|
02/05/96 Elaine Johnson letter to "Bureau Contacts": Solicitation for subsidies for International Convention [PDF Reproduction of the 02/05/96 Solicitation Letter] February 5, 1996 To: Bureau Contacts  Thank you for your interest in hosting our 2005 International Convention of Alcoholics Anonymous. As you are aware from our history, this event just keeps growing in magnitude. As this event continues to grow, so do the pressures to keep it affordable to our Fellowship while maintaining a high quality of experience for everyone. For your information, when you submit your bid to the full committee on April 20, 1996 in New York City, a limited discussion of financial considerations will be part of the committee's deliberations. We ask you not to dwell on that aspect during your presentation as this remains just one of the many factors we look at in selecting our finalist cities. As we do not wish to put our local delegates in the position of suggesting our negotiating on the Board's behalf, any questions or conversations relating to financial considerations must be directed to and through out professional consultant, Gregg H. Talley (809) 845-7220 or Valarie Alcoholics Anonymous Staff Convention Coordinator (212) 870-3119. A.A. like other groups of this size, has been offered in the past: reduced or complimentary facility rentals, facility operation subsidization, transportation subsidization, production expense subsidization, housing/registration subsidization and city support for services such as fire / EMT and trash removal. Other creative proposals have also been previously offered. We appreciate your continued interest and support of our event. Please contact us with any questions or concerns this raises. We will share with all of you any clarifications that may be requested throughout the process. Sincerely, /signed - Elaine M. Johnson/ Elaine M. Johnson, Ph.D. Chairperson Trustees International Conventions Committee EJ:cb |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
04/21/98: GSC Final Report on Income and Expenses of 1995 San Diego International Convetion
 The General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous Inc.
|
04/13/97 Report to the 47th GSC about cash incentives presented by Elaine Johnson, chairperson. [PDF Reproduction of the 04/13/97 GSC Report page 37] April 13-19, 1997 47th (1997) General Service Conference Report, Page 37  Starting July, and continuing through 1997, there was extensive correspondence and sharing regarding A.A.'s policy of accepting financial/cash incentives to offset expenses of International Conventions. At the request of this committee and with the agreement of the General Service Board, the following was the topic at the February 1997 Board Weekend Sharing Session: "Board policy regarding financial/cash incentives including monetary subsides, in-kind subsides, rebates, etc. in connection with bids to host International Conventions." Historical information and research about site-selection procedures and past financial/cash incentives was shared with committee members. At their February 1997 meeting, the committee referred consideration of A.A.'s policy of accepting financial/cash incentives to offset expenses of International Conventions to the February 1997 meeting of the trustees' Finance Committee and the 1997 Conference Finance Committee
Because of the increasing complexity and size of International Conventions, the committee suggested that the trustees' Finance Committee consider describing in greater detail discounts, rebates and cash inducements of individual cost items of International Conventions in future financial statements. Elaine Johnson Ph.D. Chairperson
|
Up to ≈ Nov 1997-Gay G. Timeline leading up to the Minority Report on Cash Incentives
HISTORICAL EVENTS LEADING UP TO WRITING THE
 March '96 - I received a telephone call from the Chairman of the Atlanta Bid Committee for the international Convention - year 2005. He had heard that one of the reasons that Atlanta had not gotten the bid in year 2000 was that Minneapolis/St. Paul had had a cash incentive in their bid of $100,000. He wanted to know if Atlanta had to offer a cash incentive to be eligible for the International 2005 bid. I was Southeast Regional Trustee and Chairman of the Alcoholics Anonymous World Services at the time. At the March '96 meeting of the AAWS Corp. Board, I asked to speak to George Dorsey, Manager of the General Service Office and Gary Glynn, Treasurer of the General Service Board. Don Meuer, Comptroller, was called in for the meeting. At the meeting I was told there was a $100,000 cash incentive involved in the bid for Minneapolis/St. Paul. I also learned at that meeting that there had been an exchange of cash monies with San Diego in the amount of $250,000 - that figure would have been higher had our numbers in attendance been higher. The money had been deposited in a GSO Bank Account. Details of the final contract for both San Diego and Minneapolis/St. Paul are in the Minority Report. Upon returning home, I called several key people that would have been involved with negotiation of both San Diego and Minneapolis/St. Paul. I contacted several Board Members, past Board Members and Chairpersons, past Committee Chairpersons and past GSO Managers - none knew of the cash incentives for the Internationals. At the April '96 Conference, bids were taken for International 2005 - Toronto had a cash incentive in their bid of $600,000 - St. Louis also had a smaller cash incentive. There was some discussion of cash incentives but the discussion was at a minimum. At the Board Meeting in July '96, I brought the information on the cash incentives before the General Service Board. It was discussed - there was a strong minority of 7 out of 20 (present) Trustees against the cash incentive. At that meeting it was agreed that the Regional Trustee's would take the discussion back to our Regions and report that there would be an Agenda Item generated by the General Service Board for the 1997 General Service Conference for discussion and debate on cash incentives. At the October '96 General Service Board Meeting the generation of an Agenda Item was gone - no information was available as to the Agenda Item to be generated by the Board. I could not find out what had happened. Instead of an Agenda Item, there was going to be a sharing session at the January '97 General Service Board Meeting. The Sharing Session would have a Pro and Con Presentation on the acceptance of cash money for the International Conventions. At that meeting I learned that several Trustee's had not reported the cash incentive situation in their Regions. Toronto had been selected for the International 2005 - the $600,000 cash incentive had been renegotiated on paper!
