CLOSING REPORT
C.A. WORLD SERVICE CONFERENCE 2007
STRUCTURE AND BYLAWS REPORT
INTRODUCTION AND OPENING COMMENTS
Opening Comments:
This committee’s relentless commitment to ensure the most comprehensive 2008 WSM worked meticulously through long late night hours to reassure we delivered motions to the floor that did not include large, voluminous, convoluted, obstreperous or controversial motions that resulted in lengthy conference discussions from the 39 referrals. Which are from the 29 referrals received at the conference, 8 carried over from the close of the 2006 WSC and 2 received from other committees during the 2007 WSC. Resulting in a moderate 15 motions to be brought to the floor.
Committee introductions:
Chair: Bryan Seid
Co-Chair: Gloria Bridget
Co-Secretary: Deborah Wilbert
Co-Secretary: Niki Drake
Committee Trustee: Bobbie Harmon
| Edward Ballard | Khalid King | Rachael Carfrae |
| Kathrine Holland | Michael Thomas | Pierre Rollins |
| John Bodkin | Michael Schelin | Patrice Fitzpatrick |
| Nick Alexander | Dan Flores | Patrice Royal |
| Steve Freeman | Guillermo Valdez | Bill Burmeier |
| Judith Marinoff | Chris Whybrow | |
| Ronald Washington | Michael Chiki |
Page 33 of 115
REFERRALS THAT RESULTED IN MOTIONS
- Referral #5096 Please find an appropriate place to add the following verbiage to the World Service manual: “Attendance is suggested and encouraged at group meetings and at a “home group” to participate in additional service work at the district, area and World service levels. It is vital and imperative to have a pulse on the group conscience of the fellowship.
A. MOTION: To include on Page 10 at end of Paragraph 5 ‘To participate in all levels of service work, attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group” And to include on Page 17 above OFFICERS OF THE DSC insert a 5th Paragraph under DISTRICT “To participate in service work at the district level attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”. And to include on Page 19 insert a 4th Paragraph above SUGGESTED AREA FUNCTIONS “to participate in service work at the area level attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”.
Second.
Steve Edwards – reads the motion. Would you like to speak to your motion? Ed Ballard – not at this time.
Trevor Scheible – speak against the motion the first part of the motion to add that sentence. The location of the addition makes absolutely no sense.
Scott Botz- i speak against the motion. Looking further into the motion they want districts and areas to participate in service work. May be mistaken and maybe the committee can rework it. I would refer it back to committee if! could make a motion.
Brian Tenenbaum – is it actually the 6th paragraph?
Ed Ballard – yes it should be in after Anonymity.
Steve Edwards – can we assume that it’s the 6th paragraph.
Ed Ballard ~ yes
MOTION: To include on Page 10 at end of Paragraph 56 ‘To participate in all levels of service work, attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”. And to include on Page 17 above OFFICERS OF THE DSC insert a 5th Paragraph under DISTRICT “To participate in service work at the district level attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”. And to include on Page 19 insert a 4th Paragraph above SUGGESTED AREA FUNCTIONS “to participate in service work at the area level attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meetlng(s) or at a “CA Home Group”.
Bobbie Harmon – if you are looking on the computer, it numbers the cover page.
Page 34 of 115
Brian Tenebaum – speak in favor of the motion, it is a very good idea. I’ve seen people do service work who don’t go to CA meetings and try to carry the message of CA. Particularly H&l, it’s not carrying the proper message if you aren’t attending CA meetings.
Dan Santa Maria – speaks in favor of the motion. The traditions are to the group what the steps are to the individual.
Don Logan ~ speaks in favor of the motion. I like the fact that it is suggested and strongly encouraged rather than being a rule.
Tony Drake – Point of Information – clarified the page numbering if reading WSM online.
Steve Edwards – reads the motion. The motions carries unanimously.
Scott Botz – 5th Concept Statement – this verbiage is District/Areas must participate in service work. I think the intent was that Delegate or someone doing service work participate in CA. This motion does not do that. Am I reading that wrong?
- Referral #5076 Request to change WSM to include minimum qualifications for service to include “member of CA home group.”
Bryan Seid – we are going to try and take you through the manual front to back. Rachael Carfrae –
MOTION: To add to Page 14 of the WSM directly above
MEETING/GROUP TYPES; THE CA HOME GROUP”: The Home Group provides an opportunity to begin to be of service. Experience shows a home group is one of the vital components to continuous sobriety. In a Home Group, members participate in the business meeting and are able to cast their vote as a part of the group conscience of the fellowship as a whole.
Second.
Steve Edwards – reads motion. Would you like to speak to the motion?
Rachael Carfrae – not at this time.
John Whitaker – I am the writer of the referral and you didn’t all the three pages which included Item A at the beginning of each request which would require a
Home Group at the beginning of each.
Steve Edwards – are you speaking to or against the motion?
John Whitaker – did the committee receive the entire referral?
Rachael Carfrae – yes we did.
Don Logan ~ friendly amendment to add word. I will come back.
Page 35 of 115
Vinny Martin – friendly amendment – …in a Home Group, members participate in a business meetings…add “members are able to participate in business meeting…
Bryan Seid – we decline the friendly amendment.
Kim Sherwan – speak against the motion because I don’t think this gives us a definition of what a Home Group really is that we regularly attend on a regular basis.
Mona Ibrahim – speaks against the motion. If definition of Home Group is the purpose here, it may be misinterpreted that you must be a member of Home Group to be a voting member. A lot people don’t have Home Groups and we again get separation that you must be a member to participate in Group Conscience.
Don Logan ~ friendly amendment …In a Home Group members can participate Bryan Seid – we accept.
MOTION: To add to Page 14 of the WSM directly above MEETiNG/GROUP TYPES; THE CA HOME GROUP”: The Home Group provides an opportunity to begin to be of service, Experience shows a home group is one of the vital components to continuous sobriety. In a home group, members can participate in the business meeting and are able to cast their vote as a part of the group conscious of the fellowship as a whole.
Susan Bredau – friendly amendment …to add a first sentence of the definition “A Home Group may be defined as a meeting a member attends regularly■”
Rachael Carfrae – we accept.
MOTION: To add to Page 14 of the WSM directly above
MEETING/GROUP TYPES: THE CA HOME GROUP”: “A Home Group may be defined as a meeting a member attends regularly. ” The Home Group provides an opportunity to begin to be of service. Experience shows a home group is one of the vital components to continuous sobriety. In a home group, members can participate in the business meeting and are able to cast their vote as a part of the group conscious of the fellowship as a whole.
Cynthia Cronkhite – friendly amendment…following the language just inserted, add, “See the pamphlet title The Home Group.’’
Rachael Carfrae – we do not accept.
Carl Warlick – speak against motion. The original pamphlet, The Home Group, i spoke against that also. In California, there are meetings on every corner unlike other areas. We aren’t particularly dedicated to one Home Group. When l say
Page 36 of 115
I’m a member, I’m a member. If is have some knowledge on a certain issue, I can’t participate because I’m not a member of a Home Group.
Wardel! Kahn – friendly amendment…last sentence,…in a CA Home Group, members are encouraged to…participate
Rachael Carfrae – we don’t accept.
