CA WORLD SERVICE World Service Board of Trustees and World Service Office Board MEETING MINUTES
March 7th, 2009
APPROVED
Since this report is a confidential CA document, for members only, it may contain members’ full names. This usage to facilitate communication within the fellowship was approved by the 1990 WS Conference. Such confidential use does not, of course, violate in anyway our Tradition on anonymity in public communications media (press, radio, TV, etc).
Page 1 of 44
March WSBT/WSOB Board to Board
March 7, 2009
Hayward: Welcome to the WSBT/WSOB Board to Board meeting March 7, 2009, it is now 3:23 p.m. I would like for us to observe a moment of silence and the caws 2009 One with the Spirit. Would you all join me in the WE version of the serenity prayer? Opening remarks: Hayward Hunt World Service Trustee, WSBT Chair. I’m glad everybody is here. I’d like to say one thing before we get started. It’s been way too much information leaking back and forth between Boards and it is causing a lot of conflict. People are talking too much. What happens with the WSOB should stay there, what happens with the WSBT should stay there until it’s properly communicated by our communicator, who is the World Service Office Trustee. Please. That’s all I will say about that. Also it’s John’s birthday. That’s all the comments I have so I will turn it over to the WSOB Chair.
John: Thanks Hayward. Just like the last meeting, we want to really try and keep that communication as pure as possible. It’s really hard because we are all friends and family here but there is a job for each of us and Willie’s is very specifically to be the great communicator. I want to up hold that comment. Today is a very exciting time for us and I think a real moment of opportunity for us. I am looking forward to the meeting. Unfortunately I had a babysitting crisis come up and I going to have to cut out a little early, I suspect around 4:45, so I apologize for that. We also thought the meeting was at 3:00 today not 3:30. It’s really kind of grinding into the time that I have but unfortunately I can’t do anything about it. So I want to apologize in advance for the impact. If it causes us to move anything around on the agenda, please feel free. It’s great to be here with you all. Thank you for the birthday wishes.
Hayward: I would also like to announce that the WSBT has made its decision on the new Chair for the WSOB, I’ve notified the candidates that weren’t selected first. I would like to announce the Chair that will be taking over at the end of the upcoming Conference is Tom Phelan.
Congratulations.
Tom: Thank you.
Hayward: Supplemental reports, are there any from the WSOB? Are there any questions from the WSBT? Any questions about the WSOB Chair’s report? Seeing no hands, we will move on. Vice Chair’s report? Treasurer’s report? The paid Director’s? Secretary’s report or any of the Director at Large?
John: If I may, Hayward, I just wanted to interject that I was very impressed with both paid Directors report this period. There’s a lot of information packed into those and I think they are very useable for us, so thank you ladies we appreciate it.
Page 2 of 44
Hayward: Ok we will get to item number 4. -Discussion on Conventions. First is CAWS 2009-One with the Spirit. Any discussion on that Convention? Is there anything Patty that you would like to add?
Patty: They just broke the 200—205—that they are—I anticipate that we are going to have a problem on achieving the goal on the hotel contract, as I already told you guys it’s not really news. They contract calls for a high food—we have to make $25,000 in food and we don’t have it because currently there’s not enough people having dinner. Stranger things have occurred before. I anticipate we are only going to have 500 people. They are gearing all of their stuff for 500 people. The memorabilia guy is—the person doing the memorabilia person has interesting ideas. Truthfully I didn’t have to feed the Treasurer anything more than I have already fed him before we got the report for memorabilia. John Powers came right to me and said isn’t that against what you said, it that against what you said. I’m like yeah so there’s no fight from our side yet the fight is going to be on their side. The problem is that he isn’t proactive. He has not yet spoken to Dan. The question that he sent us is the same question he sent to Beth and Beth hasn’t talk to Dan. They are going to wait until the meeting and then it’s going to seem like World didn’t do anything in 500 meeting because the whole city didn’t do their job. We don’t get the information—we don’t start processing the information until their Spending committee is complete with it. Their Spending committee hasn’t come back to me and said yea or nay, so we’ve just given it as information to our Board. It’s going to be a problem and it will be our fault. I’m ok with that. Truthfully the big problem is he is only spending $12,000, now he’s holding $2,000 more for computers. We are like no. He wants to do bar coding. I’m like no, buy stuff. You need to sell stuff. Your job is to sell stuff, not fix it so it looks really cool.
Tom: He wants to bar code the materials?
Patty: Yes. I told him he could come do our entire inventory. I would be happy.
John: What I think is unique about this—first of all it’s great news we have 200 registers rants. Obviously we would love to have more but frankly I’m very impressed we have 200. This is the first year that we deployed Reg online on the website. One of the pertinent questions here to examine is, what impact does that have on advanced registrations and the ability for people to come online, ease of access to the information and make a commitment to attend even if we don’t have their payment yet? For example: Has that been helpful? Have we seen—do we know like a percentage of participation online verses the old way?
Patty: No, it’s exactly what I thought we would have no matter what, but it only took an hour to make that report including creating the report.
John: Which is amazing.
Patty: That’s from Reg online. We just imported—it took an hour because she had to make the report. She had to tell it what to report to us. From now on it’s like that long.
Page 3 of 44
John: One of the things that lead me to that question was that I’ve seen a real sort of ah-ah moment for people when I share with them that they can go to the website and actually make a commitment to attend that event and do it very easily right online. Not like before, not the old online but the new online. I think that’s the message I want to encourage for each of you to take back for people who are undecided yet. Even if we don’t have those registration forms on the table, tell them it’s all right there for them and how easy it really is. Just try it out if nothing else. Check it out. That made it possible for a lot of people who otherwise would be searching for a registration form to just go and do it.
Patty: For the people who are not tell us that they want to do it, that they are just registering— which we don’t encourage—we are able to proactively go are you going to come, are you going to come, are you going to come, aren’t you coming.
John: We need to follow up with those folks, immediately.
Patty: Because Joy’s coming. Aren’t you going to come?
Hayward: Of the 205 registered, how many are attending the banquet so far?
Patty: 148.
Randy: 205 bank with 148…
Patty: Plus, Plus. Its 148 total and then chicken…
Randy: Total banquet including full registration was 148. Then there’s a breakdown: 99 chicken, 48 fish, eight vegs—that’s the breakdown of the 548.
Patty: I don’t know if I remember it.
Randy: It turns around…I’ll pass the report around. I do want this back though.
Patty: We will email it to you. We emailed it to the committee and showed them how to run the report. I’m having a phone meeting with them tomorrow so that they can run the report.
Richard: Registration committee?
Patty: Yes. Beth is fine.
Trevor: I just wanted to say for the office that feedback from where my sister registered online she was really impressed. She got a call right away saying is this confirmed because we have somebody else by this name? She was really happy with that. She thought that was great that you guys would take the time to phone her back to just make sure that the information was correct, to clarify. I thought that was really nice to see.
Page 4 of 44
Patty: Right because we have time—now we have time to do what we are supposed to be able to do instead of putting it in and entering it. Hopefully we will do the same for Conference.
Richard: I would like to go back. Can I get a one sentence on what you see the problem is with memorabilia?
Randy: What do you need us to do?
Patty: Encourage John. There’s not enough inventory. He can’t achieve his goal. We gave the excel sheet that tells you how much you are going to sell and at the bottom it says you’re only going to sell 80%. When I multiply what he has at the prices he has times 80 percent, I don’t achieve their goal of $18,000 in sales but John is on it. John understands that and has no fantasy. He’s like you need me to get more stuff. Even shirts like T-shirts. He’s under ordering T-shirts. He only wants to buy 150 T-shirts. I’m like there’s 500 people there.
Richard: So the only issue you see at this point is a lack of inventory being accounted for.
Tom: No, accounted for.
Richard: I mean lack of inventory scheduled to be purchased.
Patty: We need more.
Richard: And you are thinking 15% more?
Patty: Yes. Well, 15% more after he spends the 2,000. It could be as much as 20 some percent, truthfully.
Richard: Thank you.
Tom: It’s not so important—you might want to get this to them—when all said and done that we know was sold. We are more interested in how much in memorabilia was sold. We don’t need to know, cups, shirts you know.
Patty: Well we do because we know how much you bought.
Tom: Right.
Randy: That’s a simple addition and subtraction when you’re done.
Patty: Truthfully, what Tom said is that the person that’s doing this is using assumptions that I cannot prove. Every assumption that he has put out I’ve got—he said we had too many T-shirts in Salt Lake City. I said only the white ones . He said “that’s because we sold our 25th anniversary stuff. I said I don’t think someone bought a sweatshirt instead of a white T-shirt. I don’t think
Page 5 of 44
someone spent $30 instead of $10. It’s a white shirt. We are done with white shirts; just don’t get a white shirt.
Richard: Is this crossing over into—I know there was discussion—the Memorabilia Chair has discussed at the General committee meeting a concern that World Service Office selling their inventory of fleeces and stuff would have an impact on the sales of memorabilia for the Convention. That’s why Patty just mentioned the fleeces or whatever.
Patty: The Memorabilia committee actually made a motion that we not be allowed to sell our stuff. It hasn’t passed Spending; it won’t by my polling of the people who are saying why would he do that? The truth is we don’t charge the committee. You don’t get the cost of the stuff you only get the income.
Tom: It’s World Service Convention income.
Richard: It is.
Patty: His belief is that it diminishes sales. That’s what he believes. The 2009 the food box lunches, I’m ok, go ahead with that. You said you were going to talk about that at dinner.
Randy: Did you see what…
Patty: It’s resolved. That’s all the question. Can you tell me what to do or can I make up my own.
Randy: I sent something to her last night that said I will be formally speaking to the Trustees at dinner tonight. We believe we are going to be prudent to look towards a solution regarding the bag lunches that would not be prepared by the members themselves. If a more formal response is necessary, please let me know.
Patty: I will be able to help her direct on buying Subway sandwiches or whatever she’s buying.
