Rose G – presents report
CLOSING REPORT C.A. WORLD SERVICE CONFERENCE 2018
LITERATURE, CHIPS, & FORMATS COMMITTEE REPORT
INTRODUCTION AND OPENING COMMENTS
The majority of this committee’s efforts deal with literature that aids the membership in applying and understanding the 12 Steps, Traditions and Concepts, carrying the message to the addict who still suffers. It also supplies valuable information to the professionals with whom our members would most likely come into contact; and that clarifies the nature of addiction to the general public.
Committee Introductions
Chair: Rose G
Vice Chair: Petra L
Co-Secretaries: Ricky W & Justin C
Trustee: Tom P
2ndTrustee: Jason L
Committee Members
Shawn B
Brenda M
Tammy H
Tom P
John H
Matthew R
Justine K
Ronald S
Petra L
Marshal S
Linda M
Carla S
COMMITTEE WORK THAT RESULTED IN MOTIONS
*****
Marshall S presents –
- MOTION: To approve the “1 Week” chip for distribution and make available to the Fellowship.
Seconded.
Trevor S – Wish to debate?
Marshall S – No.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 54 of 128
Tye S – Speak against, might be lowering standards, thinking back to when I was newer, I was excited to push myself to get that one-month chip. Instead of justifying myself and get another one-week chip.
Stu E – I speak in favor, your group can decide, it will not cost the fellowship any money, it’s a great thing.
Rose J – I also speak in favor, I agree with Stu, also for historical facts I had an opportunity to see the older 80s chips, they had a one-week chip.
Henry A – I speak against, although in the end I’m sure I will vote, in my personal experience, laughed when I mentioned we had the 24 hour chips, if we make them we will probably all have them. That’s all I have to say.
Kevin M – I speak emphatically in favor of this motion. When I was new I was trying for three years to get sober, and I came into this program, and that first week was a miracle. I’m sure you remember that first time, that one week was such a miracle. AA doesn’t do this, cause they don’t have this really, but here we have them all ready to go, in your language! We were’nt supposed to, but we didn’t know. We made the molds, we made a mistake. But it wouldn’t be the first time.
Carl R – Against. My group has a lot of new comer chips, they would have to have another chip, it would be extra money, I don’t see us having the extra expense.
Michael C – Speak in favor. The first chip I ever got was a newcomer chip. I lost them a week later, got them back, and then I had to wait a month. I waited that whole month. To put one in the middle of that I would have been a real happy camper. I think its time we do recognize peoples accomplishments as they get to that. Go to a meeting, stand up and get a chip and share to try for the next one.
Delores B – I disagree with the motions, the newcomer chip covers 1-29.
Greg I – Speak in favor, when I first got here 30 days was a very long time, 7 days was a long time. There is no cost.
Seth N – To my understanding that these chips are already in print, do you have one I can look at?
John R – Since when do we get chips for free? I speak against. The first thing I was told when I got there were that these are things I had to earn. I stumbled into a week, I think for progress and traditions, I feel like we are giving stuff away.
Trevor S – This is something I don’t think has ever happened before. One of the Co-Secretaries wants to be part of the debate.
Ruby C – No, I don’t think you’ve ever seen a Co-Secretary leave the dais before to have a voice. I do have a voice, even though I do not have a vote. I am in favor, because chips are a revenue stream for this fellowship. The reality is that very little of the money that goes into the baskets really makes it into the WSO. We need all the revenue stream we can get. If your Area does not agree with this chip, you do not have to purchase it. If your Area thinks this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, order a thousand of them and knock yourself out. Chips and Literature are a revenue stream for this fellowship. There are enough people in favor of using this chipe to produce a revenue stream to help this fellowship.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 55 of 128
Albino K – Against this motion, then there will also be other weeks.
Carol P – After one week, one I knew I had a goal of thirty days, I pushed on. If it isn’t broke, don’t fix it.
Jay F – Undecided, this is a revenue stream issue, we give out chips for the first 29 days of sobriety, then there are less chips being given out.
Maria K – In favor of motion, I don’t feel like I have to speak why. The autonomy of this program of this fellowship and groups, and I speak in favor because it’s this Tradition that needs support. I do not need to prevent everyone else in this room from receiving it.
George M – Against, every day that I don’t use is a miracle. I looked forward to that 30 day chip… like goal posts out there to strive for. I watch people come in now and get 30/newcomer chips, makes it too easy. I can understand the revenue part of it. I speak against.
Bart van der P – I remember we voted for the concept of one-week chip last year, now everyone has had the opportunity to see this chip. I want to call the vote.
Kevin M- Point of Order – I believe it is longstanding rule, you can’t debate and then call the vote.
Trevor S – Call the question is out of order, because there was a debate before.
*****
Audz C – Call the question.
Trevor S – That is in order, and has been seconded.
Clicker 17 vote – for 139 // 11 against. Call the question passed with substantial unanimity
*****
Trevor S – Prepare to vote on the original motion.