Terry Marsden – speaks in favor of this motion. In my Area, when people want a certain item to go a certain way, they participate in a number of groups and vote many times to a certain issue of debate. I participate in my Home Group when I am in town. Because we have Home Groups we have some sort of structure in the meetings. We encourage all to participate and we aren’t shutting anybody out.
Peter Olsen – Point of Information – in Asia/Oceania area, we have a number of meetings getting started and can the meetings in Indonesia, etc be considered Home Group.
Rachael Carfrae – yes
Vinny Martin – speaks against the motion. The pamphlet wasn’t referred to in the motion.
Dan Sadur – speaking against the motion because it seems to exclude those members who can’t get to a meeting on a regular basis. They still sponsored people, did service work without actually having to attend the meeting.
Willie Bailey – motion to limit debate to one more for and one more against.
Second.
Steve Edwards – motion not debatable and requires 2/3 majority. Motion carries.
We will now proceed in the order.
Barry Haynes – friendly amendment – strike the..
Parliamentary inquiry – Roy Ricard – if motion to limit debate has been passed, can we make a friendly amendment?
Steve Edwards – at this point, since we have passed motion to one for,one against and friendly amendment is neither, then it is ruled out of order. You may either argue for or against.
Barry Haynes – speaks against the motion because of the wording.
Brian Tenebaum – Parliamentary Inquiry – yesterday when we limited debate, you allowed Point of Information. What are we allowing today?
Steve Edwards – the distinction is the friendly amendment offer with only one more or one more against, the amendment could change the motion entirely.
Cynthia Cronkhite – Parliamentary Inquiry – if friendly amendment been accepted, would we than have been able to reopen debate.
Page 37 of 115
Kevin Murphy – friendly amendment is a unanimous consent request and I don’t believe that changes the limitation on the debate. Acceptance would restart the clock. The body could reverse the motion to limit debate.
Michael Chiki» speaks for the motion. This was brought to us to clarify membership in a Home Group. We tried to provide succinct answers. 1 have 3 Home Groups and I vote in all three. This motion is not trying to be exclusive.
Steve Edwards – Point of Order
Roy Ricard – motion to limit debate does not allow me enough information to make a decision on this motion.
Steve Edwards – motion to limit stands. We have heard 19 people speak to this motion.
Mona Ibrahim – why are we getting into different clause…
Steve Edwards – not a parliamentary inquiry.
Kevin Murphy – response to a referral by a committee they decide what they are going to. There is no requirement that the result actually totally addresses the spirit of the referral.
Barry Haynes ~ Parliamentary Inquiry. If this motion passes, can I make a motion to amend?
Steve Edwards – yes. My parliamentarian believes that further information should be given.
Kevin Murphy ~ it would have to be recognized at this point in time in order,
Barry Haynes – motion to amend the main motion. To exclude the last 6 words of the last sentence.. .of–the fellowship as a–whole.
Second.
Steve Edwards – would you like to speak to your motion?
Barry Haynes – yes.
Steve Edwards – vote on motion to amend. Motion carries with substantial unanimity. As a result of the motion to amend, debate can begin again.
MOTION: To add to Page 14 of the WSM directly above
MEETING/GROUP TYPES; THE CA HOME GROUP”: “A Home Group may be defined as a meeting a member attends regularly.” The Home Group provides an opportunity to begin to be of service. Experience shows a home group is one of the vital components to continuous sobriety. In a home group, members can participate in the business meeting and are able to cast their vote as a part of the group conscious of the fellowship as a whole.
Page 38 of 115
Bryan Seid – Point of order – our entire group is sitting on the waii and raising their hands and not being recognized because we are out of the line of sight of the Chair.
Steve Edwards – Bryan, I am going to rule that out of order.
Wesley Blount -how much of this are we keep wanting to define? Are we next going to define an Addict? I get to decide when we have an election as to whether or not you are qualified for the position.
Robert Pouisen – under the impression you can only have one home group. When we do the surveys we count you. You are being counted in more than once. You should have only one Home Group.
Susan Bredau – Point of Order – speaking of census not survey.
Steve Edwards ~ out of order,
John Whitaker – speaking for the motion although it has nothing to do with the referral I sent. I have a Home Group. I attend 2 other meetings which are smaller and would also be my Home Group. This is not telling people what they can and can’t have in a Home group.
Mona Ibrahim ~ speak against the motion because it doesn’t respond to the referral. Put a whole new category in our Manual and when they read about participating in business members. We are breaking traditions here that the only requirement is a desire to stop using. A newcomer can’t just come in and participate in the meeting. This is going cause a lot of controversy in our Area. Really causing a division. You don’t have to be a certain type of member to participate in any meeting. We are crossing a line here with the Group Conscience.
Susan Bredau – speaks for the motion. I believe the intent is pure and it is important to understand the distinction between a suggestion and a mandate. Therefore doesn’t violate any of the traditions.
Robin Long – I have a home group in Redondo Beach and my home group is online. My Home group is what I say it is. This is a suggestion not a requirement.
Roy Ricord – in favor of the motion. We have not heard much debate about the motion itself. This is a pamphlet of Worid Conference approved literature that explains what a Home Group is. In the back of the HFC II, it’s in there. It should be consistent and should be added to the WSM.
Rose Jones – speaks in favor of this motion. My Home Group saved my life We have qualifications to serve at District/Area levels. In order to qualify to run for some of this positions, you need a history of service work that comes from the Home Group. If you want to become a member of my Home Group, say you are.
Michael Chiki – call to question.
Page 39 of 115
Second.
Kevin Murphy – no discussion and requires 2/3 majority.
Joy Hutcheson – Point of Order – he called to question not limit debate. Kevin Murphy – more formal name of the same thing.
Motion clearly passes.
MOTION: To add to Page 14 of the WSM directly above
MEETING/GROUP TYPES: ‘THE CA HOME GROUP”: “A Home Group may be defined as a meeting a member attends regularly. “ The Home Group provides an opportunity to begin to be of service. Experience shows a Home Group is one of the vital components to continuous sobriety. In a Home Group, members can participate in the business meeting and are able to cast their vote as a part of the group conscience of the fellowship as a whole.
Kevin Murphy – prepare yourselves to vote. Motion passes with substantial unanimity.
Tony Drake – motion to reconsider the first motion that S&B passed.
Second.
MOTION: To include on Page 10 at end of Paragraph §6 To participate in all levels of service work, attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”. And to include on Page 17 above OFFICERS OF THE DSC insert a 5lh Paragraph under DISTRICT “To participate in service work at the district level attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”. And to include on Page 19 insert a 4th Paragraph above SUGGESTED AREA FUNCTIONS “to participate in service work at the area level attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”.
Steve Edwards – any debate on the motion to reconsider.
Tony Drake spoke to the motion to reconsider.
Michael Chiki – spoke against the motion to reconsider.
John Bodkin – there is some benefit to the motion to reconsider because I have discovered some more information that would be helpful in reconsidering.
Mona Ibrahim – speaks in favor of motion to reconsider.
Dan Santa Maria – speaks in favor.
Dan Sadur – motion to close debate on motion to reconsider.
Second.
Page 40 of 115
Steve Edwards ~ with minor opposition, passes. Vote on motion to reconsider.