That’s want I wanted to make sure. You didn’t tell her what to do. I’m ok.
Hayward: CAWS 2010.
Patty: They would like us to reduce their exposure. I brought copies of their contact in case anybody doesn’t have it. Quin called and asked us to reduce their—he has a really nice idea. It would help us. We currently generally ask for 1200 room nights across the board for us to go with. We get 20% attrition. The contract clearly states 20% attrition on it at the end and clearly states that we can’t go less than 960 no matter what the heck we do in ever and it’s 960. Unless I can reduce 960—which I’m totally willing to do—but maybe you guys can look at this and see if I’m drunk or whatever because I don’t see it here for you guys to discuss on your contact stuff, your TNC. He wants us to reduce it because there are two opportunities to reduce it. There is
Page 6 of 44
absolutely no reason to reduce it because it can’t go less than 960. Why would I reduce it when it’s already at 960? That’s all I know.
John: So they are looking for increasing attrition, right? 25%?
Patty: In the clause it says—15 months before, which where we are, you can give up 10%. If he wants to give it up because he sees no down side—but I see no reason. I can’t go less than 960.
Kim: What page is that on?
Patty: Seven.
Kim: Thanks.
John: We’ll keep an eye on this then.
Hayward: I got an email on that.
Patty: That I would bring it to you guys. That I would write them the letter?
Hayward: Yeah, something.
Kim: Excuse me, there’s so many conversations going on.
John: Not to take up anymore of your time on this particular issue but so that you’re aware of it, the Chair of the Convention made a suggestion. We are going to give it its due. Certainly it would be Hayward that would negotiate that down after quite a bit of discussion. I’m sure at a Board level, from a spending stand point.
Patty: Well, it’s TNC.
John: You are advised that Quin is in the mix with a suggestion. We’re sensitive to it.
Patty: They have achieved their pre-convention totals.
John: Which is great.
Patty: I don’t know if she forwarded you that before too.
Kim: They are actually showing at this time currently a net gain of 4360.11.
John: Congratulations.
Kim: $4360.11.
Page 7 of 44
Patty: Changed a little bit. Yeah, they’re going to run up against a problem because now they are still going to want to do pre-convention fundraising and they’ve capped they pre-convention spending. We have to figure out a line item move. We are willing, unless you guys tell us not to.
Kim: I attended their General meeting. They requested action regarding the spending request for the sweatshirts.
Patty: Which we emailed on the Friday because of their complaint about the Tuesday and both of their machines were down.
Kim: Ok. Yes, I know Quin’s computers down.
Patty: So he is going to call us on Friday.
Kim: Also, I’m getting a request for the “Pass it On”. I know I emailed you and you don’t have it. I don’t have it.
Patty: We don’t have it.
Kim: Do you have it Trevor?
Patty: We did pass their spending. Yes, we told them that they can buy their sweatshirts and we emailed both of them.
John: Kim is there any other form of “Pass it On” that would be helpful?
Kim: Yes, they have the other ones.
Hayward: The one from 2006?
Kim: The other issue that I heard was under special needs in regards to their interpreters. You might want to discuss it with them, their direction as far as using students at a local University. It wasn’t a fight that I was going to pick. That was the only concern that I had otherwise they seem to be on target— they’re filling positions.
Randy: This position is students from the local University?
Patty: The guidelines say that it’s a certified person. We don’t have a position, the Conference does. If their teacher there then it’s probably fine.
Hayward: Is that it? Then on to 2010. CAWS 2011.
Page 8 of 44
Patty: Their contract has too much exposure too, but I just got that done this week too. I haven’t told anybody.
Randy They are meeting tomorrow?
Patty: Are you going to be there?
Randy: If I get out of here in time.
Patty: They just sent it as a maybe. Tomorrow is when they are going to decide if that’s the real hotel, right?
Randy: I’m not sure if he has it on the agenda tomorrow. It’s the first meeting of the General committee. By the time they get done with introductions and job descriptions…
John: Would you character this contract that’s on the way as a bonfided consideration?
Randy: I think it’s going to be the Biltmore.
John: Probably going to be the one.
Patty: Well that’s the hotel.
John: We’ll give it a little more attention than not.
Hayward: Ok, 2012.
Nick: There isn’t too much happening. It took a while because the lack of resumes brought to the Area, some more were sent and finally got ratified, but they need to go to the Conference committee to make sure. Jackie has been confirmed as the Chair. She’s asked and requested for resumes. She’s been working hard to get the Steering committee in position. We are going to start going through that after CA May 17th. We start working in three weeks on it. Kim’s been invited in the loop. We got some advice and some experience. It’s coming along. There’s nothing to worry about. The Chair and some other things are coming in place.
John: The office is very excited about the Chair. Congratulations.
Nick: She knows what she is doing and reaching out. I know she just went to…
Patty: Liverpool today?
Nick: And she talked to your man when she was in down in Phoenix.
Randy: Yeah, she spent almost three weeks with us.
Nick: To get some experience. So she is reaching out to previous Chairs and it’s going to be fine.
Page 9 of 44
Hayward: NADCP Conference updates.
Richard: Do you remember what we discussed a week and a half ago?
Patty: They still don’t have an exhibitor group thing possibility. That’s the only change.
Richard: I didn’t get that, so what’s the deal?
Patty: We still can’t reserve a booth. That’s it. Go ahead it’s your gig.
Richard: Yes, but what is it not being able to reserve a booth? Is that the floor space in the layout?
Patty: They usually in February they actually put it out there. It’s a growing organization—small non-profit company and we can understand completely their inability to staff there.
John: Just not organized as such.
Patty: Yes. We just need to be on it.
Richard: Is that a we thing, is that a you thing, is that something that…
Patty: I should tell you that I didn’t do it like I was supposed to.
Richard: Ok.
Patty: Because I can’t.
Richard: The follow up is, as I told you guys earlier in my report, we talked about two and a half week ago on the people who were going to attend and so you know I will have a sheet—Willie is interested in being there. I what I will do is generate a schedule as to the timeline of who can fill in and that way we also don’t have five people crowding into it. Joy will attend. Hayward is still trying to get out but I have a 58% commitment from him.
Patty: Carl will do it.
Tom: Are you going to involve the Orange County people at all? Their PI?
Richard: It was not a plan at all. It’s a great suggestion. It’s in Anaheim.
Tom: Wherever that Drug court—whichever area it’s in. The area should be pretty active with it.
Joy: The area would show up to a caucus in a second.
Page 10 of 44
Richard: I can take that—I have not even considered that. I will take that suggestion and make a contact. Thank you. Pardon me?
Hayward: Talk to Bobbie about it.
Richard: Ok. Patty had discussed a coin for that event and her thoughts on a design and finding out what the expense would be on that.
Patty: They stole this great idea about giving chips people when they graduate from 12 step groups. To make a coin that would be from CA that they could give away is much more useful to them. It’s not that much money considering how many books that we’ve been giving away. It’s going to be less than a book.
Richard: I will be able to follow up with Bobby in Orange County before the end of the month. If you would follow up with me on the coin and let me know on the booth reservations that’ll keep us in-line.
Hayward: Next item is CAWSO Financial statements and that was Joy.
Joy: I been sitting here talking to Tom and he won’t let me ask any questions on February because there not very good numbers so…
Patty: He’s not done.
Joy: Yeah, I know.
Patty: You knew that.
Joy: I know, but I still—there’s still just some—trying to figure—and I’m going to go to 09—or February because that where all my questions are.
Tom: I won’t be about to answer.
Joy: I know. You might be able to.
Tom: I would have to look at them.
Joy: It’s still related to January also. It’s just that there are certain numbers at are really over exceeded the budget numbers that were wonder why they are so-so high.
Tom: Can we look at January?
Joy: Of course we can. It’s just not highlighted. You’re 200% over budget in shipping supplies.
Hayward: Can you be specific on what’s over?
Page 11 of 44
Joy: Yes. We are under program services on the actual vs. budgeted July 2008 to January 2009. We are looking at shipping supplies and it’s for the period for July to January, for that fiscal period. There are at almost $1,500 and the budget was $575, which puts it 223% over budget, which is actually 123% over of the actual budget. We are just trying how to figure out on the ones that where the numbers are really high, why we are over in that specific area.
John: What some other areas?
Tom: Shipping, the budgets too low. Another thing we did with shipping was that we were not paying for the materials we were using postal service materials and adapting them. We decided we can’t do that anymore.
Joy: So we just need to increase the budget?
Tom: We were stealing.
Joy: Next…
Tom: Yes the budget was too low.
Joy: Did we compensate that we didn’t compensate for that in the 09-2010 budget.
Tom: I don’t know if we have or not, I would have to see it.
John: I think for those delegate office dynamics too, they were literally turning priority mail boxes inside out.
Joy: I believe it.
John: Which the postal service prints and provides.
Tom: In my report I mention shipping, maintenance repairs, and merchandise being out of whack.
Joy: What about bank charges?
Hayward: How over are we on that?
Patty: Totally.
Joy: Yeah, way over.
Tom: $1,500 vs. a budget of $2,900. We are $1,500 over in credit card fees.
Page 12 of 44
Patty: Our fees are obviously out of line and our bank fees—it’s not just credit card fees—now we have bank charges. We recently just got a bank fee on our savings account—hello the bank hasn’t reversed that yet—so there are things that are wrong in our banking account. We just got a notification today that said our fees were going up. I don’t see that our budget going to be correct on that. Shipping supplies, besides the turning boxes inside out and or going to the trash—which was what Karen use to do and get me all the boxes I ever needed—we bought a lot of boxes and the shipping guy was already informed that he’s not supposed to—he ain’t buying another box until July 1st. I don’t care where he gets them.
John: What I’m hearing you saying is that slightly that’s going to level?
Patty: Yes, it’s probably going to level.
John The other thing we did also Joy was to switch shipping systems. Was there any substantial cost in switching shipping systems, when the contracted signed?