|
12/05/97 Cover Letter -Gay G's Minority Report on Cash Incentives International Conventions
 December 05, 1997 To: General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous ATTN: Mr. Gary Glynn, Chairperson 1112 Park Avenue #3B New York, New York 10128
Dear General Service Board,
Enclosed is a Minority Report addressed to each of you. It is being filed due to the grave concern many of us have regarding the actual monies paid to Alcoholics Anonymous from an outside source in 1995 (San Diego) and the proposed payment of monies due to be received in the year 2000 (Minneapolis/St. Paul). I appreciate your time and energy and thank you in advance for your diligent and visionary service to Alcoholics Anonymous. Respectfully Submitted, [signed] Gay G~ Past Southeast Regional Trustee
|
12/05/97 Page 1 Gay G's (Trustee) Minority Report on Cash Incentives International Conventions
This document is currently unavailable. The content is to the left and also in the PDF reproduction file. Concept VAll minorities "should be encouraged to file a minority report whenever they feel a majority to be in considerable error. And when a minority considers an issue to be such a grave one that a mistaken decision could seriously affect A.A. as a whole, it should charge itself with the actual duty of presenting a minority report to the Conference." Concept IX"When such an occasional situation arises, and something very vital is at stake, it is always the duty of leadership, even when a small minority, to take a stand against the storm using its every ability of authority and persuasion to effect a change." The basis for this minority report is the actual acceptance of cash monies from San Diego in the amount of$250,000 (1995 International Convention) and the proposed cash monies of $100,000 from Minneapolis/St. Paul to be paid to A.A. 45 days after the final A.A. meeting (2000 International Convention). The minority view is that it is against our basic principle of self-support and a belief that this will seriously affect A.A. as a whole. This minority report is sectioned in three parts: 1.) Reference material from A.A. Literature regarding our money principles 2.) Facts regarding "cash incentives" for »San Diego (International Convention 1995) and »Minneapolis/St. Paul (International Convention 2000) and 3.) Solutions
(1) The following references come from the "A.A. Service Manual" and the pamphlet "A Tradition. How it Developed" the section on "Money" (What led up to the writing of Tradition Seven). "A.A. Service Manual", page 41 .Re: self-support
"Finally we saw that for the long pull outside money could really ruin us. At this point, that had been just an idea or general policy crystallized firmly into an A.A. tradition. We saw that we must sacrifice the quick, nearby advantage for long-term safety." Pamphlet - AA Tradition. How it Developed by Bill W. - section on Money" (What led up to the writing of Tradition Seven) Pages 23-30.
"That the use of money in AA is a matter of the gravest importance. Where its use ends and its misuse begins is the point we should vigilantly watch."
|
12/05/97 Page 2 Gay G's (Trustee) Minority Report on Cash Incentives International Conventions
 Page 2 "Now what about donations or payments to A.A. from outside sources? There was a time some years ago when we desperately needed a little outside aid. This we received. But times have changed. Alcoholics Anonymous now has thousands of members whose combined earning each year amount to untold millions of dollars. We are no longer poor. We can, and we should pay our own way."
"And further The Alcoholic Foundation will accept no earning which may be tendered from any commercial source. A.A. has nothing to sell: that we all wish to avoid even the suggestion of commerce, and that in any case A.A. generally speaking, is now self-supporting." "To my mind, this is a decision of enormous importance to our future - a very long step in the right direction. When such an attitude about money becomes universal through A.A., we shall have finally steered clear of that golden, alluring, but very treacherous reef called Materialism." "In the years that lie just ahead Alcoholics Anonymous faces a supreme test - the great ordeal of its own prosperity and success. I think it will prove the greatest trial of all. Can we but weather that, the waves of time and circumstances may beat upon us in vain. Our destiny will be secure!" (2) Facts regarding International Conventions 1995 and 2000. The following information comes from History of Financial Incentives and the background information on A.A. International Conventions Financial History. These two references were compiled and distributed by the General Service Office. In the International Convention Trustees Committee background material on the "cash incentive" issue, there were two letters from the Manager of the General Service Office to the Montreal Convention & Tourism Bureau and the Minister of "Affaires Sociales", Quebec in 1983 and 1984 stating that we do not "accept funds directly from an outside source" and that "it is essential that these monies be distributed by a third party." There wasn't any information from 1984 until the background material jumped to the year 1988 and the San Diego City Council setting a new precedent and deciding to give the financial incentive ($300,000) to the Fellowship of A.A. There was discussion on the '97 General Service Conference floor as to whether we had solicited monies from San Diego but information was misleading and the correct series of events were not presented as requested at the microphone by a Trustee. According to the information distributed by G.S.O. on The History of Financial Incentives and the Trustee's International Convention Committee background information A.A. International Conventions Financial History given to members of the Trustee International Convention Committee - the events were as follows:
|
12/05/97 Page 3 Gay G's (Trustee) Minority Report on Cash Incentives International Conventions
This document is currently unavailable. The content is to the left and also in the PDF reproduction file. Page 3 1. "The local A.A. Bid Committee approached the city of San Diego and requested financial assistance in the amount of $300,000 to offset what were anticipated to be unusually high transportation costs if the Convention were to be held in San Diego. A San Diego A.A. group brought the situation to the attention of the General Service Board and it was considered by the trustees' IC/RF committee at the July '88 GSB Meeting. The committee reported that it would 'express its concerns to the San Diego/Imperial County Area Assembly about the inappropriate mechanism used by their Bid Committee, which involved A.A. in the public sector.' " ["Financial assistance" became a payment in the form of a check in the amount of $250,000].