Clicker 18 vote – for 113 // 41 against. Passed with substantial unanimity.
*****
Russell S – It can be quite challenging when people are all about and raising their hands, if Trevor calls you as “tall man with hat” those are my notes, apologies for such list keeping, it can be a bit much amidst the bustle.
*****
Justin C – presents –
- MOTION: To approve the creation of the pamphlet, “Honesty, Open-mindedness and Willingness.”
Seconded.
Justin C – Motion is response to Point 12 process.
Trevor S – Any further debate? Seeing none, prepare to vote Clicker 19 vote — for 147 // 7 against. Passes, substantial unanimity *****
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 56 of 128
*****
Petra Ludde – presents motion –
Introduction
The World Service Conference Literature, Chips, and Format (“LCF”) Committee facilitates the expression of our Fellowship’s hope, faith and courage through our literature, chips, and meeting formats.
LCF writes, reviews, edits, submits to the WSC for approval, and assists in the publication of WSC-approved literature and meeting formats. The literature we deal with is of the following types:
- The proposed item will expand the inventory of materials adopted by the Fellowship and aids membership in an understanding and application of the Twelve Steps of Cocaine Anonymous, the Twelve Traditions of Cocaine Anonymous, and the Twelve Concepts of Cocaine Anonymous.
- The proposed item carries the message of C.A. to the addict who still suffers.
- The proposed item supplies valuable information to the professional fields with whom addicts would most likely come in contact.
- The proposed item clarifies the nature of addiction to the general public and Fellowship.
C.A. literature is subject to the C.A. Pamphlet Approval Process, the C.A. Pamphlet Publication Process and the C.A. Book Approval Process, all of which are set forth below. Under the C.A. Pamphlet Approval Process, LCF is responsible for presenting any new literature or substantive changes to existing literature to the Conference for approval. Changes which are not substantive, such as correction of typographical errors, grammar, punctuation and formatting issues, are considered housekeeping matters and may be handled by LCF, working in conjunction with the World Service Office.
LCF also reviews, develops and submits to the WSC for approval all new or redesigned plastic or metal chips. Once approved by the Conference, all chips are prepared and distributed through C.A. World Services.
We welcome input and participation from the Fellowship. Please contact the LCF Chair via the World Service Office or by e-mail at lcf@ca.org.
Organization of the Committee
The LCF Committee consists of a Chairperson, a Vice-Chairperson, two Co-Secretaries, one or more Trustees, one or more members of the World Service Office Board, and delegates and members of the Cocaine Anonymous Fellowship with a willingness and desire to serve. Members attend all committee
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 57 of 128
meetings and assist in the writing, review and solicitation of literature submissions. They work closely with other committee members throughout the year via e-mail and conference calls.
LCF utilizes the Cocaine Anonymous World Service Manual guidelines regarding the WSC Committee officers’ duties, qualifications & selection. In addition, LCF requires that the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson have one full year of service on the WSC Literature, Chips, and Format Committee.
C.A. PAMPHLET APPROVAL PROCESS
Statement of Purpose: The C.A. Pamphlet Approval Process covers pamphlets from the development phase through approval by the World Service Conference. The term “pamphlet” applies to pamphlets, booklets or other publications from 1 to 25 pages in length. It is the spiritual intent of this Process that it be followed in principle and as timely and as expeditiously as possible.
Point 1: The idea for the pamphlet is submitted to the World Service Conference (WSC) Literature, Chips, and Format Committee (LCF), accompanied by a rough draft whenever possible.
Point 2: LCF will review the submitted material pursuant to the guidelines set forth in the World Service Manual.
Point 3: If LCF is in favor of proceeding, it will bring a motion at the next WSC to approve the concept. If LCF does not approve the idea, no further action will be taken (other than responding to any referral(s) involved).
Point 4: The WSC votes on the motion to approve the concept. If the motion passes, it is considered a mandate to LCF to develop a draft and the pamphlet moves to Point 5. If the motion fails, LCF will re-review the concept and decide whether to modify it for re-submission to the WSC or remove it from the process.
Point 5: A subcommittee is formed to actively work together throughout the year on writing the pamphlet. A subcommittee chair is elected to facilitate the process and keep it moving forward. The subcommittee chair will provide the full LCF Committee with regular bi-monthly reports on its progress via e-mail and/or conference calls. If the full LCF Committee determines that insufficient progress is being made, the subcommittee chair may be replaced and/or the pamphlet may be reassigned to another subcommittee. Once the subcommittee has approved a draft, the pamphlet is forwarded to LCF with a signed release form.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 58 of 128
Point 6: The full LCF Committee reviews the draft and may make revisions as needed. If approved by LCF, the pamphlet moves to Point 7. If not approved, LCF will return it to Point 5 or make a motion at the next WSC to remove it from the process.