Taffy: Well our contract is a little bit more but I don’t know if that’s the line item that she is talking about.
John: I don’t think it does.
Joy: That’s asset side.
John I just wanted to see if it got tacked on there by mistake.
Joy: I haven’t looked at the balance sheet I’ve been strictly been tearing up the P&L where I always start.
John: So shipping charges, bank charges what else? Merchandise?
Joy: Merchandise, I got that. The website and email…
Patty: That should have been amortized. Remember she got the whole year in there, $1,100.
Joy: So we just expensed the entire thing?
Patty: And we did just expense the entire thing. I’m not convinced that it’s going to stay that way before the March ending.
Joy: That’s good. Under program services the travel, there’s like$1,900 in travel. I know we budgeted for $3,500 but I’m just trying to figure out—the meals were like $1,700.
Tom: That’s probably a miss code.
Page 13 of 44
Patty: No. I don’t think so. We have 10 Board members that went to the Conference.
Joy: Is that what this is for? This is for Conference?
Patty: Most likely.
Joy: Ok.
Patty: Me going to—she’s shutting me up.
Joy: No I’m not shutting you up. Go ahead.
Patty: Boss. I would love it if these types of questions would be given to us before because then I can click and do a transaction thing and email you that. The way that I did on my report…
Joy: Can I get these the Friday before the quarterly?
Patty: Yes, assuming your quarterly is at a reasonable time. You could have done December and the shipping over in December. We identify shipping in December, where were you?
Joy: Ma’am, I don’t know. I did get Decembers until last week.
Patty: Sorry, that was really rude but I couldn’t help it.
Joy: One more question. Why is our budget negative?
Tom: It always would be because we expect to make $45,000 in the Convention. It’s a breakeven year so we would expect to be negative $45,000 at the beginning of May.
Patty: Somewhere in the year we’ll be negative.
Joy: Then I just have a few requests. We discussed as a Trustee Board that the GL for the entire 08-09 fiscal year…
Patty: Is printed.
Joy: Quarterly. I can I get copies?
Patty: Electronically?
Joy: No, just copies. You already printed the GL, just make copies.
Patty: We print the GL.
Page 14 of 44
Joy: I’m sure you do. That’s where you find all of everything. We are requesting you to send it to Willie and send it to me.
Patty: Do you want me to write that down?
Hayward: One for what?
Joy: Per quarter. Just do it quarterly.
Patty: Otherwise it will drive her crazy. She wants a beginning and ending otherwise it’s a stack.
The GL for year is this thick.
Tom: I don’t want the GL. I look at…
Willie: You want the GL and the Convention, right?
Joy: I’m getting to that. I was focusing on GL first. You do the QuickBooks file for Convention, you restart a whole new one every year? No, you don’t.
Patty: No. We defer it. It’s on the balance sheet you don’t look at.
Joy: I haven’t got to that yet, really. Yes, I know there is deferred stuff.
Patty: That is where the Convention is held. The current year falls from the beginning of the year.
Joy: You don’t keep a separate QuickBooks file for…
Patty: No we have an Excel file.
Joy: It’s all under Excel?
Patty: Because it’s on the balance sheet
Tom: The deferred income?
Patty: First off, this is the first year they had $8,000 before the year started. It’s like a miracle. If they all do that I will make another QuickBooks file and they can party on.
Joy: They were under the impression that there was an actual QuickBooks file of CAWS 2009.
It’s not part of CA WSOB.
Patty: We give that QuickBooks file—like Sharon is doing—to the Treasurer, who is supposed to forward us monthly reports.
Page 15 of 44
Joy: Ok.
Patty: She got the report. I didn’t get that report because it looked like a QuickBooks report. I haven’t looked on the group to see if she logged it there either.
Kim: I got it at the General meeting.
Joy: Are you getting—are you not getting your report from your Treasurer of the Convention.
Patty: Nope, that’s her Excel file.
Kim: No.
Patty: Nobody likes it. We tried to convince them to use QuickBooks, if that’s your goal I want to, but they end up in Excel.
Joy: So it’s not in QuickBooks.
Patty: John Powers’ is not using QuickBooks.
Richard: I do not know if John is or not. There was a QuickBooks file for last year.
Patty: For 2009.
Joy: I’m sure there was. We need their Excel…
Tom: Yes.
Richard: We need the spreadsheet itself.
Tom: We need the accounting for the bank account is what we need.
Patty: We just want to talk to him on Monday’s. I would be fine if he would call me and I could tell you.
Joy: We want to physically look at the Convention and make sure they are in-line with the budget.
Patty: For the current year—it’s on our line.
Joy: For the current year, yes.
Patty: It’s on your PL.
Page 16 of 44
Tom: It’s in here.
Joy: No budget.
Patty: Yes, there’s not budget against it. I’ll put the budget in January, Happy Birthday.
Tom: We put the budget in where we anticipate it’s going to be spent.
Patty: I’ll move it.
Joy: No, No.
Patty: That’s what you want.
Joy: All I want. This is what I want—hold on, hold on—this is what I would like. This is really what I would like, the Excel spreadsheet and a copy of their budget.
Patty: Alright.
Joy: In Excel, that’s fine. One file, just send it.
Tom: You should have that.
Joy: I don’t.
Patty: You do because you have the whole year.
Joy: Convention…
Patty: In the…
Joy: 09 only.
Tom: But we include it in the year. We don’t have it broke up separately. It’s part of the financial statement.
Patty: But we would be glad to separate it for you.
Joy: I don’t think you understanding what I’m saying.
Patty: I do understand and I will get you what you need.
Joy: Thank you Miss Flannigan.
Patty: Your very welcome, Madam Trustee, so sorry—First year.
Page 17 of 44
John: Freshman.
Joy: Not anymore.
Kim: Rookie.
Hayward: We are going to move on to item number 4 which is SR16 and that was Nick.
Nick: I didn’t even know what SR16 was until some very sharp person in the UK pointed it out. There are over 175 meetings in the UK now. There are quite a lot of people with over ten years. A lot more people start to pay more attention. They even have sponsees over there saying why can’t we see what happens at Conference, where is it. Who reads all this stuff and correct all this stuff? Why does it take so f**king long—are their exact words. This kid came up to me—he’s fantastic—he says the office steps in immediately. How fast is immediately and why is it still a month late? He’s quite sharp and he’s sober and he can add up. The transcripts, I’ve done first week in September, you count 150 days it says: for distribution to the delegates no later than 150 days after the close of the Conference. If the Conference Committee is unable to do so, the World Service Office will immediately assume responsibility…So they are already a month late and they won’t know when they’re coming. If it’s any policy and whether human error is stopping this happening. Not gossip, why it’s not happened. Do we have policies to make sure it doesn’t happen and how fast is immediately? Can we make it a bit more solid because that whole is area is getting more prepared and they are starting to want—the area assemblies—they want their delegates more accountable. They want to read what their delegates are saying whether they find what they suggested as an area mandate. Otherwise they got four people standing up there saying we said this and we took it as that. If they can read it they can write what they say they will accept their answers. I want to know what to say to them and if there are any divisions the policy might need looking at because this promises one thing—the reality is the mailings always in March but it’s send out around February, so it never sinks. I don’t need a full answer John, just some answer.
John: No, I think it’s a terrific question so please thank the individuals that said it.
Nick: I already have.
John: When it first came up we were immediately copied on the email and the communications around it. I did actually respond with my own opinions about “How it Works”. Obviously we prefer that the Conference take care of the business that’s required in the Conference committee, particularly who is constantly challenged, very busy and active throughout the year but nevertheless was experiencing a changing of the guard this year, if I’m not mistaken. The letter of SR16, for me, defines immediately very concisely. It’s the number of days, if it’s not achieved that’s the day that we need to calendar or tickle at the office to say hello we are expecting this. Now, stepping in could simply be just that and this is where the policy gets a little hazy, just in my mind as I stepped back and read it. Stepping in could just simply mean hello, its ninety days
Page 18 of 44
and what’s going on, which is kind of in effect what happened. Thankfully, Kevin Murphy did stepped up to the plate, as I recall, reviewed the documents.
Hayward: It should be going out in the March mailing.
John: Additionally that mailing date is historically when it has gone, if I’m not mistaken. Interesting thing, historically and traditionally it would have not gone necessarily before then, contradictory however to SR16. This is the question. This is where the conversation about improving and streamlining that policy is relevant. We thank them for their question. I don’t know the answer. I think we would prefer that people we delegated the work to, do the work.
Patty: Kim and I were there when we invented—if she don’t get it the office is going to do something—we did it because it wasn’t coming. We said ok well if it doesn’t come then what do we do and then we said well give it to us. This is the first time that someone actually read it. The theory behind SR16 was so that there would be on out. So it would make that March mailing. That’s the point. Is it we’ll still make the March mailing, as it would.
John: As it usually does.
Patty: We can’t post it because it has last names on it. I have issues with that and I will write another referral because I love driving you crazy with that one.
Nick: Is there a possibility that we can all mend this to work out the reality?
Patty: Oh, yeah.
Nick: Because you know drug addicts give up and think everything is perfect. We know that doesn’t happen. It would be more realistic to say by the March mailing rather a specific number of days. Even if they do it perfectly it will still not be saint according to your present policy and procedures. It’s like it never worked. Fantastic, I applauded it. It never worked. You can never do what you say. If it’s built in and someone screwed up a little bit or got the flu or something you just sent the March mailing and slightly amend it, it could be realistic or…
Patty: We like the word spring mailing.
Nick: Or another shot a new comer said well I thought stuff got—what they say—I thought shit got emailed now days. If you’re just asking if it could work, because they want to try and bring it to their assembly so the membership in the UK can have it so they got the right policy. We’re going to get it and then we have 60 days and then after that 30 days later there were 70 groupies. Choose their delegates to go to Conference to be informed. They are trying to actually get some policies going. Because they are big enough now there are so many people I think they need policies in order to keep out of it. When I was asked what I thought I said well in general I think that it’s a good idea to be more organized. That’s all I said. So maybe there are asking us to be
Page 19 of 44
more organized. The reality is do we say we are sending out March or do we say we can send immediately on termination of the approval by electronic format.