2. "Responding to the San Diego A.A. group that had objected to the San Diego Bid Committee's actions, the chairman of the Trustees' Committee on International Conventions reported that the A.A.W.S. Board would form a committee to look into the danger of presenting an appearance of affiliation . . ." [This brings up our Sixth Tradition of actual or implied affiliation]. 3. 1988 - San Diego is accepted for the International 1995. 4. 1989 - The contract with the City of San Diego becomes $150,000 inducement to offset the anticipated costs of transportation and a rebate program in the amount of $3.00 per occupied room night totaling $100,000 from the San Diego Convention and Visitors Bureau. ["Inducement" and "rebate" in reality were monies of $250,000]. In 1990 an article appeared in the San Diego Tribune. Quotes from the article were: A.A. edges G.O.P. in O'Connor choices "Mayor O'Connor says she wants a Republican party convention in San Diego - but apparently not as badly as she wants a gathering of recovering alcoholics... she persuaded the City Council to set aside $150,000 in taxpayer funds to draw the 1995 Alcoholics Anonymous Convention. The decision was accompanied by a new policy allowing public funds to be used to lure single extraordinarily large' conventions." The Policy that was used to support the "cash incentive" was originally a statement from the International Trustee's Committee regarding travel option discounts to the '95 International Convention. "Whenever a discount or subsidy is that which would be offered to any other organization of similar size requiring a purchased service or product of similar character and magnitude, i.e. convention rates at hotels, it may be accepted. Whenever the discount or subsidy is partly or in total offered because we are Alcoholics Anonymous, it must be declined." It was to go to the Conference but records show that it was not on the Agenda.
|
12/05/97 Page 4 Gay G's (Trustee) Minority Report on Cash Incentives International Conventions
 Page 4 The minority report research into disclosure regarding "cash incentives" at the time of the negotiations for both International Conventions (1995 and 2000) showed that Committee Members, their Chairpersons and Board Members were not aware that "cash incentives" were involved. There was such a mixture of terms. In the background material, "A.A. International Conventions Financial History" terms such as "Financial assistance" "Financial concessions" "to defray costs" "payment" "discount" "subsidy" "rebate" "specific dollar contribution" "real money inducement" "financial inducement""Financial considerations" were used. It would be difficult for one to realize that the terms translated into cash monies. The minority believes that if members of the committee and the General Service Board had realized that a cash payment was involved, objections would have been voiced at that time. The "cash incentive" issue was not presented and discussed in some Areas prior to the '97 General Service Conference. Delegates were not fully informed when they arrived at the Conference. Accurate information was not established during the Conference. Therefore, the Conference vote was not an informed vote. Terms such as "we must trust our trusted servants" and "we don't want to tie the hands of those who negotiate for us" were forefront at the Conference. These terms make us feel guilty, manipulate us and cut off discussion of the issues which is detrimental in establishing an informed group conscience... The facts are - we solicited the funds - the money was public funds (taxpayer funds). The long form of Tradition Seven reads: "that any public solicitation of funds using the name of Alcoholics Anonymous is highly dangerous whether by groups, clubs hospitals or other outside agencies." (3) Solutions: That all Convention transactions be negotiated up front on paper and that no cash/check monies from outside sources be a part of the transaction. This would be acceptable to those who feel there isn't a difference in principle between paper and cash. It would relieve the pressure of the minority view that believes there is a great difference. That all monies ($250,000) from San Diego be refunded, returning us to our long standing principles of self-support. That all monies ($100,000) negotiated on the International 2000 in Minneapolis/St. Paul to be paid to A.A. 45 days after the last AA. meeting, be renegotiated in the spirit of not accepting payment of money from an outside agency to pay our expenses.