Motion passes.
Main motion returns to floor as if it had never been debated on the floor. MOTION: to include on page 10 at end of paragraph 5 ‘To participate in all levels of service work attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”. And to include on page 17 above OFFICERS OF THE DSC insert a 5m paragraph under DISTRICT “To participate in service work at the district level attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group” And to include on page 19 insert a 4th paragraph above SUGGESTED AREA FUNCTIONS “to participate in service work at the area level attendance is suggested and encouraged at CA Group meeting(s) or at a “CA Home Group”.
Bryan Seid – can we address the motion as if it had never been passed.
Tony Drake – speaks against the motion. I love to see service workers at meetings. Upon further investigation, since when do I get to determine who is a CA member or not. Maybe down the road, I don’t donate enough message. We could be on a slippery slope with this issue. Concepts discuss choosing sound leadership. This seems like we are starting to govern here, it bothers me that service members don’t attend meetings. It’s not a mandate that CA is going to lay down.
John Bodkin – we desire a higher quality of service, better way to do business, elect trusted servants. From 2nd Tradition of AA, where does AA get its direction. I understand the language of the motion was thoughtful – suggested and encouraged. Thin ice, slippery slope ~ it’s semantics. It is very easy for me to suggest to you, to encourage you. It comes very close to a concept that we can tell another member how they can participate. Maybe go back and look at it again and come back.
Steve Edwards – it is noon and time for our lunch break. We are in the middle of our debate and people have been talking about not having enough time to review information. So maybe you could take this time to review the information.
*****BREAK*****
Steve Edwards – Call to order, it is 1 ;58 p.m. I apologize for us getting going late,
I have been advised by the S&B Committee that regarding the motion on the floor, they would like to take it back to committee.
is there an objection?
Page 41 of 115
John Whitaker – yes.
Michael Chiki – Motion: I would like to make a motion to send this back to committee. Second.
Steve — would you like to speak?
Michael Chiki – Yes, ! believe this needs more work. This is what we do. We are asked to craft motions. We work from the manual, believe in the manual, this is what S&B does. See this? Unity. We can spend all day on this. We have 13 more. This was an easy one. I think in the interest of CA, I love AA given what they gave us, we are CA, let’s get together as Cocaine Anonymous
POO – Cynthia Cronkhite ~ a member may decide to withdraw the motion. If there is an objection, the Chair will call for a vote.
PI – John Whitaker – I was under the impression it was not a debate.
Steve – you objected to withdraw the motion, i ruled that your objection killed their request. They wanted to withdraw their motion, you objected. I told the floor they couldn’t withdraw. I was in error. I was supposed to allow the body to vote and we were in the middle of doing that.
The motion carries with substantial unanimity.
- Referral #4194/4195 Bring into line with suggestions in the financial guidelines and the WSM with regards to requirements for the treasurer.
A. Guillermo Valdez – Motion: to change one year term to two year term for the treasurer under area service committee officer duties and qualifications on page 21 of the WSM.
Second.
Steve Edwards ~ would you like to speak to your motion?
Guillermo Valdez – not at this time.
Gloria Bridget – I’d like to speak in favor of the motion. It’s one of the best things that could happen because you are just learning what’s going on. If your Area is in trouble, by the second year you can help overcome problems.
Dan Santa Maria – I speak in favor of this motion. The entire slate of Area officers is a two year term.
Steve Edwards – Any further debate?
Motion passes with substantial unanimity.
- Referral #4377 TOPIC: increasing the sobriety requirements of the Delegates and Trustees. REFFERAL: Please amend Page 24 (paragraph 3, the last sentence) of the World Service Manual. Referrals related to increasing the sobriety requirements of Delegates and Trustees respectively. The reasoning is in part due to the recognition that the CA fellowship has matured greatly since
Page 42 of 115
these sobriety requirements were set. Also, in looking at the AA sobriety requirements, they are 5 or 6 years for delegates, and 10 years for regional trustees and trustees at large. NA minimum clean time for trustees is also 10 years.
- Please amend page 24 (paragraph 3 the last sentence) of the World Service Manual that currently reads: it is further suggested that Delegates have two years of continuous sobriety. Motion to modify this sentence to raise the suggested number of years of continuous sobriety for Delegates from two years to four years of continuous sobriety.
So the sentence as modified would read:
It is further suggested that Delegates have four years of continuous sobriety.
- Please amend page 39 (paragraph 4 under Qualifications of Addict Trustees) of the World Service Manual that currently reads:
- A minimum of five years of continuous abstinence from cocaine and all other mind-altering Substances at the time of the election to the Regional slate.
Motion to modify this sentence to raise the suggested number of years of continuous sobriety for Trustee candidates from five years to eight years of continued abstinence from cocaine and all other mind-altering substances. So the sentence as modified would read:
- A minimum of eight years of continuous abstinence from cocaine and all other mind-altering Substances at the time of the election to the Regional slate.
A. Patrice Royal – Motion: to raise the suggested number of years of continuous sobriety for Delegates from two years to four years so it reads “it is further suggested that delegates have two years four years of continuous sobriety’1 as listed on page 24, number 3 of the WSM.
Dan Sakur – I speak against the motion. I believe what is not broke don’t need fixing. I believe that increasing the minimum requirement for delegates and trustees will eliminate qualified people from the pool. I understand it sets a higher bar, we don’t need to dip into the areas. We should leave it at 3 and 5.
All Furoy – I speak strongly against this. Some Areas CA has significant clean time in the rooms, that’s not all Areas. I know service saved my butt. I was ready at 2 years. Thank you.
Michael Ahern – l speak against the motion because of carrying what A1 said. We are a smaller fellowship. I just got 2 years and was elected delegate. If you bump it up 4 years, you eliminate people like me getting involved in service at a higher level.
John Bodkin – I am in favor of the motion. This is where we do this. We are at the 24th conference. We are maturing as a fellowship. We have quality in some areas. The spirit of the motion doesn’t limit, but the term suggested here doesn’t hurt anybody but is something to consider.
Page 43 of 115
David Crosland – May ! ask a question and then speak?
Steve Edwards – No, one of the other.
David Crosland – i speak against the motion, i think it’s important to remember in the UK it’s not 25 years old and so this is setting the bar too high.
Russell Sedman – I speak against the motion. I can talk to 2 members here and they have more clean time than my home group. It’s a suggestion but seems too high. We don’t have this in Europe and we need participation.
Jeffery Ushry – I speak in favor of the motion. We are growing up. It’s important to put the right people with the right qualifications in place.
Barry Haynes – I speak in favor of the motion. We are talking about putting language that’s a guidance. We have been debating and discussion absolutes. We sit at this conference and debate as if it is absolute. Page 3 of the WSM, suggestions are just that. Remember each group is autonomous. So the idea is suggested 4 years and suggested 8 years, not absolutely 4 or 8 years or you’re not qualified.
Tony Drake – I speak in favor of the motion. We are talking about changing the suggestion. If we don’t change because we have new Areas and Regions, we hopefully will always have new Areas and Regions. It’s about us growing up. The Trustees have talked about this a lot It’s touchy. A lot is about me. When I vote here I vote for the fellowship as a whole and not me. There is lots of service you can do without a title. Maybe we need to stay sober, clean ashtrays, make coffee, maybe it’s not time. Ninth Concept says choose the highest leaders.