Hayward: That’s a referral.
Nick: That’s fine. That’s the answer.
Patty: It’s only been two years that it’s like that.
Nick: So do I say we have discussed this and suggest they put it in their referral?
Tom: Yes.
Hayward: Ok John wanted to add something.
John: We can end the conversation by saying to put in a referral but does it really solve the problem? They are trying to get some work done. Here’s the point for me, I think that they had the right idea when they said 90 days. I think they had the right idea when they said the office will step in, but there are efficient calendaring mechanisms in place for that to sort of really actively happen for a phone call to get launched, for some notification to occur. That’s a down fall, administratively nevertheless I don’t think you say that we pushed the deadline off so it makes the March mailing because then we’re back to the same old problem of well we are going to miss the mailing because we didn’t on it in time. Again, back to those calendaring mechanisms, tickling it, making sure that’s in on our agenda, for example, as a Conference committee and so forth. I don’t think I would necessarily include in a referral—a smart referral— that you back off the timeline necessarily, just say it’s in that mailing. I think this question has compelled us to look at systemically what’s going on in our agenda’s, what’s going on in our calendaring, and perhaps some improvement can be made there. A referral is fine because it’s going to compel everyone to have to deal with it. I’m sure the Conference committee has recognized that this is something they need to get done and they are doing it. It’s fantastic. It’s kind of all I have to add. I wouldn’t recommend that we become less specific about the 90 days.
Kim: The transcripts were done and posted in October, prior to the 90 days. The problem is a human failing. I’m pretty sure that we have some concepts to cover that in the future. From our understanding, the last Conference call for the Conference committee is that—although Steve Edwards did received (hand delivered) my understanding—copies of the transcripts. He has not taken action on that so Kevin Murphy is acting on his behalf. I don’t know where the status is at this point, if Kevin has done it or not. Have they come to the office?
Hayward: We will contact Brian.
Kim: I’ll shot an email off to Brian and make sure that he follows up on that. That’s where we are at because I know they were posted to our Yahoo group October 27th . What exactly can the office do if the Chair or the Parliamentarian doesn’t do their job? I think we need to look at that.
Page 20 of 44
Who steps in and actually approves those? I know there is some discussion about re-dative minutes and so forth. That was on the last Conference call.
Nick: I would phone the members—three of the—individually, and express our complete gratitude for them flagging out rather than sending out emails. I think they like that human touch John always told me about that. So sending email out is like we’ve done that and some bloke will say he didn’t do it and he couldn’t help it. I don’t do any good. I can say we take it on board; we would love to see your referral. It’s something we’re currently working on.
Patty: The summaries, your dailies, they can make their reports from their dailies, which they got in their October–whatever mailing that is.
John: I think there are specific reasons underpinning this that they want to actual transcript.
Nick: They want actual product.
Patty: They don’t get the transcripts. They are talking about the minutes.
John: The actual minutes, forgive me I used the wrong word but there’s something nevertheless underpinning this where the minutes are sufficient vs. the dailies. I agree with you however the dailies are entirely useful.
Kim: Most of the dailies are available at the Conference.
John: Right.
Patty: We’ve have been getting those out really quick.
Kim: Prior to them leaving.
Nick: So they can suggest to their delegates and the delegates can ask the people to bring them back to the UK.
John: This is issue is appreciated. Tell them it’s appreciated, we had to sit and talk about it and we need to something about it.
Nick: Thank you.
Hayward: We are going to jump over number 5-The Office Restructure Project. We will come back to that a little bit later. Next is the AA permissions recommendation’s and that was Willie.
Willie: Did you guys bring the recommendations going forward to the…
Patty: It was one of my reports that I sent to you. I’m sure you’re all quite aware that Alcoholics Anonymous does not own the copyright to their own book, lost it in the 60’s, lost the second
Page 21 of 44
book in the 80’s. I can’t say how we are going to act with them but my recommendations are twofold, number one to reduce our exposure international where they still own their copyright, that we print a book, we table that at the WSOB, we would like to know if you guys are interested in us spending another $30,000 out of that savings account of ours. Just printing that without “How it Works” because they do own “How it Works” outside the United States including Canada. They own it in Canada and all other international sites, Mexico—everywhere except the United States. They own the copyright until 2021 or 12 or?
Joy: 21.
Patty: Thank you. They own it there until that date at which time they should not lose it if they do their paperwork correctly. Once you lose your copyright it cannot be recalled. The mistake they made I would have made it too. When they printed the second edition of the book in 1955 they assumed that that copyright would be good for the first 164 plus, but it isn’t.
John: Right, grandfathered it.
Patty: You have to actually extend your copyright in your 28th year to get your extra 60 years. They did not do that so by the time they printed their second book, it was within the 28 years, but it was a different edition. In two different dates they lost both of those books, they have no right. They have asked their fellowship and us to act as if they have it copyrighted. That’s what they have asked us to do. I want to bring a referral to the Conference that says yea or nay. Do we act as if they have a copyright or do we not act as if. They do not give us permission to change it, we never did. What we learned from the Trustees that were in the face to face and that phone call that I made they are going to say yes you can because they don’t own it. They can’t tell me not to. The law says they don’t own it, so they can only ask me or imply that it would be really nice in the United States if I followed their requests. That’s what they can do and again that’s only within the United States that they don’t own it. That’s a really critical piece, because if we are sending anything out on the international web it would need to be coded so that they couldn’t open it. If we left in on our website “How it Works” as part of the meeting format we would have to be formatted so that anybody accessing it from outside the United States couldn’t access that, to protect ourselves.
Hayward: Any questions?
Kim: So we don’t have permission to change “How it Works”?
Patty: No.
Kim: So how are we going to move forward from that based on what the Conference voted?
Patty: They don’t own it. The question is, are you following the law or are you following AA’s statement? AA doesn’t own it; they cannot give permission, legally, to that piece. It’s in the public domain; anyone can use it anytime they want.
Page 22 of 44
John: In the United States of America.
Kim: As we’re a worldwide fellowship I guess that causes concern for me, anybody else? I see some heads nodding.
Patty: Yes, that’s why I said my recommendation is to print the book without it.
Kim: Ok.
John: Thank you for this agenda item. This is the good stuff, folks. Patty, thank you for the tremendous volume of information you collected, conversations you attempted to have and attempted to have them until you finally found right thing to say that got them to spill their guts, appreciated. The answer to your question Kim is we really can’t tell you what to do with your book, the fellowships book. The best we can hope to do is come here and have an informed conversation and that piece of intellectual property really is yours to deal with. I think you guys have the right idea. We have some exposure globally. It’s no different book that we are shipping overseas and distributing over there and that gets into a bunch of import export stuff I don’t know about. It was printed here, published here and we sold it here and sent it somewhere, over there. I don’t know if there is exposure or not. The truth of the matter is at the end of the day spiritual where are you at with that? Patty and I have talked a lot about this. We don’t always agree. I had very firm opinion on it early only. The best we can hope to do is bring you the information and hope that you can process it in a way that is in the best interest of the fellowship. As far as what the Conference decided when they passed, based on the best information that we had at that time, wouldn’t be the first time we had to circle around and figure something out. I think the grace here and the good news is, just for my own part, that there doesn’t seem to be necessarily any recourse immediately indicated on part of our friends at AA, doesn’t seem to be any need for the extreme which would be to destroy inventory, and I’m so grateful for those aspects, but it does give us a window of opportunity to consider the larger question about whether or not to proceed with the groups conscious at that Conference. Now we have new information. Thanks for mining that out by-the-way.
Hayward: Kim, are you through? I see you thinking.
Kim: Yes, I am thinking.
Hayward: Ok, we will come back to you.
Kim: Thank you.
Randy: We said worldwide. I went through these documents that came from John Bragg, President of AA World Service or whatever, he actually just mentions Canada.
Patty: That was in the 80’s. They didn’t even get to Russia until 90.
Page 23 of 44
Randy: Ok. Of course you may be aware the copyright on the first and second edition of the big book in no longer enforce anywhere except Canada nevertheless we ask the fellowship worldwide to act as we do as though the copyright was still enforce. He just mentions worldwide so…
Patty: It changed. They are absolutely protected in Greece, Italy, France, Spain, the European Region, South America, Mexico, and Germany.
Randy: I would like to know that we have something in writing saying they won’t give us permission to us it.
Patty: It doesn’t say he won’t, it says we would appreciate it if you didn’t.
Randy: We have something that says that?
Patty: Yeah.
Randy: That would help. What we are trying to do is at least one…
Patty: That verbiage is in my timeline.
Randy: From you?
Patty: No. The quote is from them. In November 08…
John: Is that the email?
Patty: It’s an email.
John: Is it this information here?
Randy: She said she informed us that the policy permits the adaptation but…
Patty: They do not feel that is appropriate to grant permission that is their exact language.
Randy: Ok. I guess what I am concerned with is that one of the reasons that we got this issue is that we just have the perceived recollections of conversations from calls, those kind of things. Even though this is what you produced, and it might be their exact language, we almost need to start a file that says this is the actual email we got from them.
Patty: We have a file.
Page 24 of 44
Randy: Ok. I don’t mean to be confrontational but I think that’s what we’ve asked for, from this Board, can we see what we have? At times we just get summaries of what—we got this and we just want to see it.
Patty: Ok. I just thought you just wanted a report. That’s how everything else comes to you, is just a report from me. It isn’t confrontational; I gave what I always give.
Randy: I guess for me is where the jest of this matter really comes—I think we need to be very careful about the idea that they made some mistakes regarding the first and second edition of a book that is now at a third and a fourth and it’s their word, it’s their stuff. They own it.
Patty: Spiritually feeling, you believe that right?
