaine and all-other mind altering substance.

Henry A. – Why do we have this fellowship? It was you people that showed me that this program was not drug specific. Please let’s keep that. I oppose.

Stu E. – This is Cocaine Anonymous. We keep pushing these readings that does not have cocaine it. We seem to want to pull cocaine out of all our literature. We already have we our all-inclusive. If we have to keep defending our identity, we need to accept who we are. Let’s stop being embarrassed that Cocaine is in our name. I oppose.

Ernest M. – Oppose. I look around and see the love for C.A. It was the love of the fellowship that helped newcomers when I came into the rooms. Literature was not what helped me get here, it was the members in this fellowship.

Michael C. – Oppose. We are C.A. Yes, we have members that do other things. Yes, we

have members that has never use Cocaine. We take everybody! Let’s keep our inclusivity by keeping what we have and stop pandering to a certain section of our members. Our fellowship is the only fellowship that accepts everybody.

Heidi J. – Oppose. When I was a newcomer and I was reading the Big Book. There were a lot of things that I did not understand in the Big Book. When we read “Who is a Cocaine Addict” the newcomers can understand the language.

Carl R. – Oppose. Whenever I go to an H&I meeting, I always read ‘Who is a C.A. Member.’ ‘Who is a Cocaine Addict?’ has helped me stay here in this program. If we take out ‘Who is a Cocaine addict?’ out of our pamphlets, why are we here?

Jimmy Y. – How will this affect the meeting format? Jason L. – This reading will be replaced.

Earl H. – Oppose. For the entire time I have been in the fellowship “Who is a Cocaine Addict?” has been a reading.

Jay P. – I will be honest when I first heard that this was being considered to be taken out, I got emotional. What I love about C.A. is we have the solution for people that use all drugs. Hopefully, the newcomer might grab a pamphlet, they may just read “To the Newcomer” which would give them an invitation to our fellowship.

*****

Rose J. – Call the question.

Tony D. – Prepare to vote to call the question. Vote 06 – 104 for and 27 against. Motion passes.

*****

Tony D. – Re-read motion. Prepare to vote. Vote 07 – 48 for and 92 against. Motion failed.

The same type of error also occurred during the PI Committee’s report. In the minutes, the results of Vote 47 regarding the NADCP, the numbers reported where also transposed.

It should read 63 for with 82 opposed. Motion Fails

Day 4 Daily, Page 61 of 88 of the 2016 World Service Conference Tony D. – Vote to reconsider.

Vote 47 – 63 for and 82 against, motion to reconsider fails.

These results have been verified using our audio recordings. In both cases, the total votes in the minutes were correct; they were simply read out as the larger number first, not the votes for and against. Both motions failed. The votes for and against were listed backwards.

The Conference Committee has put into effect changes to help eliminate this from happening in the future. We sincerely apologize for not catching this sooner.

In Love & Service,

2017 WSC Conference Committee