Brian Tenenbaum -1 speak in favor of the motion.
Peter Olsen ~ I speak against the motion. I understand what Tony said, but we have small Areas. We hope there are new fellowships coming.
Willie Bailey – MOTION: I would like to limit debate 2 more for and 2 more against. Second. Not debatable. Motion passes with the required 2/3 majority.
Carl Warlick I speak in favor of the motion. We discussed it on the phone. We looked for substantial unanimity. And Nicholas brought up the European Region is young and new. We are not saying you can’t. Cocaine Anonymous is 25 years old. Let’s raise the bar. We rely on the people willing to do service. This year I’m 15 years sober and I started out at 30 days as GSR. The next year I was Area chair. Those same suggestions were the same. We were here with one and two years. It’s not about me, it’s about our fellowship as a whole. Let’s grow up in CA.
Rachel Carfrae ~ I speak in favor of the motion. I understand Areas and Regions that are new. We understand they are suggestions. We have created our own guidelines in my Area. You can create your own Area manual using this. Thank you.
Vinny Martin – I speak against the motion, l know what suggestions are. I also heard over here we have quality sobriety and over here we have new members. Some new members have quality sobriety. What I hear is don’t come back next year. This stuff is in the manual. I would like to know what came up to change this?
Page 44 of 115
Yvette Holman – I speak against the motion, I keep hearing suggestions, in my Area they are particular. If it goes in there it’s not a suggestion, we will follow it. We follow those, those are the rules we live by and practice that.
Steve Edwards ~ ! will hear a motion to amend.
Ian Young – Motion to Amend: so the minimum requirement is 3 years. It is further suggested delegates have 3 years.
Steve Edwards – it is debatable. Would you like to speak to your motion?
Ian Young – Yes. I was lacking in social skills to come to this floor. It is coming of age in this fellowship these are suggestions. We try to follow the suggestions in the UK.
John Whitaker – Friendly Amendment: wherever and whenever possible..
Ian Young – no.
Wesley Blount – I am in favor of this. I heard a lot of stuff about suggestions. If we are saying to pass it and don’t use it, why? I think 2 to 4 is a big jump. I think raising it to 3, let’s see where that takes us. 2 to 4 changes things for people.
Dan Sadur – I move to limit debate to 3 for and 3 against.
Steve Edwards – There are not that many people in line. I’ll rule that out of order.
Trisha Villeneuve – I speak against the motion to amend. If you bring it up to 3 years, CA is growing up, yes. We will be denying the new Areas because they are unsure if they meet the requirements. There is nothing stopping any group if you want somebody with more time. If you have people willing at 2 years, give them that opportunity.
Willie Bailey – I speak against the motion to amend. Raising it anything is stand in line to the original motion. Each Area is autonomous and it’s all the time when we suspend the rules to let newcomers hold positions. We are not going to stop now, but we need to raise the bar. There are people with enough time and service work to represent us.
Barry Haynes – I speak against the motion to amend. Granted it’s suggestions, but if it’s in the manual we do it. That’s not the truth. Page 14 of the manual.
PI ~ Vinny Martin – Are we allowed to debate the whole motion?
Steve Edwards – we are debating whether to amend it 4 years to 3 years.
Barry Haynes – You look at the bottom of Page 14.
Steve Edwards – This doesn’t go to changing from 3 to 4. You are speaking to the underlying motion.
Barry Haynes – I was trying to get that.
Steve Edwards – But you didn’t.
Barry Haynes – i admit that. In speaking against this motion to amend 2 to 4, 2 to 3, 2 to 6, whatever it is, planning it to be a suggestion and then it’s an absolute, we start looking at other things, they’re suggestions also.
Nick Alexander – I am going to speak against the motion to amend. Clearly they have in the WSM about parliamentary procedure. I heard enough debate about the word suggestion.
Bobbie Harmon – call the question.
Page 45 of 115
Steve Edwards – Motion fails. Let’s go back to the original motion.
Patrice Royal – Motion: to raise the suggested number of years of continuous sobriety for Delegates from two years to four years so it reads “it is further suggested that delegates have two–years four years of continuous sobriety” as listed on page 24, number 3 of the WSM.
Steve Edwards – Motion carries with substantia! unanimity.
PI – Yvette Holman – when you read the motion, she brought A and B and B hasn’t been made yet.
PI – Mona Ibrahim – Is it possible we can look at what it was?
Steve Edwards – I’m quite sure i stated only motion A, and seeing what’s on the report might not help us.
Mona Ibrahim – My concern…
John Bodkin – By the nature, motion A would be the motion we acted upon, motion B would have been out of order. I heard it clearly.
Steve Kontos – 5th Concept. I voted against the motion. I come from a small Area, older Area, has mixed sobriety time. I understand the motion is to show we have matured. Why do we feel we need to put it in writing we have matured? You keep telling me to trust the process, but we want to micromanage here and there.
B. Niki Drake – Motion: to raise the number of years of continuous sobriety for Trustee candidates from five years to eight years so it reads “A minimum five years of eight years of continued sobriety from cocaine and all other mind-altering substances at the time of the election to the Regional slate” on page 39, number 4 of qualifications of an addict trustees of the WSM.
Second.
Steve Edwards – before we begin, ! am going to point out it is 3 p.m. and S&B have been up here for 4 hours except for lunch. If we are going to hear the same arguments, be prepared to go to 4 a.m.
Niki Drake – This one does say a minimum of. If it says 2 years for treasurer are you going to not elect anybody? You fill that in. Don’t worry about that word. You do what you need to do.
Dan Sadur – I speak against the motion. We are changing the language. This is not a suggestion, it is a requirement. My region cannot choose somebody less than 8 years as a nominee because they will be disqualified by the TEC.
Bobbie Harmon – You know, I heard a lot of stuff, I speak in favor. I come from an Area, you flip it and twist and rub it down. We only use it when we don’t get our way. My deal on this, when we sat down, we talked about it, we spent at least 2 hours on Friday, 2 hours on Saturday to come to a decision. We did. I am talking about the WOBT, we took that into consideration. We thought about the need for experienced, mature individuals to make decisions for the fellowship as a whole. You don’t need time to have integrity, but you’ve gone through stuff.
Page 46 of 115
You’ve done real-life living after 8. i might not be here. I don’t think the TEC wiil not take into consideration they see you have 5 years, what was this Region thinking? I don’t think they are going to do that. Did this Area have somebody with more time? Nobody likes to grow. Nobody likes to change. Let’s grow up. Dan Santa Maria – ! speak in favor of the motion. The way I see the WSM, how it is interpreted etc, indicates to me the change will be followed or not. CA is 25, perhaps we can set the bar at a different level. That’s not to say time brings experience in recovery. Talk about character building. If I look back, is it better than it was at 30 days, 1 year, 2 years? Does that make sense to hold myself to a higher standard? I think it’s the extension of everyone’s recovery.
Willie Bailey ~ Make a MOTION: to limit debate, 3 for and 3 against. Second.