Point 7: The approved draft is reviewed by the World Service Board of Trustees (WSBT) to ensure that there are no Traditions violations or other concerns that might affect Cocaine Anonymous as a whole. If approved by the WSBT, the pamphlet moves to Point 8. If the WSBT finds problems with the draft, it will provide a list of specific recommendations and the pamphlet returns to Point 6. The WSBT review process should take less than thirty (30) days to complete.
Point 8: Following approval by the WSBT, the pamphlet is promptly transmitted within (10) business days by the LCF Chair to the WSO, with a copy to the WSOB liaison, to arrange for professional editing. Professional editing should take less than thirty (30) days to complete.
Point 9: The professionally edited draft is returned by the WSO to LCF for approval within ten business days of completion of the editing process. LCF will carefully review each of the editor’s revisions solely to insure that the original meaning of the piece has not been changed. This review should be completed within ten (10) business days of receipt. Any edits which are deemed to materially alter the meaning of the piece may be rejected by LCF. Once LCF has approved the edited draft, the pamphlet moves to Point 10.
Point 10:Point 8: The pamphlet is labeled “DRAFT” and distributed to the delegates by the WSO as a draft piece of literature with the legend: “This draft is pending WSC approval. and professional editing. We solicit your feedback.” The draft should be accompanied by instructions regarding where and when to submit feedback. For categorization purposes, feedback should be limited to one of three options: (1) approve the draft as is; (2) refer the draft back to committee with specific comments; or (3) disapprove of the pamphlet project altogether.
Point 11:Point 9: LCF reviews Fellowship feedback. If LCF determines that there are either no changes or only minor revisions needed, it will bring a motion at the next WSC to approve the pamphlet. If significant changes are needed based upon the collective conscience of LCF, the piece returns to Point 6.
Point 12:Point 10: The WSC votes on the motion to approve the pamphlet. If the motion passes, the pamphlet moves to Point 1 of the separate C.A. Pamphlet Publication Process.11. If the motion fails, the pamphlet is considered referred back to LCF at Point 6 unless otherwise directed by the WSC.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 59 of 128
Point 11: Following approval by the WSC, the pamphlet is promptly transmitted within (10) business days by the LCF Chair to the WSO, with a copy to the WSOB liaison, to arrange for professional editing. Professional editing should take less than thirty (30) days to complete.
Point 12: The professionally edited draft is returned by the WSO to LCF for approval within ten (10) business days of completion of the editing process. LCF will carefully review each of the editor’s revisions solely to insure that the original meaning of the piece has not been changed. This review should be completed within ten (10) business days of receipt. Any edits which are deemed to materially alter the meaning of the piece may be rejected by LCF. Once LCF has approved the edited draft, the pamphlet moves to Point 1 of the separate C.A. Pamphlet Publication Process.
C.A. PAMPHLET PUBLICATION PROCESS
Statement of Purpose: As stated in the World Service Manual, the CAWSO Board as a whole shares responsibility for reviewing and publishing all WSO publications. The C.A. Pamphlet Publication Process covers publication of pamphlets following approval by the World Service Conference. The term “pamphlet” applies to pamphlets, booklets or other publications from 1 to 25 pages in length. It is the spiritual intent of this Process that it be followed in principle and as timely and as expeditiously as possible to fulfill our primary purpose, carrying the C.A. message to the addict who still suffers. Since publishing technology and practices are evolving at a rapid pace, the practical application of this process may be revised by agreement between LCF, the WSOB and WSBT.
Point 1: Following Conference approval of a new or revised pamphlet pursuant to Within 10 days of completion of Point 12 of the C.A. Pamphlet Approval Process, the approved piece shall be forwarded to the World Service Office (WSO) by the Literature, Chips, and Format Committee (LCF) Chair. Unless otherwise specified by the WSO, files should be formatted in either pdf or Word format and transmitted via e-mail to the WSO, with a copy to the LCF Trustee. After verifying that the content of the piece complies with the action taken by the Conference, the LCF Trustee shall indicate his or her approval via return e-mail to both the LCF Chair and the WSO.
Point 2: Delivery should be completed within 30 days of the close of the Conference.
Point 3:Point 2: Upon receipt from LCF, the WSO shall arrange for the piece to be published in hard copy and on the website, as appropriate, with the goal being to complete publication in both formats within 90 days following delivery of the piece by LCF. It is suggested that Points 4 and 5 of this process proceed simultaneously in order to meet this timeline. If this 90-day timeline proves unfeasible, the WSO and LCF will determine a mutually agreed alternative timeline.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 60 of 128
Point 4:Point 3: For publication in hard copy, pieces shall be laid out in pamphlet form by WSO staff member, committee volunteer or third-party vendor. Before printing, the layout shall be submitted to the LCF Proofreading Subcommittee for final approval. If there are any errors, the LCF Proofreading Subcommittee will indicate the correction(s) to be made. Once the piece is in its final, correct form, the LCF Chair will authorize the WSO to proceed with publishing the piece in hard copy. The LCF Trustee’s signature indicating approval will also be required before publication.