Randy: Yeah. I do. I’ve got some real concerns about that. I got some concerns that when I made a mistake in my life I got to own up to it. If we represent Cocaine Anonymous as leadership and we make mistakes and we need to own up to it. How that happens in the form of an amends, how that happens as to information present to this Conference, as to where this is at, and how it got there and what our fault and our part was, then to tell them that—but now that we found out that they f**ked up and we can actually go get it if we want it, for this little part of the world it doesn’t sound like a formal amends and a complete amends on my part. I’m concerned that we have—I got a posting on every meeting I go to, reprinted with permission, blah, blah, blah, we’ve done all our books, we’ve done it all over the place. I’ve got 25 years in Arizona that we’re going to celebrate here shortly, and it’s on everything. In some way, I don’t know how to address that but I’m just getting all twisted up about it. I don’t know what to do next but I know we need to be careful and do it right. That’s my concern.
Trevor: Real short. If I see you drop $100, but it’s not illegal to not tell you, that’s still not ok for me.
Tom: There was approval. It goes back to when it was originally done, but it wasn’t right. It was done in the spirit as it has always been. Not like we stole something. Ray and Jennifer were told yes its ok, go ahead and do that. Then life has changed as it’s going on, it’s never been that we didn’t have approval. What we’ve been charged with is finding it. We’ve been in garages and warehouses. Ray Rosa moved his stuff trying to find the approval he gotten. Then he remembers that Jennifer was living in New York at the time so maybe she’s got it because she was dealing with General Service Office there. The stuff you have posted is correct.
Randy: I know we are doing this because we heard it from the people we trust. Do we have anything from Alcoholics Anonymous that says they changed their stance?
Tom: Before I leave off this topic is I want to leave the Trustee Board this thought that we got $60,000 worth of books printed. That is an important issue that has this in there, so. There’s a financial issue to it as well.
Page 25 of 44
Randy: I agree.
Tom: I will leave it at that.
John: I’m glad the meeting took this turn because I didn’t want to be the first to froth up and do my thing. I initial recommendation to Patty—because I published three books–one of them had some plagiarized material in it that I wasn’t aware that the author did. I immediately called the publisher—whose material got lifted—I got out in front of it. You know what, we struck a bargain and an understanding and we corrected it and we rectify the situation. Those are the very first things that I suggested be passed along in our recommendation. I hope that you didn’t take from what I shared with you that we’re ok. I don’t think it’s ok, at all. If it’s just Johns’ opinion, I don’t think we ever need to print it again. I think we can say what we have always said, which is we read a portion of the big book of Alcoholics Anonymous. Go read it, you know. To the point of where we say use by permission, I do believe most of our materials are correctly referenced in that regard. We don’t—this is the first time we’ve reprinted in a volume of work, that portion of chapter 5, therefore I don’t think in the past we’ve ever said on anything reprinted with permission of Alcoholics Anonymous. I could be wrong. I think mainly it was the steps and the traditions that we did have that permission on. By recollection we are pretty clean there, just to clear up that point of what you were saying.
Randy: What about meeting formats and those kind of things?
John: If meeting formats say that on there, which is not my recollection, then that would be dicey. I don’t think they do, but there’s so many you know Randy, they really are. So many different people have so different things circulating so it’s possible. Anyway, to get to the point, I’m with you. If we are wrong then we need to make it right. What we’re getting from AA, based on the conversation that Patty reported back to me wrong. I wasn’t in it, is that we don’t really have the authority to tell you not to but we wish you wouldn’t. If you guys read the copyrights in the beginning of this latest edition of the big book it is written very creatively. I think what I’m getting to is I hope since we are down to spiritual matters here in this meeting I hope we don’t print it again. I hope the recommendation at the Conference is that we don’t print it again. I hope that we don’t have to destroy what we’ve got. To me that’s always come with, short of an exchange and willingness to do what’s right with Alcoholics Anonymous, that’s my opinion, because that’s my experience professionally. Get out in front of it, say what you’ve done, which we have, say what you’ve done and be willing to make it right at all costs. Even if that means sharing some revenue or paying them for it, is it a literal business stand point, that was my opinion. I realize this sort of is not like my business but I’m more on the side of your spiritual uncomfortably with it Randy then maybe what you heard me say earlier. That’s kind of what I wanted to get out there because—and I didn’t want to be the first to do it. This is your book. This is a very important decision for the fellowship to make, not the Office Board to make, certainly. We can collect the information, we can bring it to you, and we can say what we think. I’m glad to have been able to have done that today. So thank you for that.
Page 26 of 44
Randy: Just to respond. When we get asked did we ever have it and we say yes and our only answer is we say yes because someone we trust told us so. That doesn’t fly no more. At this juncture with the stakes this high that answer is not acceptable. We use to have it and don’t have it now and the only way we can prove to it is that we heard it from some folks that we trust. That’s hard to go to the fellowship with.
John: I appreciate your personal opinion on that. I encourage prudence and balance in your conversations going forward as there not only spiritual and legal questions but financial questions that as well and it’s really mixed bag, but again I get back to the 8th and 9th step with everything that I do and it’s a genuine willingness to want to make it right with the least amount of damage to others.
Patty: Randy, if you call the office and don’t talk to the IP department at Alcoholics Anonymous World Services they will tell you go ahead. As long as you’re not talking to the IP department— anybody will call and get the same answer that I got when I called the office in August. They will not give you the written permission as they didn’t give them in 1989. The written permission that we did get from them, that Allen Swartzberg and somebody else, whose name is not coming…
Randy: It was for the 12 steps and the 12 traditions?
Patty: No, what they got in the 89 thing was for the preamble. The only written permission that anyone had before I got the policy, which is the steps in the short form, is for the preamble. The preamble we have written permission from that the lawyer found for us, probably cost us $500 but whatever, he found the preamble and he actually gave me the hand written note that Allen Swartzberg, that’s how I know it was him that he wrote. That’s the only thing we’ve ever had written permission for. I’m not making the argument that we should go with the legal thing, I’m telling you that if I talk to any of the Trustees or anybody outside the IP department they all say go ahead. We could all have a face to face meeting with this entire Board, which they’ve offered us, which I took out of there because John didn’t want me to lead us to the water, they said come on, what do you want go over an agenda and their still not going to give us written permission because they don’t own it. It’s against the law. They would be breaking the law if they gave permission in 89 or if they gave them permission now. They would be breaking the law. They can only give you what they want you to do. That’s a totally different policy. And no she hasn’t answered my question yet, which is in an email that said when did you start this policy that you answer it like this? When did that policy start? She hasn’t answered me. I also in that same note back to her said what do you think they said to them in the 1989?—I want a copy of your minutes. That’s what I requested. She said she’s not a member and nan, nan, nan. I’m not a member of Alcoholics Anonymous, so some of you that are maybe both side maybe you could get the minutes from that meeting. I was a Trustee meeting. It wasn’t just a meeting that they walked in the office they had a meeting that Jennifer, Ray, Johnny, and Greg had was a face to face meeting with Trustees. We would have the same meeting and they would give the same response. I don’t know, like John said, I also said to her because John told me, he said ask her what you can do and I said we’ve been using this for 25 years. We owe you some kind of amends
Page 27 of 44
and she said thank you we accept your amends. We appreciate that. I’m like, no. The reason she said that is because she doesn’t legally have a leg to stand on. She can’t say to me how many books did you print, because she can’t.
John: Everybody is in the vacuum here.
Patty: There’s no vacuum.
John: No spiritual vacuum and far as I’m concerned.
Patty: So I’m reporting to you and I’m giving you everything that I can give you but based on everything I know. I thought I had it in writing when I was at the Conference. I thought the response that they sent me; the email that he sent me gave me permission but what if gave me was the steps in a long form of the traditions. It was that statement. I thought it was. My memory of it was faulty. I am sorry for that mistake. That was a mistake of me reading an email. I actually have no emails from the entire summer. I did make that mistake because I thought the email said something it didn’t say. That mistake I did make but I can’t make amends for the other ones because truthfully it’s the law—I have to go to the law. My job is to show you the law. You guys get to play with the spiritual stuff, not that I don’t get to when I’m sitting in the meeting, but when I’m sitting here I don’t get to say those things.
John: I don’t really think that we would characterize it as playing. I think we characterize it as a really serious conversation with a serious outcome.
Kim: All of this conversation is generated from a motion at the Conference to revise the 4th paragraph of “How it Works”. Many people spoke in favor of that. I think that the transcripts reflect that the Conference floor voted in favor of that. I can only assume that a lot of the discussion that was prior to the vote and then ultimately us advising the Conference floor that we did have permission. I think that’s why the motion passed. There was discussion by several people saying do we have that permission, can we change it whenever we want. So now the motion passes. Aside of everything that we have currently in print and how we’ve used it and changed it—but now the Conference floor is mandated, for lack of a better word, the direction that we need to go in and that is we are going to change “How it Works” paragraph 4. When you say it’s our book, it’s our book, it’s our literature, and it’s everyone. To unify both these Boards, how do you think we should proceed? I think the Trustees have to further discuss this book. What is the Office Board stance as far as what direction should we go in. What amends we should make or what we should advise the Conference floor of. There are several points here, basically.
John: Thank you Kim. Have been an “Our” I agree with you, it’s ours. I don’t think Conference was truly informed as well as it could have been. When a Conference isn’t in session you are our—I used to be an “our”, not anymore so—congratulations. I do take your meaning on that though. I do consider the conscious of the Conference very, very significant. The Office Board has been not been able to substantially debate the issue. Patty brought a report, I believe at your
Page 28 of 44
request, Hayward followed up and gathered the fax and so forth concerning this copyright information and brought it forward for you. In this form, we know now that it needs to be a file and as organized as possible in terms of communication and timelines and so forth. Nonetheless the Office Board hasn’t had a chance to make a formal recommendation. I think that’s only as a result the fact Patty called me on Tuesday before the Thursday meeting and said I just concluded my conversations. We already had a lot of our agenda as you guys do. We didn’t really draft any kind of a statement that says what we think you should do but we looked forward to the opportunity to bring you this new information or existing information to balance against what you already know. The question about moving forward, we’re happy to debate and to make a recommendation on nuts and bolts. The vacuum that I was referring to earlier is that nobody owns the intellectual property. It’s not mine to necessarily say should or shouldn’t. I tend again to go more to the spiritual side. It’s not a group conscious recommendation at this time. We’d be happy to convene on that.