Kevin Murphy – We have only had 3 people speak. I have 12 or 13 in line. I will rule that out of order at this time.
Brian Howard – Trustee, trust is in the name. I am speaking for the motion. Trustworthiness, what people hold in your decisions. You are seen as a resource for your Area. With more experience you have more resources. You know your Area better.
David Crosland – I’m confused. We are hearing on one side it’s a requirement or a different requirement. If it can be stretched, why is it in different language? Gloria Bridget – The requirements in the WSM doesn’t say suggestion, that’s why. It’s a requirement.
Michael Chiki – I speak in favor of the motion. Yesterday I spoke against it. I was worried my Area wouldn’t be here anymore. I sat in my committee and fought against it. When I looked deeper, the point behind the referrals, to help CA grow, I had to change my mind. Or! could stay stubborn and say no, no. I did that way too long. This is controversial, but we are talking about Trustees here. They have a lot of responsibility. It’s important we get the right people so that CA can function and grow and we can be happy and have it work for us. These qualifications for addict trustee to really understand, I think you need to have that much time. It’s important that we have structure. That’s why we have this committee. It’s good, it works.
Wesley Blount – I’d like to make a motion to amend. MOTION: Strike the number 8 and replace with number 10.
Steve – is there a second?
Ian Young – I’ll second that.
Steve Edwards – Wesley, you may speak to your motion.
Wesley Blount – if we don’t raise the time, we have delegates for 4 and trustee for 5. There are fewer trustee delegates and it’s reasonable to ask they have time. I think we are comfortable to say 10 years is reasonable.
Trevor Scheible – l speak against the motion to amend from 8 to 10 years. I think another 15 or 10 years down the road we may be ready for that. Let’s take smaller steps.
Gloria Bridget – I speak against this motion, i cannot tell another person how spiritual they are. I speak against this because there have been people at 5 years become trustee.
Page 47 of 115
Steve Edwards – the motion is now to amend. You are out of order because you are addressing the originai motion.
Gloria Bridget – I speak against the motion to go from 8 to 10.
Steve Edwards – The motion fails with substantial unanimity. Back to the originai motion,
POO – Vinny Martin, my recollection, maybe 2 against the original motion, why are we debating it?
Nicholas Lynn – I speak in favor of the motion. The board worked hard on this. I listened to the debate. I need to be thinking about CA and not the little groups. I have a group I attend where you have to have 8 years to speak. There is a growth and maturity in that meeting and the newcomers love it. I experienced my first TEC, we didn’t choose a trustee for one of the Regions. I have had to make hard decisions this year. I have had to step back and think of CA and not me and not my Area. Only do l hear people with no time telling me time doesn’t mean shit. This is a program of change. I like the word suggestion. We let anyone make tea and put out the literature, says in Concept 9 take great care in choosing our leaders. Protect what we’ve got and grown up. The UK went from 4 meetings to 130 with great care. Let’s trust the process.
Bryan Seid – POO – l believe when we started there was a motion to limit debate.
Steve Edwards – it was ruled out of order.
Tony Drake – Call the question.
Motion: to raise the number of years of continuous sobriety for Trustee candidates from five years to eight years so it reads “A minimum five years of eight years of continued sobriety from cocaine and all other mind-altering substances at the time of the election to the Regional slate” on page 39, number 4 of qualifications of an addict trustees of the WSM.
The motion carries with substantial unanimity. It is 3:25, please return at 3:35.
*****Break*****
Steve Edwards – S&B has 11 more referrals and have taken 4 hours and 3 more committees are to follow. I’m going to assume that we have a quorum and ask S&B to bring it’s next motion. Wait, we have a 5th Concept Statement regarding the last motion.
Earl Henderson – 5th Concept Statement – WSO Trustee – I have yet to debate during this Conference and have tried to concentrate on listening. What I say isn’t as important as what I hear. During that last debate, l didn’t hear some things in the last debate. Quantity does not equate quality. Service from the very beginning will begin to prepare you for service later in recovery. I embrace the spirit and intention of this referral and I agree that CA has come of age. What bothers most in previous motion is that there is a missing word and that is “suggested.’’ A suggestion is really more of a guideline. The way it is written will
Page 48 of 115
be excluding a lot of candidates. Do we want to narrow the field or do we want to embrace as much service as we can. Thank you.
- Referral #4282/4909 TOPIC: To clarify Regional Assembly process and how an Area’s votes are distributed amongst its representatives. Also clarify the voting status of the assembly chairperson. REFERRAL: Please revise page 26 Regional Service Assembly section of the World Service manual. Referral to clarify Regional Assembly process and how an Area’s votes are distributed amongst its representatives. Also clarify the voting status of the Assembly Chairperson. Pease amend page 26 (paragraph under Regional Service assembly) of the World Service Manual that currently reads:
REGIONAL SERVICE ASSEMBLY
A Region should hold a Service Assembly at least once per year, preferably five months prior to the annual World Service Conference. The Regional Service Assembly should be hosted by one Area. Attendance is open to all C.A. members; however, voting is exclusive to those members representing the Region: Trustees residing in the Region, WSC Delegates, and Area Chairpersons. WSC Delegates may carry no more than two votes at the Regional Assembly (one proxy pursuant to WSC voting procedures). Voting agenda should include only the selection of Trustee Candidates pursuant to the procedures outlined herein and proposed locations for future Regional Assemblies. It is suggested that the Regional Assembly adopt the C.A. Manual to govern its proceeding and voting process. The Regional Assembly can then make appropriate modifications.
Michael Chiki – MOTION: To modify the 4lh sentence in section on Page 26 under regional service assembly to read as follows:
REGIONAL SERVICE ASSEMBLY
A Region should hold a Service Assembly at least once per year, preferably five months prior to the annual World Service Conference, The Regional Service Assembly should be hosted by one Area. Attendance is open to all C.A. members; however, voting is exclusive to those members representing the Region: Trustees residing in the Region, WSC Delegates, Alternate Delegates, and Area Chairpersons. WSC Delegate Any of these voting members may carry no more than two votes at the Regional Assembly (one proxy pursuant to WSC voting procedures). Voting agenda should include only the selection of Trustee Candidates pursuant to the procedures outlined herein and proposed locations for future Regional Assemblies. It is suggested that the Regional Assembly adopt the C.A. Manual to govern its proceeding and voting process. The Regional Assembly can then make appropriate modifications.
Second.
Page 49 of 115
Steve Edwards – reads the motion. Wouid you like to speak to your motion? Michael Chiki – not right now.
Steve Edwards – motion carries unanimously.
- Referral #4955 Please insert into the WSM the following language in a new section just before Regional Service Assembly: “Regional Conventions, many regions throughout our fellowship hold a regional convention on a rotating basis once a year. In some instances, the regional service assembly is held in conjunction with these conventions, but not always. The region itself establishes the rotation of the hosting of these conventions and also how the net proceeds are retained/distributed.”
Judith Marinoff – MOTION: To insert in the WSM on page 26 in a new section just before REGIONAL SERVICE ASSEMBLY: Regional Convention: Many regions throughout our fellowship hold a regional convention on a rotating basis once a year. In some instances, the regional service assembly is held in conjunction with these conventions, but not always. The region itself establishes the rotation of the hosting of these conventions and also how the net proceeds are distributed.