Point 5:Point 4: For publication on the website, pieces shall be laid out by the CAWSO webmaster, a WSO staff member or a committee volunteer. Before posting to the public portion of the website, the new web content shall be submitted to the LCF Proofreading Subcommittee for final approval. If there are any errors, the LCF Proofreading Subcommittee will indicate the correction(s) to be made. Once the piece is in its final, correct form, the LCF Chair will authorize the WSO to proceed with publishing the piece on the website. The LCF Trustee’s signature indicating approval will also be required before publication.
Point 6:Point 5: The final wording and formatting (i.e., italics, bold type, paragraphing, etc.) of each piece, both in hard copy and on the website, shall be identical to that approved by the Conference. Non-substantive housekeeping issues may be addressed by LCF, working in conjunction with the WSO. If the World Service Office Board, as part of its responsibility for publishing all World Service publications, desires to make substantive changes to any piece of literature (i.e., altering the content in any way from what was approved by the Conference), the issue shall first be taken up with LCF. If LCF and the WSOB cannot reach agreement, the issue shall be brought to the next Conference.
C.A. BOOK APPROVAL PROCESS
Statement of Purpose: The C.A. Book Approval Process applies to books, workbooks or other publications 26 pages or more in length. It is the spiritual intent of this Process that it be followed in principle and as timely and as expeditiously as possible. Since publishing technology and practices are evolving at a rapid pace, the practical application of this process may be revised by agreement between LCF, the WSOB and WSBT.
Point 1: The idea for the book is submitted to the World Service Conference (WSC) Literature, Chips, and Format Committee (LCF), accompanied by a brief description or outline whenever possible.
Point 2: LCF will review the submitted material pursuant to the guidelines set forth in the World Service Manual.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 61 of 12
Point 3: If LCF is in favor of proceeding, it will bring a motion at the next WSC to approve the concept. The motion should include a brief outline or table of contents. If LCF does not approve the idea, no further action will be taken (other than responding to any referral(s) involved).
Point 4: The WSC votes on the motion to approve the concept. If the motion passes, it is considered a mandate to LCF to develop a draft and the book moves to Point 5. If the motion fails, LCF will re-review the concept and decide whether to modify it for re-submission to the WSC or remove it from the process.
Point 5: A subcommittee is formed to actively work together on the book throughout the year. A subcommittee chair is elected to facilitate the process and keep it moving forward. The subcommittee chair will provide the full LCF Committee with regular bi-monthly reports on its progress via e-mail and/or conference calls. If the full LCF Committee determines that insufficient progress is being made, the subcommittee chair may be replaced and/or the book will be reassigned to another subcommittee.
Point 6: If input from members of the Fellowship is required in order to complete the book, the subcommittee shall immediately prepare a flyer for distribution. The flyer should contain a summary of the project, a detailed description of the input requested (i.e., suggested topics to be addressed, number of words or pages, etc.), a submission deadline, instructions for sending the submission to the WSO, and a release form. Whenever possible, it is preferable that the flyer be approved by the Conference prior to distribution, but if this would cause a delay of 60 days or more, Conference approval is not required but the flyer should be approved by the LCF Trustee.
Point 7: All Fellowship input will be reviewed by the committee anonymously. Each submission is forwarded by the WSO to the LCF Trustee or such other individual as may be designated by LCF (the “designee”). The designee removes any information that might identify the author, assigns a reference number to each submission and forwards it to the subcommittee for review. The designee maintains a confidential record of all submissions that includes the assigned reference number and the author’s name and contact information. The designee also ensures that each submission is accompanied by a properly executed release form.
Point 8: The subcommittee reviews all submissions as they are received from the designee and determines by group conscience which submissions will be included in the book. If a subcommittee member recognizes the author of a submission and believes he or she cannot be impartial, he or she should abstain from voting on that particular submission.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 62 of 128
Point 9: An initial rough edit of the book will be performed by subcommittee members. Although correcting spelling, grammar and punctuation is generally desirable, the subcommittee may opt in favor of preserving the author’s voice and the original flavor of the submission. Once the subcommittee has approved a draft, the book is forwarded to LCF.
Point 10: The full LCF Committee reviews the draft and may make revisions as needed. If approved by LCF, the book moves to Point 11. If not approved, LCF will return it to the subcommittee for revision, reassign it to a new subcommittee, or make a motion at the next WSC to remove it from the process. If the committee believes it is necessary to make substantive changes to the outline or table of contents initially approved by the Conference, the new book structure should be submitted to the Conference for approval before proceeding.
Point 11: The approved draft is reviewed by the World Service Board of Trustees (WSBT) to ensure that there are no Traditions violations or other concerns that might affect Cocaine Anonymous as a whole. If approved by the WSBT, the book moves to Point 12. If the WSBT finds problems with the draft, it will provide a list of specific recommendations and the book returns to Point 9. The WSBT review process should take less than ninety (90) days to complete.