|
12/05/97 Page 5 Gay G's (Trustee) Minority Report on Cash Incentives International Conventions
This document is currently unavailable. The content is to the left and also in the PDF reproduction file. Page 5 The following questions need to be addressed by the General Service Board of Trustees. 1. Why would we place ourselves in such a position in our business affairs that our Traditions would ever be questioned? 2. Why would we offer ourselves as an example for the A.A. Fellowship saying it is permissible to solicit outside funds to help us meet our expenses? Are we saying that it is acceptable for our Area Assemblies, Conventions, Conferences, service Centers and the A.A. Group to negotiate "cash incentives? Are we walking the same way we are talking about self-support? 3. Why would we place ourselves at risk regarding implied or actual affiliation? To many, this is a very dangerous place to be and we must do everything we can to keep A.A. in harmony with our very foundation. Our A.A. history shows that money problems have always been extremely difficult for us and have always diverted us from our primary purpose of staying sober and carrying the message to others. The '96-'97 Board of Trustees and the Conference had a very strong minority view and voice. This is a vital issue involving A.A.'s very base of operation within the Twelve Traditions of Alcoholics Anonymous. The General Service Board must do everything within its power to bring Alcoholics Anonymous back to our long standing principles of self-support and non affiliation by revisiting these grievances. Respectively Submitted, Gay G. Past Southeast Regional Trustee
|
02/18/98 Pages 1 & 2: Art Knight letter to Gay G. -- To be informed is not in the "best interest of the Fellowship
 February 18, 1998
Gay Dear Gay: During the past board meeting your letter of December 5, 1997 - "Minority Report" was the subject of considerable discussion. We all appreciated the sincerity of your concern. Your Report was on the agenda of the trustees' Committee on the Conference and the trustees' International Conventions/Regional Forums Committee. Both the Conference and International Conventions Committees referred the matter to the Finance Committee since it had been addressed by that committee last year. As you know, the January board meeting is attended by the Conference Committee Chairs, six of whom were present during the discussion at the Finance Committee. Of course, the chairperson of the Conference Committee on Finance, who participated in the entire discussion at last year's Conference, was among those present. The minutes of the meeting, which were accepted by the board on Monday morning, state: "Following significant sharing from the committee members and guests, the committee felt that the best interest of the Fellowship would not be served by forwarding this report and related documents to the Conference Committee at this time." I can tell you that the word "significant" doesn't adequately describe the fullness of the discussion. Everyone in the room had a chance to speak if they so desired, and many did. There were, quite frankly, just a few who felt this matter should again be sent to the Conference Finance Committee. However, in the course of the discussion it was made clear that the Conference Finance Committee was entirely free to take up the matter again if they so wished. As the chairperson of the meeting, I felt that there was a sense that the minority voice had been heard last year at the Conference, and that there was opportunity to reconsider had that been the group conscience of the Conference. Further, it was my feeling that the sense of those present was that an informed group conscience had been reached at that time. Gay Contd February 18, 1998 There was the thought expressed that while the actions of any one Conference are not binding on another, and while everyone has a right to express a minority opinion and displeasure with the group conscience, a time should come when the acceptance of the process calls upon us to leave an issue alone, at least for a while. On a personal note, Gay, I feel the issue was fairly and rigorously discussed at our meeting. Let me also tell you how much I miss you at our board weekends and hope all is well with you. Cordially, /signed/ Art Knight Treasurer General Service Board AK:ls
|
04/06/98 Debra K letter to Seated Delegates. -- No informed group conscience, need to reconsider this issue...
 April 6, 1998 Dear Seated Delegate: There are many who feel that the information regarding cash incentives for the international conventions, brought to the last general service conference, was incomplete. Therefore the group conscience was not as informed as it could have been. Since this time, new information has been brought to light, i, among many others, have written to G.S.O. about our concerns over this issue. In this packet I have enclosed a copy of my letter, a copy of the response to our past southeast regional trustee's minority report, and a copy of the letter sent to the orange county convention center and all convention bureaus bidding on the 2005 international convention. My hope is that by informing all the seated delegates of this information, we together with New York, can strive to see that our traditions continue to guide us in all our decisions. Thank you for taking the time to consider this information. In Love and Service, /signed/ Debra K---- Vice-Chairman District 7 Area 15
|
04/06/98 Pages 1 & 2: Debra K letter to GSB -- Disillusionment of GSB practices and policies regarding Cash Incentives and unfairness. Protesting violations of trust and traditions
 April 6, 1998