Kim: I think in my opinion, as humble as I can be, I think we should unify the two Boards and come forth to the Conference floor and be on the same page together.
John: It wouldn’t be the first time we had to circle around on something that we didn’t have enough information on. Like Calgary for example and those numbers. That’s still up here. It’s hard to do, but it’s the right thing to do.
Kim: It’s hard for me to say that.
John: But I’m with you.
Randy: I just went to our website and suggested meeting formats and we’ve still got “How it Works” that says reprinted and adapted from Alcoholics Anonymous page 58 with permission from AA World Services. And that’s what I’m saying, it’s in every meeting. I’ve got 1,000 meetings that printed these out for their meeting formats and we read them with “When we can recover” or whatever. It is…
Patty: Even the preamble, we don’t notate it the way they told us to. We have other changes coming through LCF. They gave us specific direction on how to notate it and we didn’t do it. It doesn’t say grateful on it.
Randy: I’m fine with everybody said. I think that if our time together in May at the Convention, if that would give all of us some time to go you know what, what’s the plan, what something we bring to the Conference. If we as a group, both Boards, stay focused on a solution I think that could be presented again in this structure as something we wanted to do and decided upon in May at that Convention and then present it to the Conference.
John: Thank you for including us.
Page 29 of 44
Hayward: So let me get this straight, the WSBT will further talk about this issue when we get back into our agenda and the WSOB will talk about it at our upcoming meeting. The outcomes will be combined and a solution will be found.
John: I want to apologize at this point folks; I am going to have to leave. It’s the first time in my entire history at World Service that I’ve had to cut out early from a meeting. There’s always got to be once. I wish you all the best. Congratulations Tom.
Hayward: The next item is Willie-The WSOB Director at Large outreach
Willie: I want to remove that from the agenda. I will bring it back at a later time.
Hayward: Ok. The next item is Per Diem, Nick and Kim. We discussed that at the quarterly but you’re wanting to further discuss something.
Nick: You had some proposals, ideas, and thoughts on vouchers and food and there are lots of things you were thinking of. I wonder if you were thinking anymore.
Patty: I forgot it. Even though I read this agenda all week—he gave it to me Monday or something—I read it and went but I was busy at the top ones. But basically I believe we can—I told you already. Did you bring it up? Ok. The only thing I found for sure is that the IRS states specifically the lowest amount. Per Diem is by state. They have a minimum—do I need to give this representation or did you do it? We have to pick a number and the Government says the maximum number that you can give on each city and it changes in every city as what you can give as a per diem. You guys don’t’ get per diem, you can call it per diem until you come home, your volunteers. We go outside of the law. The way the IRS says volunteers can only get reimbursed, they cannot get per diem. Employees can get per diem, I can get per diem. The law only gives you maximum and there is no law about per diem. We picked $40 as a number so that we can live within our budget number. If you want a higher number you have to tell the Finance committee for next year. That’s not me, I didn’t set it and I don’t make it up, the Finance committee and ya’ll. What I was really paying attention to is how to get the mileage up because—even though some Trustee told me that the policy changed last year, I discovered they were wrong. We’ve been going to 17 cents but the law didn’t change, it is still at 14 cents, unfortunately. You send me to look up shit, want to talk about an amends. Trustees told me to pay more and I’m breaking the law all year long, thank you very much.
Trustees: We’re sorry.
Richard: Good move.
Patty: But I finally read this time is we don’t have to only pay you 14 cents. I can actually pay you what your expenses were for driving. It doesn’t say maximum on that—as compared to per diem, which doesn’t apply anyway—it doesn’t say max. We can make up a policy that said you fill up your car before you leave; when you get home you fill up your car again. Whatever dollar amount that was we’ll pay that.
Page 30 of 44
Randy: But that’s less.
Patty: It shouldn’t be less. It will be more.
Randy: I usually get 20 miles per gallon, so…
Patty: More than 17 cents? We are only paying 14 cents.
Randy: 60 miles times 17 cents is…
Patty: 14 cents
Randy: 14 cents is about nine bucks. 60 miles to 20 miles to the gallon is three gallons of gas, nine bucks…eight bucks.
Patty: I don’t care but they ask me…
Randy: I’m just saying…
Patty: What they were telling me that 17 cents and now it will be 14 cents. I would hope your policy is according to the law. My job was to find out if you could find another way to do it. Yes you can. You can find another way to do it. You just have to tell us—make a policy, make a document from you that tells us what to do. As long as were following it the IRS doesn’t care. They don’t care, just like we did for the banquet. I’m sorry. You know the banquet we did it as entertainment. It doesn’t count in your daily meals.
Taffy: Travel reimbursement, even if it is mileage, is not only designed to cover gasoline. It’s also designed to supplement wear and tear, like a percentage of what it takes your tires to do this work, what it would take for a tune-up. If you do devise a policy keep that in mind that it is not just mile per mile gallons. Factor in some sort of wear and tear on the car also, because that’s part of what it is.
Patty: Actually I think if you went to wear and tear that then you would have to go the per mile. If you go per mile…
Taffy: If you create your policy, you don’t have to say why. You just say this is our policy; we reimburse $100 a month or whatever. I’m just throwing things out there. As you are itemizing how you develop the policy keep in mind it is not just mile for mile a gallon. I just wanted to throw just one other thing in there, for employees the mileage minimum is up to 56 cents. I just wanted to throw that in there so have a barometer.
Nick: I recently came to this because my gas is five times as expensive as your gas. I don’t really give a damn about your gas. If I get the sweeten it’s about seven times as much. From your
Page 31 of 44
experience Taffy would you be able to –and other people—be able to draft a policy that gave either or, because if he likes it per and I like it that, can we do a policy that would work for both?
Joy: Yes you can.
Nick: We just got to figure out the wording, really. That’s all we really need to do.
Patty: And an effective date.
Hayward: Ok, are we going to move on? Next item is Accounting Procedures/Policies.
Joy: I did spell that wrong, didn’t I?
Patty: Here’s the one from that document you gave us.
Joy: Which part?
Patty: The document that Willie gave me that shows your accounting procedures.
Joy: Are you adding on or?
Patty: No, those are the same ones. I just took the actual policies out of them.
Joy: Oh.
Patty: So someone can make a motion.
Joy: We already did.
Patty: Oh, ok.
Joy: What we are going to do now is submit it to the Board at the office for your review and approval.
Patty: That whole document?
Joy: the whole 26 pages, yes ma’am, accounting only.
Patty: Ok. I want you to…
Joy: What would you like me to do?
Patty: Make the policies. We were singing earlier—I’m really sorry you didn’t stop by the office Taffy—
Page 32 of 44
Joy: These need to be added.
Patty: You make policy and I make procedures. I say procedure, you say policy. Procedure.
Joy: Policy
Patty: Yes!!
Joy: I will add these as policy to…
Patty: So you guys make the policy and let me play with the procedure. That’s the way we should play.
Joy: What I will do, Miss Flannigan, what I will do is I will add these and I will highlight in bold the policies that the Trustees would like related to reporting. That we can—how do you want me to…
Patty: We have a problem, overall. The only minutes of things that show up is you guys. We are invisible.
Joy: We don’t want you to be.
Patty: The policies have to be your ideals, which is why we got in trouble last year because you know the policies we did last year—what happened is somebody said why are you doing it that way and I said it was policy and they said where is it and we looked at our minutes and found that it was made on the WSOB and the WSBT said not good enough we’ve going to make them here. I would be glad to make it at the WSOB but then next year when you get new Trustees you’re going to tell me that it needs to be here.
Joy: No.
Patty: Yes. Right, Nick you were here. You guys were here. How come the expenditure policies came from you to us? You guys can talk about it when I leave. They were done on our Board but it wasn’t good enough. I don’t know why. I don’t care.
Joy: With the collaboration of you and the policy document you already created I just pulled the accounting crap out of it and put into one little document that says when the invoices should be imputed into the system and how many days we should really pay them and who should actually be the consistent signers of the checking accounts.
Richard: And when we would like the reports.
Joy: And when we would like the reports and who the reports should go to, by quarterly, by monthly kind of thing.
Page 33 of 44
Patty: Yes.
Joy: That’s in here; it’s in the meat of it.
Patty: Yes.
Joy: What I would really like is—because I think the Office Board should also accept these, if you so choose, or make whatever changes and then bring back so that we can…
Nick: Who was that?
Hayward: She’s going to give them to Willie; they will then be forward on to you.
Joy: No, no, no, that’s why, like I said, took most of it from the actual…
Patty: Procedure book.
Joy: Procedure book.
Tom: That means we are going to have to pay somebody to do that.
Joy: Forget that. So this is what I’m going to do on Monday, I’m going to send this to you guys and then tweak it, make whatever changes. That way we are both on the same page. That way I know the procedures are being followed. That’s what I would like. We can add these little things in here.
Patty: Those are already in there. There already in your document. I took that paper from your document.
Hayward: Alright we are going to turn the focus to Taffy since she gave us her letter and let her say her goodbyes to us.