Point 12: Following approval by the WSBT, the book is promptly transmitted within (10) business days by the LCF Chair to the WSO, with a copy to the WSOB liaison, to arrange for professional editing. Professional editing should take less than ninety (90) days to complete.
Point 13: The professionally edited draft is returned by the WSO to LCF for approval within ten (10) business days of completion of the editing process. LCF will carefully review each of the editor’s revisions to insure that they do not change the meaning of the original language. This review should be completed within ninety (90) days of receipt. Any edits which are deemed to materially alter the meaning of the piece may be rejected by LCF. Once LCF has approved the edited draft, the book moves to Point 14.
Point 14: The book is delivered by the WSO to a professional book designer or typesetter, who will prepare the book for printing. This process should be completed within ninety (90) days of LCF’s approval of the edited draft in Point 13.
Point 15: Once the book is in electronic form and ready to be printed, a copy of the proof is returned to LCF to review it for accuracy. Extreme care should be taken to ensure
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 63 of 128
that the text does not differ from the draft approved in Point 13. In addition to proofreading for content, all formatting (including italics and bold fonts, as well as paragraphing) is double-checked. The WSO will serve as the intermediary between LCF and the third-party vendor, relaying all necessary corrections and updated drafts as expeditiously as possible. The WSO may also enlist other volunteers to assist with the proofreading process. Once LCF has approved the proof, the book moves to Point 16.
Point 16: The book is delivered by the WSO to the printer. Depending on the number of galleys available from the printer, one or more hard copies of the book are delivered to a proofreading subcommittee comprised of members of the WSOB, WSO staff and/or LCF selected by the WSOB based on their familiarity with the source material, proofreading skill and ability to complete the project in an expeditious manner. . Here again, extreme care should be taken to ensure that the text does not differ from the draft approved in Point 13. In addition to proofreading for content, all formatting (including italics and bold fonts, as well as paragraphing) is double-checked. The proofreading subcommittee shall prepare and submit a list of any necessary corrections within a reasonable time frame to be determined by the WSO.
Point 17: The WSO will then obtain and forward corrected proofs to the proofreading subcommittee. This process will be repeated as many times as necessary. Once the piece is in its final, correct form, the WSO will proceed with publishing the book. The LCF Trustee’s signature indicating approval will also be required before publication.
Seconded.
Trevor S – As you guys were advised this past at the start of this Conference, this is one of the long motions I would really rather not read into the mic. Has this document been changed since it was been submitted for SR14?
Petra Ludde – No.
Trevor Sceible – Any objections to not reading this into the mic at this time? Seeing none. Is there any debate? Prepare to vote.
Clicker 20 vote – for 153 // 0 against, motion passed *****
LCF 2018-11 From Rose G. Texas Area/LCF (In-Conference)
To approve the new Chip Approval Process, for insertion in the C.A. World Service Literature, Chips, and Formats Committee Guidelines following the C.A. Book Approval Process.
*****
Matthew Reynolds presented Motion
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 64 of 128
- MOTION: To approve the new Chip Approval Process, for insertion in the C.A. World Service Literature, Chips, and Formats Committee Guidelines following the C.A. Book Approval Process.
C.A. CHIP APPROVAL PROCESS
Statement of Purpose: The C.A. Chip Approval Process covers chips, coins and medallions from the development phase through approval by the World Service Conference. The term “chip” applies to plastic and metal chips, medallions and coins. It is the spiritual intent of this Process that it be followed in principle and as timely and as expeditiously as possible. The practical application of this process may be revised by agreement between LCF, the WSOB and WSBT.
Point 1: The idea for the new or redesigned chip is submitted to the World Service Conference (WSC) Literature, Chips, and Format Committee (LCF), accompanied by a proposed design whenever possible. Ideally, the proposed design would include wording and artwork for both sides of the chip as well as any suggestions regarding the proposed size, color and material.
Point 2: LCF will review the submitted material pursuant to the guidelines set forth in the World Service Manual.
Point 3: If LCF is in favor of proceeding, it will bring a motion at the next WSC to approve the concept. If LCF does not approve the idea, no further action will be taken (other than responding to any referral(s) involved).
Point 4: The WSC votes on the motion to approve the concept. If the motion passes, it is considered a mandate to LCF to develop the chip and the concept moves to Point 5. If the motion fails, LCF will re-review the concept and decide whether to modify it for re-submission to the WSC or remove it from the process.
Point 5: A subcommittee is formed to actively work together throughout the year on designing the chip. The design should include wording and artwork for both sides of the chip, as well as the proposed size, color and material. A subcommittee chair is elected to facilitate the process and keep it moving forward. The subcommittee chair will provide the full LCF Committee with regular bi-monthly reports on its progress via e-mail and/or conference calls. If the full LCF Committee determines that insufficient progress is being made, the subcommittee chair may be replaced and/or the chip may be reassigned to another subcommittee. Once the subcommittee has approved a design, the chip is forwarded to LCF with a signed release form.