General Service Board Of Alcoholics Anonymous Attn: Mr. Gary Glenn, Chairperson 1112 Park Avenue, #3b New York, N.Y. Dear General Service Board, My name is Debra and I am alcoholic. I am a member of the group in FL. District Area 15 and my sobriety date is I am Vice Chairman of District Seven, Chairman of the 42nd Florida State Convention and was Chairman of the Bid Committee for the 2005 International Convention bidding for Orlando. On that committee with me were the then seated Delegates from Area 14 and Area 15. When I found out about the cash incentive issue regarding the international conventions I was shocked and for the first time in my sobriety I felt disillusioned with Alcoholics Anonymous. In our meetings with the Orange County Convention Bureau and the Orange County Convention Center we were mast emphatic that when the delegation from GSO came to do a site inspection that the fastest way to lose the bid was to offer them anything. We told them over and over don't even offer them a pencil!! My worst disillusionment and anger came when I learned of the letters that were sent to the bidding convention bureaus. It wasn't bad enough that Alcoholics Anonymous was soliciting funds, the fact that they were advised not to share this information with the AA's that were preparing the bid was upsetting. During the course of our negotiations with them, we were offered an all expenses paid trip to the Orange Bowl on New Years. We, of course, thanked them for the offer but told them that due to our traditions we were unable to accept. Being a big football fan, I would have given my right arm to have tickets to a bowl game. When this issue came to light and was brought up to the conference, it is my understanding that the facts were not completely understood by all. Consequently this vote was not an informed group conscious. On Dec. 5, 1997 a minority report was filed and virtually ignored. According to concept five, not only is the minority opinion to be heard but they compel a thorough-going debate on important issues. This is a most important issue. It is in direct conflict with tradition seven which states that any public solicitation of funds using the name of Alcoholics Anonymous is highly dangerous. It goes on to tell us that experience has warned us that nothing can so surely destroy our spiritual heritage as futile disputes over property, money, and authority. We all know that if Alcoholics Anonymous is destroyed, it will come from within. Let us guard our Traditions diligently so that this never happens. We must always remember, first and foremost, our primary purpose, and all do our part to assure that those coming after us have the same opportunity we had for recovery. Tradition two is also in question here. When at several Regional Forums, questions regarding cash incentives were raised, those asking were told that the policy has been established and no questions will be entertained. Our leaders are but trusted servants they do not govern. When we are not even permitted to ask questions, isn't this a clear cut case of governing. One of the main concerns to those of us that bid, is the fact that we did not have a fair playing field. It seems to me that after the transportation fiasco in San Diego that Orlando and Atlanta would have been on the top of the list for consideration. We had solutions to the transportation problem. Atlanta had an established system of transportation that worked quite well for over one million people during the Olympics; Orlando went one step further and eliminated the need for a stadium, having everything under one roof and 70% of all motel rooms within a one mile radius. Could the fact that neither one of our bids included a cash incentive have anything to do with this? Have you forgotten that our structure is upside down - The Groups and the individual AA members are the voice of AA. Please give us an opportunity to be heard. Bill Wilson was quoted to say that the International Conventions should no longer be put on by the General Service Office. Maybe his foresight was right. Maybe the time has come to make this change. Thank you for your consideration of my opinion. In Love and Service, /signed/ Debra Chairman, Bid Committee cc: All seated Delegates
|
04/19/98 Report to the 48th GSC about cash incentives presented by Gary McAuley, chairperson
 April 19~25, 1998
48th (1998) General Service Conference Final Report, Page 30
The committee discussed the December 5, 1997 Minority Report addressed to the General Service Board regarding financial incentives in 1995 (San Diego) and in 2000 (Minneapolis) and agreed to forward this Minority Report to the trustees' Finance and Budgetary Committee. [Editorial Note: Research and scans of 1997-1999 GSC Reports found no reference to the Minority Report in any Finance and Budgetary Committee Reports -- also see 49th 1999 General Service Conference Final Report, page 35]
|
06/02/98 Bob K letter to GSB -- Cash Incentives issue had merit, should inform all groups with direct mailing.
 June 2, 1998
General Service Board Of Alcoholics Anonymous Attn: Mr. Gary Glenn, Chairperson 1112 Park Avenue, #3b New York, New York 10128 Dear General Service Board, I have carefully reviewed Gay G~~~~~'s Minority Report on the San Diego Convention money issue. It seems to have great merit, but was given very little consideration. The issue has been completely ignored by the General Service people in our area. In the interest of fairness and in the spirit of Group Conscience, it would be of great benefit to the membership if the Minority Report were distributed by directly mailing to the groups, rather than by distribution by delegates. If a past Regional Trustee has such strong feelings on an issue that is so close to the core of our spiritual existence, we should take every possible step to aid the membership to come to an informed decision. Bob K~~~~~ Past Los Angeles Central Office Trustee FAX copy George Dorsey FAX copy Gay G~~~~~
|
06/15/98 Lois Fisher letter to Bob K -- Reply to 06/02/98 letter regarding cash Incentive issues.