Second.
Steve Edwards – reads the motion. Would you like to speak to your motion? Judith Marinoff – not at this time.
Steve Edwards – debate from the floor?
Dan Sadur – Point of information – i need some clarification on this motion. Steve Edwards ~ the Region decides how the proceeds for the Regional convention are distributed.
Bryan Seid – your Region will continue to distribute funds as they have in the past. Earnest Martin – Point of information – if an Area invests its money into a convention and then all the money goes into the Region, then the Area could be left short.
Judith Marinoff – I don’t believe that is correct. A Region doesn’t have a checking account.
Bryan Seid – if an Area is giving money to a Regional Convention, you would have no decision on how that money is distributed. You will have to ask where your money is going and what will happen in the end.
Earnest Martin ~ a new Area could be blindsided and then the in the end the Region gets the money.
Bryan Seid – there is no policy in place now to protect that situation.
Jay Finesilver – speak in favor of the motion. This was requested over a course of years. In the Southwest region, there has been a conscience that 1/3 with host area, 1/3 to World and 1/3 seed money for the next Regional convention. It is up to the conscience of the Region.
Page 50 of 115
Bobbie Harmon – speak in favor of the motion. We thought you might be concerned when net proceeds was mentioned. This is a work in progress. Came about because of an Area that had never hosted a Regional convention. We just wanted information in the Manual regarding Regional conventions.
Tony Drake – Speaks in favor of the motion. This is what exactly happens right now and we are just putting it in the Manual. We are just addressing it when people ask where it is in the Manual
Chris Whybrow – Point of Information – this discusses net proceeds…what is left after expenses, right?
Judith Marinoff – correct.
Rose Jones – Point of Information – isn’t it true that the Region’s don’t hold bank accounts and it is up to the Areas to pass on the monies.
Gloria Bridget – One of the things we do in our Area is after an Area has hosted a convention in our Region, we pass all the money along. We are trying to assist you.
Ian Young – call to question.
Steve Edwards – out of order. Only one person behind you.
Bill Carter – if an Area hosts a convention and they hold a Regional caucus, the proceeds will go to the Region?
Judith Marinoff – no.
Steve Edwards – no further debate?
MOTION: To insert in the WSM on page 26 in a new section just before REGIONAL SERVICE ASSEMBLY; Regional Convention: Many regions throughout our fellowship hold a regional convention on a rotating basis once a year. In some instances, the regional service assembly is held in conjunction with these conventions, but not always. The region itself establishes the rotation of the hosting of these conventions and also how the net proceeds are distributed.
Motion carries unanimously.
- Referral #5056 On page 30 of the WSM, in paragraph 3, change the second sentence to read: The Conference Committee will determine the location of the conference. STRIKING: “which will be within a 50-mile radius of the WSO, unless agreed upon by voting Conference Members. Our fellowship continues to grow and it is no longer necessary to keep it in LA. It would help fellowship finances and growth to move it around LA is expensive and cost prohibitive area, also very pricey for CAWS.
MOTION: To strike the phrase “which will be within a 50 mile radius of the WSO” from Pages 30 and 46, Item #7 of the WSM, so that it will read “The Conference Committee wiil determine the location of the Conference, which will be within a 50 mile radius of the-WSO, unless otherwise agreed upon by voting Conference members. All World Service Conference contracts must be ratified by the CAWSO board and executed by two or more board members and/or Trustees.”
Page 51 of 115
Second.
Steve Edwards – reads motion. Would you like to speak to your motion?
Nick Alexander – yes we would. 1 was thinking about cost when this referral came in to us. I thought more about the spirit behind it. Some people travel 6,000+ miles to be here. This isn’t going to happen next year. But we would tike to have the option to open our options to this new world.
Jeffrey Ushry ~ speak in favor to the motion. We can set up a Conference in any given place in this world, i would love to see what the various Areas spend on travel alone.
Brian Tenenbaum – speaks against the motion. Eventually we will be growing and possibly there will be an office someplace else. But right now, we have an office in Los Angeles. The costs to put this function on is very expensive. To bring equipment, etc to another location would be very costly. AA has a World Service Office in New York and they hold their Conference there.
John Whitaker – Point of information – has this motion been gone through the WSO and other committees to find out if these things are feasible and if the finances in the future are possible. I understand why it is within 50 miles. If WSO has gone along with this, then it means that they have been consulted.
Nick Alexander – they have been consulted. How feasible is it? Yes, it can be done.
Michael Chiki – speaks in favor of the motion. This is a great opportunity for World Service and CA in the future. It really makes us a worldwide fellowship.
Patty Flanagan – passes
Roy Ricord – speaks in favor of the motion. CA is changing and it is imperative that we be able to do things like this move. This is a wonderful proposal and it will do nothing but encourage other growth not only in the US but in the world.
Vinny Martin – Point of Information – feasible? Have you run any economic impact report? Such as San Francisco, Phoenix.
Nick Alexander – this is the first step in moving toward that process.
Susan Bredau – speaks for this motion but 1 cannot. I need to speak against the motion. This puts the burden the coordination what would turn out to be 2 World Service Conventions. Our staff is not ready to do this amount of work.
Rose Jones – speaks against the motion. 1 heard earlier about a satellite office. We are always asking for more 7th tradition money and it costs a lot of money. We were just talking about growing up like another fellowship and they still have their WS Conferences in New York.
Tony Drake – speaks in favor of the motion. To address the cost concern. The purpose us to save us money. Los Angeles is one of the most expensive places to have this conference. We could have it in a less expensive place. Next year,
Page 52 of 115
we are here and negotiating for the year after that It may not make sense to move. If we have it somewhere in the middle of the country, some of the other Areas couid send more delegates and get to experience what World Services is about and they can get the experience of taking back to their Area’s about what goes on here. If we can draw those folks in, it would allow more to attend and we could educate people about World Services and in turn our 7th Traditions will increase. We can get them involved and enthusiastic about World Services.
Russell Sedman – speaks in favor of the motion. This is just opening the door to look at this, it costs us about $10,000 to get us over here and we could put that money into the fellowship. We could possibly suggest and debate in the future.
Dan Sadur – speaks in favor of the motion. This removes the roadblock to consideration. It opens a door that we don’t have to go through but we have a door if we choose to go through it. We could think about asking for bids from Regions to host the Conference, We could decrease the budget by having other Areas or Regions the opportunity to host.
Scott Botz ~ not in theory against the motion. None of the people who spoke to the motion and feasibility have been involved in putting on this Conference. A tremendous amount of work is done by the Office. There is a lot that goes on that we wouldn’t have if it goes on elsewhere. Maybe at some time in future we could afford to do this. I don’t believe it is feasible to move the Conference right now.
Steve Edwards ~ although you said that no one who spoke to the motion serves on the Conference Committee, the current Director of Operations and the current Conference Committee Chair were standing in line behind you.
Mona Ibrahim ~ if we have this Conference outside of California, will this have anything to do with the clause in the Manual that the members of the Board…..will any changes in our Manual or any business conducted outside of California ….
Steve Edwards – there was nothing you just read that has anything to do with geographical location.
Shall we prepare to vote on the main motion?