Point 6: The full LCF Committee reviews the chip design and may make revisions as needed. If approved by LCF, the chip moves to Point 7. If not approved, LCF
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 65 of 128
will return it to Point 5 or make a motion at the next WSC to remove it from the process.
Point 7: The approved chip design is reviewed by the World Service Board of Trustees (WSBT) to ensure that there are no Traditions violations or other concerns that might affect Cocaine Anonymous as a whole. If approved by the WSBT, the chip design moves to Point 8. If the WSBT finds problems with the design, it will provide a list of specific recommendations and the chip returns to Point 6. The WSBT review process should take less than thirty (30) days to complete.
Point 8: The chip design is labeled “DRAFT” and distributed to the delegates by the WSO with the legend: “This design is pending WSC approval. We solicit your feedback.” The draft design should be accompanied by instructions regarding where and when to submit feedback. For categorization purposes, feedback should be limited to one of three options: (1) approve the design as is; (2) refer the design back to committee with specific comments; or (3) disapprove of the chip project altogether.
Point 9: LCF reviews Fellowship feedback. If LCF determines that there are either no changes or only minor revisions needed, it will bring a motion at the next WSC to approve the chip design and proceed with production. If significant changes are needed based upon the collective conscience of LCF, the chip design returns to Point 6.
The WSC votes on the motion to approve the chip design and proceed with production. If the motion fails, the chip is considered referred back to LCF at Point 6 unless otherwise directed by the WSC. If the motion passes, the chip moves to the World Service Office for production.
Seconded.
Trevor S – Asking for approval to waive reading of motion into the mic, approved.
Seeing no discussion of the motion, prepare to vote. Clicker 21 vote- for 139 // 2 against, motion passes *****
REFERRALS THAT RESULTED IN MOTIONS
- LCF 2018-1: From David S. Scotland Area (Pre-Conference)
I would like to make a referral for a Public Information pamphlet to be considered, to be formed to display for the fellowship to give information on what is involved within the Public Information committee “what they do and what they don’t do” I feel this would be helpful to our members and encourage other new or old members to be encouraged to help carry the message to the public at large.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 66 of 128
LCF 2018-8 From Caroline H. CAUK Area (In-Conference)
The PI Pamphlet ‘A Message to Professionals’ to be adopted, included in pamphlet inventory and produced so it is available across the fellowship.
*****
Justine K made motion —
a. MOTION: (Combined Response) To approve the concept of creating a Public Information Pamphlet in accordance with the LCF Pamphlet Approval Process.
Seconded.
Trevor S – Any debate from the floor?
Jason L – Is this the ‘message to the professionals’ pamphlet?
Jason L – Why is a pamphlet entitled ‘message to professionals,’ would be created to go on a literature rack intended for the members?
Justine K – We have open meetings, where professionals are welcome to join.
Stuart J – I am looking at the LCF guidelines, and actually it may acuse a conflict, as it does not align with what we are trying to do with our professionals. Obviously, I’m speaking in favor, it might not be that they decide not to take it to the literature rack, and it might just be used by the PI committee and their outreach to the professionals.
Stu E – In favor, as a professional that has gone to various conferences in the past, when I walked past a booth or table, I was more inclined to grab a pamphlet rather than a piece of paper.
Trevor S – Is there any further debate from the floor? Seeing none, prepare to vote. Clicker 22 vote for 140 // 12 against, motion passes with substantial unanimity *****
- LCF 2018-7 From Chris W. Orange County Area (Pre-Conference)
We would like to submit this for new Pamphlet H & I world Services sub-committee “LifeLine ”
*****
Johnathan Havens– presents motion –
a. MOTION: To approve the concept of creating an H&I Pamphlet “Lifeline” in accordance with the LCF Pamphlet Approval Process
Seconded.
Trevor S – Does the committee wish to debate…. Floor? Seeing none, prepare to vote.
Clicker 23 vote – for 145 // 5 against. Motion passes.
*****
- LCF 2018-14 From Justin C. Florida Area (In-Conference) Create a “Suggested” Business meeting format.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 67 of 128
*****
Shawn Bradford – presents motion
a. MOTION: To create a “Suggested Group Business Meeting Format”
Seconded.
Trevor S – Any debate?
Stu E – Where’s the format?
Trevor S – It is suggested.