   June 15, 1998
Bob K~~~~~ c/o Los Angeles Central Office 4311 Wilshire Boulevard, #104 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Dear Bob: Since I serve as assistant secretary of the General Service Board, Gary Glenn has asked me to respond to your letter of June 2, 1998. While he would prefer answering correspondence marked to his attention personally, his schedule simply does not permit that. However, your concerns are duly noted and appreciated. With regard to your suggestion that the board distribute Gay G~~~~~'s Minority Report to all groups rather than to the delegates, it would set an impractical precedent. Furthermore, Gay addressed the Minority Report to each of the members of the General Service Board so it would have been inappropriate for us to send it to all the groups in the U.S. and Canada. The fact is that Gay G~~~~~'s Minority Report has received a significant amount of attention from the General Service Board and the General Service Conference during the past two years. The issue was debated at length, both in the Conference Finance Committee and on the floor of the Conference last year. With substantial unanimity, the Conference supported the present board policy by rejecting a proposed substitute policy that has essentially said discounts are acceptable, if offered to anyone, but subsidies or rebates are not. There were 132 voting members of the 1997 General Service Conference and there were only 28 votes for this proposed substitute policy. That would indicate that most of the Conference members felt that the arrangements for subsidizing bus transportation at the San Diego Convention were no more a violation of out Seventh Tradition than the common practice at the area level of accepting a free hotel room for renting a given number of rooms for an area convention. The 28 people who voted for the substitute policy apparently felt that because the subsidy arrangement involved the exchange of cash, this somehow made it different and made it a contribution to A.A. from an outside source. Others hold the view that the city of San Diego wanted our business. They would have offered the same deal to any other organization planning an event of similar size. It was just one way to structure the package or discount costs, so that they would be in the winning bidders. Those with that perspective do not view these arrangements as a contribution or gift to A.A. so they see no conflict with the Seventh Tradition. Web Site: www.alcoholics-anonymous.org Bob K~~~~~ Contd. June 15, 1998 With regard to the board's taking action on this matter, the trustees' Finance committee discussed the letter and Minority Report from Gay G~~~~~ at their February 1, 1998 meeting. Although I was not present at the meeting, I reviewed the minutes of the meeting and also talked with our Controller who serves as secretary of that committee. In addition, I reviewed correspondence on the topic from Art Knight, the treasurer of the General Service Board and chairman of that committee. I learned that Gay's "Minority Report" was the subject of considerable discussion. The report was on the agenda of the trustees' Committee on the Conference and the trustees' International Conventions/Regional Forums Committee. Both the Conference and International Conventions/Regional Forums Committees referred the matter to the Finance Committee since it had been addressed by that committee in 1997. The January board meeting is attended by the Conference Committee Chairs and six of them were present during the discussion at the Finance Committee, including the chairperson of the Conference Committee on Finance who participated in the entire discussion at last year's Conference. The minutes of the meeting, which were accepted by the board on Monday morning state: "Following significant sharing from the committee members and guests, the committee felt that the best interest of the Fellowship would not be served by forwarding this report and related documents to the Conference Committee at this time." In the words of the committee chairman, the word "significant" doesn't adequately describe the fullness of the discussion. It is my understanding that everyone in the room had a chance to speak if they so desired, and many did. There were, quite frankly, just a few who felt this matter should again be sent to the Conference Finance Committee. However, in the course of the discussion it was made clear that the Conference Finance Committee was entirely free to take up the matter again if they so wish. Those who participated in the meeting expressed a sense that the minority voice had been heard last year at the Conference. Further, it appeared that the sense of those present was that an informed group conscience had been reached at that time. As you probably know, the 1998 General Service Conference took place April 19-25, 1998. The Conference Committee on Finance reviewed the action taken by the 1997 General Service Conference concerning the board policy that states: Whenever a discount or subsidy is that which would be offered to any other organization of similar size requiring a purchase service or product of similar character and magnitude, i.e., convention rates at hotels, it may be accepted. Whenever a discount or subsidy is partly or in total offered because we are Alcoholics Anonymous, it must be declined. Bob K~~~~~ Contd. June 15, 1998 The 1997 General Service Conference voted not to change this policy. With substantial unanimity, the 1998 Conference Committee on Finance felt there was no need to reconsider this decision. In closing, please let me assure you that your concerns are appreciated. I have yet to meet a member of Alcoholics Anonymous who did not want what he or she believes is best for our beloved Fellowship. Clearly, on this matter, there are different perspectives with regard to what constitutes a gift or contribution to A.A. At this time, it appears that the majority of Conference delegates and trustees do not view the cash incentives from San Diego or the one negotiated from Minneapolis 2000 as gifts or contributions to Alcoholics Anonymous. If they were considered as such, the incentives would not have been accepted in the first place. I hope you will find this information helpful and informative. It is always a pleasure to hear from concerned members of the Fellowship. Please let us know if we can be of further service. In the meantime, your friends here join me in sending best wishes your way. Sincerely yours, /signed/ Lois Fisher Assistant Secretary General Service Board LF/ls
|
06/19/98 Bob K letter to Lois Fisher (GSB) -- Ask for line item finances about International Convention in San Diego
 June 19, 1998
General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous Attention: Lois Fisher, Assistant Secretary 1112 Park Avenue #3B New York, NY 10115 Dear Lois: Perhaps you might forward to me by return mail the anticipated breakdown by item of the costs anticipated from the $65.00 registration fee from our 1995 San Diego Conventions. This will further aid our Central Service Committee to better understand Bill Wilson's opposition to General Service Board Sponsored International Conventions. Yours in Fellowship, Bob K~~~~~ c/o Los Angeles Central Office P.O. Box 70159 Los Angeles, CA 90070
|
06/25/98 Bob K letter to Lois Fisher (GSB) -- Reply to 06/15/98 letter from Lois Fisher: General Service Board never addressed or discussed the Minority Report or its facts.