MOTION: To strike the phrase “which will be within a 50 mile radius of the WSO” from Pages 30 and 46, Item #7 of the WSM, so that it will read “The Conference Committee will determine the location of the Conference, whieh will be-within a 50 mile radius of the WSO, unless otherwise agreed upon by voting Conference members. All World Service Conference contracts must be ratified by the CAWSO board and executed by two or more board members and/or Trustees.”
Motion carries with substantial unanimity.
- Referral # 5173 Create a guideline with timeline on what S&B does
Page 53 of 115
Time line on what S&B does/do they want a handbook? Let’s explain what we do and how we do it. Statement of purpose in manual page 32.
Mike Schelin – MOTION; To replace the statement of purpose of the Structure and
Bylaws committee to the following:
Delete previous statement of purpose entirely and replace with: The Structure and By-Laws Committee is to formulate by-laws, guidelines and structure by which Cocaine Anonymous can operate day-to-day, at Conferences, Regions, Areas and elsewhere around the World. We execute with great diligence the task of being of maximum service to our fellowship, by introducing new verbiage into a comprehensive World Service Manual. Allowing our fellowship to grow and flourish.
Second.
Steve Edwards – reads the motion. Would you like to speak to the motion? Mike Schelin – not at this time,
Dan Santa Maria – Point of information – this committee is normally referred to as Structure.
David Crosland – discussion of the verbiage.
Don Logan – hard time hearing.
Cynthia Cronkhite – friendly amendment to strike the “introducing new” and substituting “incorporating Conference approved”.
MOTION: To replace the statement of purpose of the Structure and Bylaws committee to the following:
Delete previous statement of purpose entirely and replace with: The Structure and By-Laws Committee is to formulate by-laws, guidelines and structure by which Cocaine Anonymous can operate day-to-day, at Conferences, Regions, Areas and elsewhere around the World. We execute with great diligence the task of being of maximum service to our fellowship, by introducing new incorporating Conference approved verbiage into a comprehensive World Service Manual. Allowing our fellowship to grow and flourish.
Dan Sadur ~ Point of Information – why was the timeline struck and not replaced? March 31 we will have these changes incorporated into the WSM and the new language does not address that timeline.
Bryan Seid – the current rules are covered in Standing Rule 16.
Vinny Martin – friendly amendment 1st Sentence after word “committee” insert “on Page 32 of World Service Manual”.
Bryan Seid – no.
Mona Ibrahim – to eliminate the timeline that we can get our changes at the end of the year. We need a timeline and l speak against the motion. Kevin Murphy – I see no more debate. Prepare yourselves to vote.
Motion carries with substantial unanimity.
Page 54 of 115
- Referral #5099 Motion to accept attached response to be submitted to S&B for revision on Page 34, Points 3 & 4 under Conference Officer Point #3 reads: “in the event that the conference officer is unable or unwilling to perform his or her duties, the conference committee shall take a vote of no confidence. If the committee passes that vote and no longer has confidence, #4. reads “In the event the conference chairperson is unable or unwilling to perform his or her duties, the conference committee shall take a vote of no confidence. If the committee passes that vote and no longer has confidence, …”
Khalid King – MOTION: To amend number 3 and 4 under CONFERENCE OFFICERS on Page 33 so that it reads: “In the event that a Conference Officer is unable or unwilling to perform his/her duties, the Conference committee shall take a vote of confidence. If the outcome of the vote determines the committee no longer has confidence, the Conference shall then move to elect a replacement from the Conference…”
Second.
Kevin Murphy -read the motion. Would you like to speak to your motion?
Khalid King – no.
Kevin Murphy – any debate?
Yves White – Point of Information – the way the motion is stated it is talking about 2 points in the book but only talking about Conference Officer (3) and (4) refers to Conference Chair.
Kevin Murphy – is it the intent of the Committee that the language be changed the same in both places.
Bobbie Harmon – yes
Cynthia Cronkhite – still confused. It appears you are taking aware specific reference depending on which you are talking about and what happens to those specific remedies.
Bobbie Harmon – we aren’t changing anything that is there but adding to what is there.
Brian Tenenbaum – Point of Information – I get it on Point 3 but am confused on Point 4. if there is no vote of confidence, is the Vice Chair to take over if this happens in October and he/she will serve until we get to Conference in August. Is that eliminated or still part of the deal?
Bobbie Harmon – In Point 3, this is for when you are at the conference. Point 4 is answering your questions, the Vice Chair will operate by running the committee until the Conference or the Committee can select a new Chair.
Yves White – Motion to refer back to Committee.
Page 55 of 115
Second
Steve Edwards – motion is debatable. Not clear on what the committee is trying to achieve.
Dan Sadur – Speaks against the motion. ! beiieve that someone it can be communicated a dear understanding of the motion.
Yvette Holman – in favor of referring back to Committee. What they are trying to insert doesn’t make it clear.
Bryan Seid – speak against the motion. 1 didn’t hear a lot of opposition with enough conviction to tell me that we need to take it back to Committee and work on it.
Tony Drake ~~ speaks against the motion. The way it is typed here is just a little confusing and if the Committee could take 30 seconds they could clarify and we could move on.
Cynthia Cronkhite – if we put this same language into both paragraphs, if the Conference Chairperson,
Steve Edwards ~ you are debating the merits of the motion.
Cynthia Cronkhite – I don’t beiieve the floor can reach a clear understanding.
Steve Edwards – refer back to Committee motion. We need a count.
Dan Santa Maria ~ Parliamentary inquiry. If referred back to Committee, if they can revise this can they bring this back up.
Steve Edwards – if they can represent to me that they have worked this out, they can bring it back to me and re-present with report.
Please keep your hands up while we count.
Motion to refer back to Committee carries with substantial unanimity.
Revise SR 5(c): Strike 1st sentence: Insert new 2nd sentence: At the conference, a delegate or alternate delegate carrying one or more votes may proxy one vote to another delegate or alternate delegate from the same area or another area within the same region.
- Referral #5144
Steven Freeman – MOTION: To revise SR 5(c): add the following language to the 1st sentence: At the conference, a delegate or alternate delegate carrying one or more votes may proxy one vote to another delegate or alternate delegate from the same area or another area within the same region.
Second.
Page 56 of 115
Steve Edwards – reads the motion. Would you care to speak to your motion?
Steven Freeman – no.
Bryan Seid – it currently reads that a delegate cannot proxy vote into his own Area.
Steve Edwards ~ we are looking at 2007 WSM and we aren’t finding the language that you are referring to in your motion.
Bryan Seid – it looks like it starts in the middle of 5(c).
Steve Edwards – the motion is out of order.
Tony Drake – motion to Reconsider Motion 8 regarding the new Statement of Purpose.
Second.
Tony Drake – there was some concern that some about Standing Rule 16 and it refers the minutes and unfortunately we have lost the timeline.
Steve Edwards – any further debate on the motion to reconsider. I’m giving the Committee a little time here.
Motion to reconsider passes with substantial unanimity.