Clicker Vote 24 — 133 for// 8 against, motion passed
*****
REFERRALS OR ITEMS REFERRED TO OTHER COMMITTEES; WORLD SERVICE OFFICE, OR BOARD OF TRUSTEES
- LCF 2018-4 From Matt S. UK Area (Pre-Conference)
Following a recent experience in supporting a local meeting to address conduct of a member which was effecting CA as a whole I had cause to try and seek out literature regarding personal conduct issued by WSC. I was unable to find any and utilised the principles applied in AA guidelines regards personal conduct to assist the meeting in convening a conscience to resolve the matter. Consequently our district (Sussex) has set up an ad hoc committee to develop some local literature and guidelines. I feel anything which is developed within district must be supported by guidance consistent across our fellowship and request the WSC discharge their duty to its members in looking at this. We are looking at three pieces of literature locally; a card for the meeting table, a reading for meetings and guidance regards how members and group service committees can support the still suffering who’s struggle might manifest in problematic behavior and where necessary if all else fails discharge their duty to uphold our traditions and keep our meetings a safe place to carry the CA message of hope and recovery. I would request the LCF committee investigate the possibility of three pieces of literature in a similar vein for the fellowship as a whole to be made available to every meeting should their conscience wish it or the need arise. I am unable to attach our districts most recent draughts due to the file size but would be happy to forward our draughts via email to any members. I would stress these are a work in progress which we are liaising with our Area chair regards for further experience and guidance.
RESPONSE: Thank you for your referral. Materials suggested in this referral are outside the scope of the LCF Committee. Therefore, we have forwarded your referral to the WSBT. It is suggested that you continue to exercise your group’s autonomy and follow your group’s conscience.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 68 of 128
REFERRALS THAT DID NOT RESULT IN MOTIONS
- LCF 2018-6 From Hayward H. CALA Area (Pre-Conference)
Remove the following AA readings from all suggested CA meeting formats “A vision for you”, “The promises”
RESPONSE: Thank you for your referral. Our formats are meant to be suggestive only. Each group is autonomous and may choose to incorporate any conference approved readings into its own meeting structure.
- LCF 2018-12 From Linda M, Quebec Area (In-Conference)
To create a book or a website that tells the history of CA from the beginning, in conjunction with the Archive Committee.
RESPONSE: Thank you for your referral. We understand that Archives is currently undertaking this project.
- LCF 2018-13 From Justin C. Florida Area (In-Conference) Create a pamphlet, “The 12 Concepts”
RESPONSE: Thank you for your referral, we are currently working on a pamphlet which answers your referral.
- LCF 2018-9 To: the 2018 WSCFROM: Susan B/Online Service Area Member RE: Recognition and support of the Online Service Area as it relates to C.A. as a whole Dear C.A. WSC, Online meetings began in 1997 in response to requests from suffering addicts. The Online Service Area was formed and ratified by this conference in 2000 to continue carrying the C.A. message of recovery to those who do not have access to face-2-face meetings. We are a touchstone to C.A. for the homebound, disabled (many meeting locations do not have wheelchair access), those traveling for business, recovering from surgery, and a dedicated group that just love our Fellowship and participating in their recovery. The OSA attracts many newcomers and provides help and hope to those who are afraid to attend face-2-face meetings. Online support has given them the opportunity to feel safe in embracing C.A. as a way of life. The Online Service Area is as much a part of the lifeblood of C.A. as Hithe challenges we face are many as we are spread out all over the globe. One of the biggest challenges we have is the support and recognition of C.A. as a whole! It is news to many of our members that C.A. even has online meetings. By example I refer to the following: •Yes, You Can Start a C.A. Meeting pamphlet –No mention of online meetings. World Service Manual –no mention of online C.A. meetings Public Information – Repeated attempts to coordinate outreach have been to no avail. MOTION: That this body
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 69 of 128
recognize the OSA and the role it plays in its approved literature, service structure, and all public information materials generated by the WSC PI Committee. Thank you. IL&S, Susan B.
RESPONSE: Thank you for your referral. The function of ca.org should satisfy this concern. C.A. literature does not promote any group, or other service area above another.
NEW COMMITTEE STRUCTURE AS OF THIS CONFERENCE
Chair – Justin C, howfreedoyouwanttobe@yahoo.com, 863-510-4350
Vice-Chair – Ricky W, ricky_meyler@hotmail.co.uk, +44-7477633365
Co-Secretary – Linda M, ca.lindam@gmail.com, 514-758-1944
Co-Secretary – Tammy H, hokansontammy@gmail.com, 602-574-3234
Trustee – Tom P, prst@ca.org, 719-648-2482
2nd Trustee – Jason L, tal1@ca.org, +44-7792063165
Members:
Shawn B, princessbradford57@gmail.com, 661-860-8507
John H, johnhunter@outlook.com, 949-500-7286
Justine K, justinekite@hotmail.uk.com, +44-7736691352
Petra L, petramonster.in.ca@gmail.com, 604-928-2998
Brenda M, bmorrow49@gmail.com, 567-694-0403
Tom P, prst@ca.org, 719-648-2482
Matthew R, kotu2054@gmail.com, 213-999-0914
Ronald S, 1015frenchie@twc.com, 414-837-8162
Carla S, carla@cestalent.com, 818-903-3396
Marshal S, shibby959@gmail.com, 360-843-9768
CLOSING COMMENTS
Our LCF Committee has made great strides throughout the year. We have worked on fifteen referrals throughout 2018. The committee brought to the WSC the Chip approval process, updates to the CA Pamphlet Approval & Publication Process, the 1 Week chip and HOW pamphlet. We have six new members which jumped right into our breakout sessions and started working on projects.