 June 25, 1998 General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous Attention: Lois Fisher, Assistant Secretary 475 Riverside Drive New York, NY 10115 Dear Lois: In response to your June 15, 1998 letter to me: 1. It is most important that an issue of this import reach the groups. The General Service Delegate from our area attends the Los Angeles Central Office Central Service Meeting to report items of issue in A.A. to us. Although he was willing to swear on a stack of Big Books that he had given a report on this issue, when handed the minutes and tapes of the meeting for the past two years, he sheepishly admitted that the item had been omitted. 2. We represent some 15-20% of the sober A.A. members in this country at this meeting. They have a right to hear and be heard from in A.A. Our Central Office will mail some 3,000 copies of the minority Report, my letter of June 2, 1998 to the General Service Board, your letter of June 15, 1998 to me, and this letter so that they may become aware of the lack of importance the General Service Board has attached to this report. 3. You state that "Gay G~~~~~'s Minority Report has received a significant amount of attention from the General Service Board and the General Service Conference during the past two years," but the report was not written until December 5, 1997, so I find this depth of clairvoyance difficult even for the General Service Board. In fact, the General Service Board never addressed or discussed the Minority Report or its facts. In fact the decision from the Finance Committee minutes states "that the best (sic) interest of the Fellowship would not be served by forwarding this report and related documents to the Conference Committee at this time." 4. While discounts may be acceptable, actual transfers of cash from public or outside funds cannot be. 5. The vote to suppress discussion was not a 2/3 majority as you state, rather an uninformed 78 to 45. The real issues are in front of us: A. Did we solicit money from outside of A.A.? Yes B. Did we accept money from outside of A.A.? Yes C. Did we deposit money from outside of A.A. into an A.A. bank account? Yes. General Service Boar of Alcoholics Anonymous Attention: Lois Fisher June 25, 1998 Page 2 This cannot continue. Both the mistake in acceptance of outside money and the attempt to suppress the issue threaten the very roots of our Fellowship. Even worse, the failure of the "A.A. groups holding the ultimate responsibility and the final authority for our services" will destroy us. As time passes you will be hearing from thousands of us Yours in Fellowship, Bob K~~~~~
|
06/24/98 Lois Fisher reply to 6/25/98 Bob K. letter
 [Editorial Note: This letter is obviously a reply to Bob K's letter of 6/25/98, so the date of one of the letters is incorrect. We've placed this file after Bob's letter since it is a reply to that letter.] June 24, 1998 Bob K~~~~~ c/o Los Angeles Central Office 4311 Wilshire Blvd., #104 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Dear Bob: I received your June 24 fax. Just to clear up a minor point, you addressed it to me at 1112 Park Avenue. That is not my address nor is it the address of the General Service Office. It's a minor point since the fax number is correct. And speaking of minor points, you are absolutely correct in stating that Gay G~~~~'s Minority Report was not mailed to the board until December 5, 1997. However, Gay G~~~~~'s concerns regarding the financial incentives certainly received a great deal of attention from the General Service Board prior to receiving her report in December 1997. It was a careless mis-statement on my part. I'm not clairvoyant and if anyone on the board is, I'm not aware of it. One point presented in your letter is not minor in my opinion and needs to be clarified. You said, "The vote to suppress discussion was not a ⅔ majority as you state; rather an uninformed 78 to 45." There was never a vote at the Conference to suppress discussion. I don't know where you obtained the figures of 78 to 45 which you referred to as rather uninformed. There was every opportunity to discuss the issue as long as it needed to be discussed. In the minds of those trusted servants who have no difficulty with the concept of cash incentives, the Seventh Tradition is talking about gifts, voluntary contributions from outside of A.A. In the course of business transactions, that is, purchasing something for A.A., the board and management have always felt a responsibility to avail themselves of discounts or incentives offered to get A.A.'s business and an effort is made to make the best deal possible. In the case of the San Diego Convention, the city and its hospitality community knew that A.A., through upwards of 50,000 members expected to attend, would purchase millions of dollars of accommodations, meals, services, etc., contributing very substantial economic benefit to the city. The incentives were offered to persuade us to come and bring that economic benefit. We try to pass on our direct costs for the Conventions to the attendees through the registration fee, that is, to break even. Incentives, whether in cash or non-cash, enable us to keep the registration fee as low as possible. The board's policy states it clearly. If an incentive is given to us because we are A.A., the offer can never be accepted whether cash or non-cash. However, some of us have trouble with the argument that it is okay to accept the use of stadiums and convention centers worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, free municipal transportation when available, the use of hundreds of Web Site: www.alcoholics-anonymous.org Bob K~~~~~ Contd. June 24, 1998 hours of the services of Convention Bureau personnel for registration, but in situations in which the city does not own the Convention Center or stadium or have adequate public transportation, it is not okay to accept cash offered for the purpose of covering these expenses. It seems that to take the position that cash inducements are not acceptable, but the equivalent non-cash incentives offered for the same business reason are acceptable, requires a re-interpretation of our Seventh Tradition. Finally, your statements out of context about soliciting, accepting and depositing money from outside sources which you described as the real issue and delineated as points A, B and C in your June 24 fax is misleading to say the least. We welcome hearing from anyone, anywhere who is interested in hearing what the "cash incentive issue" in San Diego is really about. Your friends here join me in sending best wishes. Sincerely yours, /signed/ Lois Fisher Assistant Secretary General Service Board LF/ls