Taffy: I’m out here with my heart open, so it’s all good. I don’t have a way of articulating what this last year has been for me. I just don’t. It has been one of the largest challenges, and you that Chinese symbol for challenge means opportunity and what’s the other thing that it means, grow up or something like that, so together. It’s been a challenge in a good way, not always a comfortable way. It’s grown me to be here. When I was telling the staff I was just talking out of the top of my heart about when I first got here—at one of the first meeting—I think you maybe Hayward asked me so what’s it like, I said it’s like landing on the moon, because I didn’t have an idea of the level of life stories that happened in humanity because I don’t have an experience with any kind of addiction substance at all. My mind is a different mind then it was a year ago. The fact that I got the call from the Senior Minister at the church on the same day that was my year anniversary it doesn’t fall shortly on me. I recognize this feels like divinely ordain for me to be here. I don’t know why. John came into the office the other day and said so are we better off
Page 34 of 44
than we were a year ago, CA World Service Office? I can only hope that that is true, yes. I know that I am better off. I going through my work history and what I brought and I have ended up in positions when there’s a transition in my life. That’s happened a lot, so this is part of it. What I hope to leave behind in terms of the office is some bugs revealed so that as this model of two Directors moves forward that the light is shined on them so that it moves forward in a high level of excellence and perfection. That it can fulfill whatever it was that brought—the Conference brought it I’m sure, all the years of planning it that that be fulfilled. I hope my being there has added that and that that’s true. I can’t think of anything else to say, except that I came in here with a sense of ah and honor at what Cocaine Anonymous is and how it plays in people’s lives and I still have that in spades, more so because I didn’t really know the story. I just didn’t know the stories. My first month in the office I had to stop—I was like you guys have to give me your stories in increments, because it is blowing my mind who you are and how you have transformed. Tom I called him Paul. I got my own little names. I truly am humbled and I’m a bigger human being now just as a result of this year. You can’t really put words to that. I’m leaving it the way it will be great for if you had someone else coming in. I don’t know how it going to unfold. If there is somebody like me coming in on this day I’m leaving a document like that, just so there is sort of a road map to what it will be like.
Richard: Your flow chart.
Taffy: No not my flow chart.
Patty: A To Do list.
Taffy: Just like a To Do list and some ideas. Things like that.
Hayward: We would like to say Thank you for all your hard work and putting up with all of our stuff. There’s a lot of stuff that goes on here. Anybody else?
Willie: Taffy, I’m a firm believer in growth and firm believer of individuals have to look at what’s best for them in their life at this point. I’m also a firm believer in God’s will and that individual knowing what God’s will is for their life, and embracing what’s coming, the unknown, how this is going, putting past those regrets. This fellowship you say we don’t wish to shut the door on any regrets but to move forward into that and make a positive out of whatever situation it is and I wish you well. I wish you all that success.
Taffy: Thank you.
Joy: Ditto.
Hayward: We would all like to give you a hug.
Everyone: Hugging and saying goodbye to Taffy.
Page 35 of 44
Hayward: We are back on the record. We took a short break. Agenda item Office Restructure Project. It says Willie, but that’s the Office.
Willie: We kind of went over it earlier. I told him that you were going to have some additional numbers now that the DOO and we got 18 weeks and how that was going to look. I suggested that we waited until the Board to Board to actually go further into detail about how that’s going to look.
Patty: I did not want to presume either that I would just move over for the time being, by the way. I didn’t do everything because I was like kind of saying are you guys going to let me move over and be the Office manager, Director of whatever the heck I am…
Hayward: Can we include the Interim Program that’s going to happen now that the Director of Operation position is open?
Patty: We did the information that showed that we were going to be less than 5% over on the plan that we were working on. That included a salary for me and a salary for Taffy, but on Friday we don’t have to pay Taffy’s salary. Our combined salary were an amount—that I won’t mention because we are not at an executive session—that I’m going to be at least 200 or 250—$250 less than that. If you want me to go into specific dollar numbers I would rather go off the record.
Hayward: Do we need to go off record?
Willie: No.
Hayward: Ok.
Patty: There is absolutely no problem because if I’m acting as Interim manager the staff that we have currently is exactly the staff I got to when I was over there. The cost will be less than 150 not the over 3 and half percent or whatever the heck were over, but it won’t even be that. It will be less than $150,000 budgeted now, that’s not a worry. I believe I will be able to do it because I’ve been training Susan in the Assistant Director of Recourses Project Development now for months—almost six months—she’s totally up to speed on a lot of the activities and responsibilities that I’m trying to teach her anyway. I’m not at all afraid that that department going to have a real loss. I am going to be working in the office four days a week, every morning, Monday thru Thursday.
Hayward: How many hours a day?
Patty: It’s eight, but you know. It’s 5 a.m. to 1:30. I’m not going to worry about my hours. Randy might worry about my hours. I will be on a salary and it will be for full-time pay. It doesn’t matter. I’m now on my salary for full-time pay and I’m exempt. My hours don’t actually—we don’t have to worry about overtime or any of that stuff. I believe I will be able to do the operations. I was already—because of the problems that we were having in
Page 36 of 44
QuickBooks—with the meeting I asked to have here was so that I could go beg you and cleanup the QuickBooks messes. I had already scheduled two days a week for a period of up to two months, so I had already had my time slated off to do extra days. I do two days in the office now and then miscellaneous phone calls. My commitment is exactly the same before her resignation that it was after because I think it will be easier on me. I will be able to get all of the cleanup done. I probably will incur some overtime costs because I can’t do two jobs completely and that overtime cost will fall within the operations with Tony and Yvette. Those are the two people that that’s going to effect. They are going to be generating the reports themselves so that you could have them, basically. I believe we will be able to get our inventory back under control so that we can discontinue back ordering. That will end. I believe that all of the other problems that we’ve have had are associated with the entry and the check writing and stuff is now mute. The question on the restructure originally was—should I say it how originally—I think you guys saw—it wasn’t just the financial part that you were worried about as compared to this separation of duties. There’s an interesting place when we were talking to the literature person, Chair of the Literature committee, she’s like yeah but I didn’t know the 7th tradition came from Susan. When I moved Susan I moved that resource to the other department and so I still want that to stay in that department and Susan is going to represent that department. I’m going to be supervising Susan and I’m going to be supervising the staff of operations for temporary position. I don’t know where you are. I’m hoping—it won’t take me more than 60 days to clean that up—that’s what I really think. The cleanup is 60 days. That won’t change. It is going to take 60 days. There’s a lot of stuff that is different. The inventory is different, the accounts are…
Tom: We’re going to pay Oliver a little extra.
Patty: I offered Oliver extra today and he said that opportunity to be of service to us outweighs any dollar amount we could possibly pay him. He used to be our Treasurer. He was our World Service Office Board Treasurer. Our current bookkeeper was our Office Treasurer.
Joy: After I was.
Patty: Yeah. He likes helping CA. I like him.
Hayward: You said training Tony and Yvette—what training would Tony need?
Patty: Tony currently only does—I have issues with shipping. First off, I believe that job is about 35 hours, you are only boxing up five or six boxes a day, so he has a lot of opportunity for me to use several hours a week for him to do more specific reports on the inventory. He needs to be giving me stock status inventories, he needs to tell me what that is turning, he needs to show me where it isn’t turning, and he needs to be giving reports prior to running out of things. The contribution program, we just found out that we only have 100 left, that’s not acceptable for me, he needs to be giving actual reporting. That kind of thing has been missing—it’s in the bookkeeping manual—it has been missing in the interaction so he needs to trained on it because he hasn’t done it yet.
Hayward: Is that QuickBooks? Where is that information pulled from?
Page 37 of 44
Patty: It is QuickBooks that we have on hand but it’s an excel—I export it to excel, I email to them, they look at it, they verify physically—do you think you got a 1000 of those? No, then count them—by your eye it doesn’t look the same then you need to tell me what it is and it gives me a variance report. He is also doing a shipping log. He did a great job on increasing our costs for the minimum shipping to $7. He’s good at going through that, but he needs to be giving more of that so he can tell us what we are turning, how many do I have to buy, because it might be cheaper to buy certain things in a different quantity if my inventory turns aren’t the same. I miss operations.
Tom: I only wanted to mention the concerns about straightening the posting issues that Oliver needs to spend more time on. If he is all productive he is going to do it. He might even be done today with it.
Patty: No. He said he’ll finish next weekend. He’s going to give two days next weekend.
Willie: So in the Interim plan what we kind of discussed, when do you see putting out to the fellowship or out the Director of Operation positions—starting interviewing process for that?
Patty: I would say after the Convention. I’m not talking about the WSOB. Operations and Resource department are maxed out at this time between cleaning up the messes and doing the Convention we’re are maxed out. Anybody that call or came by they won’t get their best response. If we’re considering hiring somebody from within the fellowship, which Taffy gave as part of her—some of the problems she incurred was because she was not a member—if we are going to go to the fellowship we could go to the fellowship soon as long as they’re contacting the WSOB and not stopping by the office because fellowship people you can tell them, you can say we are needing additional staff working in the office, if you are interested in the office we are going to be staffing it in September, let’s say, it takes a long time for the word to get out, so if we put it out in May you will get responses sometime till Conference. If you put it out now you might get it by May, it’s not fast. I don’t think it’s very fast. I’m going to write a document after talking to Taffy about what problems that we had with her so you guys can use that data when hiring.
Hayward: Ok.
Patty: I actually deferred my opinion with her over some of that stuff. I found documents on the training of her and she had the information. John said we don’t know—the dates of mailings are in a program we have at the office. Everything is in a program at the office that tickles you.
That’s not the problem. I would like it if it was in the summertime. As an Operations and Resources we don’t have time until that time, it’s a good time. We are in a good position. Trevor: I was just going to say that it seems to me that we’re obviously not going to do it in Denver and the next time when we’re are all going to be together to possible conduct interviews is going to be in late August for the Conference anyway. We won’t have a real heavy load replacing our fearless leader. We are keeping you around, you don’t know that yet. We will have
Page 38 of 44
a few interviews so we’re not going to be stressed out on TEC and that to me sounds like a perfect time for us to come in a day early and do interviews.
Patty: And the WSOB will evade their three choices by that time.
Trevor: Exactly.