MOTION: To replace the statement of purpose of the Structure and Bylaws committee to the following:
Delete previous statement of purpose entirely and replace with: The Structure and By-Laws Committee is to formulate by-laws, guidelines and structure by which Cocaine Anonymous can operate day-to-day, at Conferences, Regions, Areas and elsewhere around the World. We execute with great diligence the task of being of maximum service to our fellowship, by introducing-new incorporating Conference approved verbiage into a comprehensive World Service Manual allowing our fellowship to grow and flourish.
Steve Edwards – reread the motion.
Tony Drake – friendly amendment – After the word “World Service Manual” “in the first quarter of the year following the Conference” before the “allowing”.
Bryan Seid – we accept.
MOTION: To replace the statement of purpose of the Structure and Bylaws committee to the following:
Delete previous statement of purpose entirely and replace with:
The Structure and By-Laws Committee is to formulate by-laws, guidelines and structure by which Cocaine Anonymous can operate day-to-day, at Conferences, Regions, Areas and elsewhere around the World. We execute with great diligence the task of being of maximum service to our fellowship, by introducing new incorporating Conference approved verbiage into a comprehensive World Service Manual in the first quarter of the year following the Conference allowing our fellowship to grow and flourish.
Page 57 of 115
Steve Edwards – any further debate on the motion as amended.
Motion carries with minor opposition.
Cynthia Cronkhite – Parliamentary inquiry on Referral #5144, was that ruled out of order by the Chair?
Steve Edwards – yes
Yvette Holman – Point of Order – Referral #5144 – I believe it was not out of order.
We proxy votes within our same area.
Steve Edwards – unfortunately the section of manual that they are revising is not correct.
Bryan Seid – when is dinner on the schedule?
Steve Edwards – agenda states that dinner break is at 6:00.
- Referral #5172
Clarify standing rule 13 that a referral should be sent to the group that it affects.
Bill Burmeier – MOTION: To amend SR 13 on page 36 of the WSM so that it reads “Any motion made “under New Business“…to be effective immediately.
Second.
Vinny Martin – Point of Order – I think we may have the same situation here. Steve Edwards – “to be effective immediately” means that it will go into effect immediately should the motion pass.
Kevin Murphy – same as stated above.
Steve Edwards – reads the motion. Would you like to speak?
Trevor Scheible – speaks highly in favor of the motion. Provides some clarity. Dan Santa Maria – friendly amendment that we strike the “to be effective immediately” so that it would follow our normal course of events.
Bryan Seid – no.
Kathy Jo Rangno – Point of Information – are you saying the way this is written that if a Committee has some housekeeping issues that they want to clean up in the Guidelines, then we would have to write a referral to ourselves?
Bryan Seid – during course of Committee work, you might find erroneous information in someone else’s guidelines. You should create a referral and talk to them and they don’t respond. Then you can bring to the floor.
Kathy Jo Rangno – My own committee and we want to change into our own committee, we see something that needs to be fixed and it is not a referral and is that still allowed.
Steve Edwards – technically you would be asking a committee to be referring something to itself.
Bryan Seid – that was not the intent of the motion.
Dan Santa Maria – speaks against the motion as currently provided. I believe the spirit and intent is well-founded. Troubled by the precedent by the immediate effectiveness of the motion. Motions approved here are effective at the end of the Conference.
Kevin Murphy – read Standing Rule 10.
Provision is already there to have this motion go into effect immediately.
Page 58 of 115
John Whitaker – Point of Information – is there a reason you are requesting it to be done immediately instead of the end of the conference.
Bryan Seid – there is nothing coming up that i am aware of but it is possible.
Cynthia Cronkhite ~ Point of Information – if LCF has a motion which originated in committee, which might be construed to effect the fellowship as a whole, would it then be out of order?
Steve Edwards – I think the answer to the question is yes. The only effect this would have would be on Committee business because the work we do here comes from referrals.
Bryan Seid – In conference guidelines, I have a referral that comes from committee work.
Steve Edwards – they didn’t write referrals to themselves.
Susan Bredau – motion to send back to committee. Second.
Steve Edwards – motion is debatable.
Susan Bredau – there doesn’t seem to have been enough thought on this motion, Steve Edwards – any further discussion. Motion carries.
Bryan Seid – quorum call.
Steve Edwards – need non-voting members to count. Please raise your hands to signify your number of votes and remain in order.
139 votes were in the room by the time the quorum count was taken. We will close the door next time prior to quorum call. Motion to refer to committee still has passed.
Bryan Seid – call for division of the vote.
Steve Edwards – all in favor of referring this to committee, please raise your hand. The motion clearly carries with substantial unanimity. Please remain in order
- Referral #4276 TOPIC: World Service Manual/Committee guideline approval/sign off. Referral: Please amend page 37 (Standing Rule 16) of the World Service manual.
16 MINUTES OF WORLD SERVICE CONFERENCE. The World Service Office will oversee the preparation of the transcripts of Conference session, for delivery to the Conference Committee not later than 90 days following the Conference. The Conference Committee is to prepare and deliver the minutes of the World Service Conference to the World Service Office, 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 for preparing and distributing the minutes in the most expeditious manner possible.
Dan Flores – Motion: to add the following paragraph at the end of Standing Rule 16: Whenever WSC Committee guidelines or other materials are to be distributed to the fellowship, it is the responsibility of the Trustee assigned at the time such
Page 59 of 115
materials are approved to review the materials for accuracy, following approval by the WSC Committee, and forward them to the WSO for distribution. This approval shall only occur after receipt and comparison of the current Conference transcripts by the WSC Committee.
a. Motion to add to page 36 of the WSM at the end of Standing rule 16 as follows: Whenever a WSC Committee guidelines or other materials are to be distributed to the fellowship, it is the responsibility of the Trustee assigned at the time such materials are approved to review the materials for accuracy, following approval by the WSC Committee, and forward them to the WSO for distribution. This approval shall only occur after receipt and prompt comparison of the current Conference transcripts by the applicable WSC Committee.
Second.
Steve Edwards ~ would you like to speak to your motion?
Dan Flores – not at this time.
Dan Santa Maria – Point of information – it is my understanding this Body approves materials.
Steve Edwards – Yes.
Dan Santa Maria – the assigned Trustee is the Trustee who is sitting at the time of the conference.
Steve Edwards – and may not be Trustee when the transcripts are released. Dan Santa Maria – could it say, the acting Trustee at the time? I could offer that as a friendly amendment
Steve Edwards – I have to say I’m tempted to suggest that S&B yield the floor to another committee and continue to work, I’m happy to do that. Michael Higgins ~~ Motion: to table.
Second.
Steve Edwards – The motion is not debatable. The motion carries with substantial unanimity.
PI – Dan Sadur – question on a tabled motion, what is the normal course of events?
Steve Edwards – it gets returned when there is a motion to remove from the table and it passes.
Rose Jones – I would like to know because of the time and all the other committees is it appropriate to have an hour for dinner to stay and get the work done? Second.
Steve Edwards – it will require a motion to suspend the rules to change the agenda.
Bryan Seid – S&B would like to yield the floor.
Steve Edwards – We can adjourn now until 7:15.
NOTE: At this point, the original S&B Report is taken back to committee.
Page 60 of 115
*****BREAK*****
Steve Edwards – Gail to order 7:35 p.m.
We are resuming session in order to hear the PI Report.
Page 61 of 115