There are referrals that we continue to work on. The 12 Concepts Inventory has now turned over to Rose G. The “12 Step Companion” has been taken over by Elizabeth S. and she is ready to run
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 70 of 128
with it. “In the Light of our Experience” (C.A. 12 & 12 book) did have a pause in its creation but one of our new members Matthew R has stepped up and is ready to take the lead. The 12 Traditions and Concepts Illustrated is still in progress with Ricky W. as the lead. The committee came together to advance “The C.A. Group” pamphlet with Tammy H. leading. Justine K. continues to trudge forward with “Thus We Grow Daily Principles.”
It has been an honor to be the LCF chair for the past two years and to pass the torch to Justin C. The love and gratitude of each committee members working on these multiple projects make me proud to be a part of LCF. Their effortless, selfless work to carry this message is absolutely amazing. Thank you so much for allowing me to be of service.
Respectfully Submitted:
Rose G
Trevor S – Any questions, please line up at the mics.
Dawn M – Thank you, LCF. I just wanted to go to a referral from the UK that you have referred to WSBT saying it is outside the scope of LCF – it is a personal conduct statement, that the area that I represent submitted. I know those members have spent a very long time to bring up these materials… the Area supports the information that comes from the Conference, and I’m sure WSBT will ensure that it is not dead in the water, that it has been put aside with other PI information passing on the referral that would be considered within Tradition 10, and or 3, and to hear what the reason why.
Tom P – I think the response might be misleading, the referral asked for three different items, in order to gain some clarity, we referred it to WSBT, to modify within the WSM or a pamphlet, the other items were not things that LCF deals with, such as signage. We thought it might be best to get some direction from the WSBT before going forward.
Susan B – I have no vote, and thus cannot make a motion, but my discussion was in support of a pamphlet called ‘You can start an online meeting’ or the OSA to help members understand what the OSA is and what we do. I cannot make that motion, but I would like to ask your committee to make that motion to accept the concept of that pamphlet.
Rose G – It seemed as though every pamphlet would have to have a notation that brought up the existence of the OSA, which we do not do, but now it seems as though you were referring to a pamphlet similar to how to start a ca meeting that would be for the OSA.
Justin C – Please submit a referral.
Susan B – I made broader strokes, to have creative minds come up with ideas on how to include the OSA.
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 71 of 128
Justin C – In the immensity of the referral that message may have been lost on us in session. If you would like to submit a referral we would be able to work on it during the rest of the year, properly submitted.
Jackie R – Now that the one week chip has been approved, how soon before it is available for purchase?
Rose G – Immediately
Sarah T – I would like to say I am aware that you have a lot of work done, could you please advise at what point the historical referrals such as the working step guide, etc, will be completed… I would like to know what point they are at, at this moment.
Rose G – They all have leads, and the point system, they’re about point 5 to 7 of our process, I’ve stated they have been started.
Sarah T – Can we state that later for clarification.
Stuart J – Can anyone make a motion?
Trevor S – They cannot unless they have a vote.
Henry A – I’m curious about the 12 Traditions Book, always had great trepidation about this, I’m interested in hearing about this. Can you tell me about the progress and what we are doing with that subcommittee and what is being built?
Rose G – There was a long pause, but our new incoming delegates has been able to take the lead and worked with.
Tom P – Relative to the 12 & 12, there is a significant amount of information, and it has been picked up, and it is about ¾ of the way done. Our original lead was detained.
Trevor S – You are free to join/approach the committee later.
Joan – process for prioritizing projects? Some of these projects seem to linger.
Rose G – Yes, the books take a lot longer than the pamphlet, up to 5/10 years to complete. We have leads, and they drop off and we have subcommittees, and they are spreading out within the Areas, we are working together. One of our projects ended up being on hold all year, and the break out session resulted in a lot of work to be done, and now its 75%, We are trudging forward with them.
Jean Pierre S – Rose, I will talk slowly, with the heart. We have seven chair coming from 7 countries, as a result we start a third meeting in Russia. Can we explain why SR14 – 2018 – 9 did not make a motion?
Rose G – We answered that question with Susan, we did not read it as to say how to create a pamphlet to start an online meeting, and instead understood that it was to be implemented on each literature.
Anne M – We carry the message through literature. Is there a sub -committee that updates these pamphlets?
Rose G – No. Good idea.
Trevor S – Seeing no more questions, join me in thanking the committee. 15 minute BREAK – next up Conference Committee.
————————————————————————————————————-
Approved – Redacted Conference 2018 Day 4 Daily Minutes Page 72 of 128