Patty: Personally, I’m ok if it’s longer than that too. If we don’t find a candidate, I would rather not take a candidate, personally, than make that mistake. That was a very expensive mistake, at which I think we had that information up front that she wasn’t going to last more than a year. We knew it. We made that choice. You make a mistake; you don’t know what God’s will is.
Randy: So we’re realigning some duties. We are relying on some additional training for some current people that we already have that can get us, we believe, successfully through the time it takes to figure out QuickBooks and get it in-line, the time that it takes to figure out the problem in shipping and receiving and get all of that more in-line through a Convention…
Patty: And year-end. June 30th.
Randy: And year-end. We think that we’re confident that we are going to be ok to do all those things. Train, train, cleanup QuickBooks to make it easier, cleanup shipping and receiving to make it easier, grow the individuals that we have on staff to do those things, go through a Convention, go through a year-end and come seven-eight months from now look to hire a full-time person to do something that is now cleaned up, cleaned up, finished, and finished. I run a couple of divisions and stuff like that. If I’ve got whole bunch of cleanup and a whole bunch of cleanup, training, and two big events that I’ve got to get done and I’ve can get all that done in my current group, well when I’m cleaned up, cleaned up, finished, and finished I don’t need that position anymore.
Patty: I will be doing it. Ok your question is, is it a good idea if we have an office manager and director—if we did that then I would stay on as your Director of Operations and Susan would have to become—and I’m saying Susan, although she knows she has to compete—Director of Resources Project Development. Yes. Our long term plan is that me disappear, not that I don’t love you, I do.
Randy: I just had to say that out loud. I hear us confident that we are going to be ok in a seven to eight month period that includes twice as much work as we thought we had a year ago. Because we have this cleanup, we have this cleanup and we got this and we got a this and when we get that done then some of these things are supposed to be easier.
Patty: In our plan, the Director and Resources and Project Development, me, was only on for two days as of September of next year, for the rest of the whole time, until we hire a new Director of Resource Project Development who probably needs a part-time assistant. We need 60 hours worth of work in that department. That is a fact. I didn’t think it was that much, I swear to God I
Page 39 of 44
would have said it was 40. We’ll need a part-time person that would do that department. One and half people for that department and three people in operations is all you need, absolutely.
Randy: If it would be possible, I would like to see a timeline as to what the office thinks is required to get us to December on next year and what the org chart needs to look like in January. The reason that I’m asking that that just gives me a—I think we’re open, were kind of walking, at least I feel I’m walking out of here open in—I don’t even know how it explain it right. I don’t know why I’m just unsettled in understanding exactly where we’re going when we leave here.
Hayward: Do you think we need a Director of Operations soon?
Randy: I think that the idea that we don’t, has to raise the question if we need one.
Patty: Oh no, we do. I’m just a cheap skate. I want to go until June. We didn’t go into financials, we’re f**ked. Look at those financials, we’re f**ked. I can go in there and do at the right price and I can make sure that we’re staffed and stuff. I’m only saying I’m willing to do those hours that might push one to resting, because we’re in trouble. We are not achieving goals. We are totally under producing on all our revenue streams. If that continues I would agree with you. If that’s what occurs with I finish the year I will bring that recommendation to the Board.
Randy: That’s what I needed to hear more than a level of confidence that we can get it done. So what I’m hearing is we are going to be able to do it, we are going to be able to do it, blah, blah, why we can’t just keep doing it.
Patty: Well we could but I need resting.
Joy: As long as when we do hire a new Director of Operations—yes Patty you need a really huge rest—that we don’t rush into it and we don’t pick anyone without actual QuickBooks experience. Some QuickBooks experience that we can actually sent to a class to further their experience. The reality is, that’s what we use in the office and since Patty and I have implemented QuickBooks into the office. We need to make sure someone knows how the hell how to use QuickBooks and has a basic bookkeeping experience. If they do not have bookkeeping experience you should not be touching QuickBooks, period. So when we put it out there for the new Director of Operations they must have bookkeeping experience with QuickBooks. I don’t care what version of QuickBooks they have but they should have QuickBooks.
Tom: I just wanted to add, Patty is overly rosy about things, because what’s going to happen is some things aren’t going to get taken care of, like the meditation books is going to stop, like potential—at least from the office perspective—the retreat formation and everything. That’s tough when Patty has to ship to—it’s not like that—we’ll get back on solid ground. What we are going to lose is the redundancy feature that we were trying to achieve with two directors, in case one goes down, then the other one is available—that wont’ be there. It won’t be as easy as she says it will be.
Page 40 of 44
Patty: I didn’t say it was easy.
Tom: I understand. It’s going to be an accomplishment here.
Patty: It’s simple.
Kim: There’s no problem here.
Tom: Right. That’s it.
Hayward: Have we finished discussing this? Oh, I’m sorry.
Patty: Part of what I want to give us is we—I was working on a training system and going over what was trained and that information and my feedback—what I wanted to ask you for was the authority to be Taffy’s supervisor for a 60 day period. That’s what I was going to ask you and when we hire the new person I beg you to give me the authority to give you the specific feedback of that review, because we knew, I and some WSOB members, knew the short fall within the 90 day period. We could have got it in writing and we could have put it another thing if it had come from—part of the problem with it—part of the problem that we need to correct is how we think you hired her so we didn’t get feedback we need to be working more. I think that’s my job, the Resource and Project Development job, gets to come talk more directly, gets to be part of and bring back the feedback. More interactive then it was before. Director of Operations wasn’t so feedbacky. We didn’t participate at the same level so now we’ve made this little dotted line that allows participation in a different level. I beg us to consider when we go in the new one that the actual report comes from me. The hands on report should come from me, and the review is done in collaboration with the WSBT for my job and that job. That’s a really important thing that we learned. I think we learned it, I did.
Joy: And it should be that way because you will be in the office everyday during that training period and you’re going to be like the only one that really knows if the person is being trained.
Patty: We have never done it before. There was no protocol. We never did it.
Kim: Well I trust that the previous WSOT who came in here at the 90 day mark had information from the WSOB regarding her position and her progress.
Patty: I don’t know that.
Kim: Well I do.
Patty: But was it weighted?
Page 41 of 44
Kim: The information is forth coming to that liaison to this Board and then we make a recommendation to make her a director at 90 days. Where else would that information come from, but the WSOB? I don’t know that what you knew was being shared.
Patty: I vote for that. They do the same thing you guys do. Once the voice is made it’s the group’s voice. Sometimes the decisions are made not on a specific—it was about Taffy, and Taffy’s great as a person. I love sharing with her. We do all kinds of healing stuff and discussions. I knew her performance. I was already giving reports to the Chair and through Oliver for corrections. That didn’t get to you. You didn’t get all of our pieces of paper.
Joy: Which we would like.
Patty: Right. That would how you would want to do it.
Hayward: Ok is this horse dead?
Kim: No. I think we need to take some further initiative as to when we are going to post this job opportunity and I think it should be immediately even though we aren’t going to take action on it for a period of time. There’s no reason why we can’t accept the resumes.
Patty: To people—normal people?
Tom: Will we do it the same way as last time where the Board interviews them? That was an excessive process.
Hayward: Yeah it was. All the resumes went to the WSOB; we interviewed that many people…
Tom: There was 55 or so.
Joy: So why don’t we get a steering committee like we did when we hired Patty?
Patty: We did have a hiring committee. I don’t like the idea based on the fact that there’s you know—right now we would get 150 resumes and today we would get 300 resumes. In actual, that kind of work at this time with the impact it would bring to the office would not get the attention it needs. Even if we said in the ad, which I would suggest to if you do, do it that you said in the ad that were not going to give you the job until September. That might reduce the amount of resumes. That’s a long time.
Kim: Here’s my concern, when this long process of a timeline that I recall of developing these two director positions, establishing it at the Conference, and us not filling the position, the fellowship came to us and said why aren’t you filling that position. We went through the process of interviews and it took a long time. Now we are going to tell the fellowship that our Director of Operations has resigned and we’re not going to fill that position until September. So that’s what we are going to tell the fellowship.
Page 42 of 44
Patty: Yeah, tell them that it’s because there’s not enough 7th tradition. I like it. It’s a good way.
Kim: That’s not what I said.
Patty: It only took three months to fill the position. We put the ad in December and we hired somebody in February.
Kim: Well it was approved on the Conference floor in August and it took three months to get an ad in the Craig’s list and the paper whatever and we, the Trustees, interviewed in February. That short list came to us from the WSO Chair, prior to that there was a number of people that interviewed to narrow down the field.
Patty: I don’t know why we didn’t—I have no recollection…
Kim: I do recall your extreme passion for the position that you’re currently holding. I would hate to see you double duty—putting on two hats and us getting away from the reasons that we have these two positions.
Patty: But when would you guys interview? I don’t understand. It has to be the WSOB and then it has to be you all and you’re not her until September. We can hire until September unless we pick only the people that can come here to do it, for this Board to do it.
Kim: I understand that. I don’t know why we have to wait. For what length of period are we going to wait before we post this on Yahoo group or Craig’s list or whatever?
Patty: I would be open to the Yahoo right now, but the Craig’s list I won’t do until May 20…
Kim: After the Convention.
Patty: The day of—the last day.
Kim: I also think that we need to be collective in our—that Patty is going to Interim. I think it’s a decision by the Board of Trustees.
Patty: I agree. I did not want to presume that. That was what we were talking about. I don’t think I can presume that. There has to be permission.
Hayward: When we have more information on that then we will talk about that more on our agenda.
Joy: I agree.
Hayward: We’ll come back with a time to start to fill the other two positions.
Page 43 of 44
Kim: Thank you.
Patty: But I am going to get her a To Do list on Monday.
Hayward: I believe that’s it. We will close the meeting with the serenity prayer. It is 5:45pm Saturday, March 7th. Thank you.
Page 44 of 44
| March 7, 2009 | 44 |
| Board to Board Meeting -‐ FINAL |