|
07/01/98 Donald W. Meurer reply to Bob K's 06/19/98 letter about finances of International Conventions
July 1, 1998 Bob K~~~~~ 8306 Wilshire Blvd.#1099 Beverly Hills, Ca 90211 Dear Bob: Lois Fisher passed me your letter of June 19, 1998. I too would like to better understand if Bill Wilson's had an opposition to General Service Board Sponsored International Conventions. I have never heard it spoken of before and have asked our Archivist to try to find what you are referring to. Any specifics from you would be appreciated. Perhaps Bill said Contributions money sent by the groups ought not be used? It isn't! By Conference action, we are required to budget International Conventions to be self supporting. The total budgeted expense for the 1995 conventions was $3,975,000 to be covered by 60,000 anticipated paying attendees. We had actual paid attendance of about 56,000+ people. The expense items you queried were reported in full many times. In the 1995 Audited Financial Statements, the 1996 General Service Conference Delegates Manuals, and the 1996 Final report of the General Service Conference, just to name a few. I'm sure a copy of the Conference Report is available at the Central Service Committee. You will find total expenses reported of $4,333,080. From this $433,080 subtract the write off of the unsold Convention books, (we printed more than we sold) and the expenses incurred to reserve dormitory rooms that was not recovered due to lower than anticipated attendance, and you have expenses of $4,111,3051 to compare with the original budget of $3,975,0001, about 3% over budget. Not to bad considering the budget and registration fee is approved about a year and a half prior to the Convention as I'm sure you can imagine, a year and a half is a long time and many little things can change that effect costs. Bob, as I opened this letter I too would like to better understand if Bill Wilson's had opposition to General Service Board Sponsored International Conventions. Any specifics from you would be appreciated. Yours truly, /signed/ Donald W. Meurer Controller DWM:rb This number, 4,111,305, and 3,975,000 are not included in the Income and Expense Report>
|
07/02/98 Bob K letter to Lois Fisher in reply to 06/15/98 Letter regarding International Convention "Cash Incentives"
July 2, 1998 General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous 475 Riverside Drive New York, NY 10115 Attention: Lois Fisher Assistant Secretary General Service Board Dear Lois: I am so sorry to use the wrong address. This was unintentional on my part. Thank goodness I had the correct fax number. The great opportunity to discuss seems to be rather ephemeral; almost there, but not quite. Our experience in Los Angeles was suppression not discussion. We are going to mail the minority report to our 3,000 groups for real consideration. We have received hundreds of calls at our Central Office as a result of the discussion at our Central Service Meeting. I think the issue is much deeper than just the cash incentives. I think it is about openness and honesty. I don't think you made a careless misstatement in your 6/15/98 letter to me. The words were meant to convey an attitude that does not exist. The Group Conscience in A.A. must be informed and heard. The groups must direct A.A. This process has stopped. We hope for a quick turnaround. If we cannot be heard, we will recommend that A.A. members no longer attend the Convention in the year 2000, and that the groups in our area withhold donations to the General Services until compliance to real A.A. principles is achieved. Bob K~~~~~
|
07/03/98 Bob K letter to Lois Fisher in reply to 06/15/98 Letter regarding International Convention "Cash Incentives"
July 3, 1998 General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous 475 Riverside Drive New York, NY 10115 Attention: Lois Fisher Assistant Secretary General Service Board Dear Lois: I would like to add a few more thoughts. When I put my money in the basket at an A.A. meeting, the furthest thought from my mind is that Big Brother in New York will squander $750,000.001 on a weekend bash in San Diego. This means that 98% of A.A. who cannot or will not go to the World Convention subsidized each and every attendee to the tune of $15.00. This is not what my money in the basket is for. The engineer of this Convention has certainly marked his place in A.A. history. It seems the same engineering force has squandered more than one-half million dollarsof our basket money on La Venta. We could have given 150,000 Spanish Big Books away and gotten much better value, or we could have hared the other Book company and given every drunk in South America a Big Book whether they were wanted or not. It certainly seems time for General Services to become financially responsible; that non-necessary services (electives) be entirely self-supporting or dropped. I would like you to send me copies of Bill Wilson's letters of November 11, 1957 and December 31, 1957 that mentioned his views on the Convention. If not I will come to New York very unwillingly. I wrote you on June 19, 1998 for the breakdown of services for each dollar of Convention services. I have not received this. I would also have you tell me the dollar amount of cash incentives \given in Montreal and the dollar amount of incentives contemplated to be received in 2000. Yours in fellowship, Bob K~~~~~ This number, 750,000.00, is not mentioned in the Income and Expense Report>
|
07/08/98 Bob K letter to Donald Meurer in response to 07/01/98 letter about budget figures
July 8, 1998 Donald W. Meurer, Controller Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc 475 Riverside Drive New York, NY 10115 Dear Donald: Thank you so much for your kindness in your letter of July 1, 1998. I had wanted the figures pre-budgeted for the convention, but this will do. I may have some questions from time to time as to specifics. To clear up any misunderstanding, Bill Wilson saw the first two conventions, even though they lost $3,000 and $9,000, respectively served very important purpose and were worth the money, but the need for future conventions just wouldn't be there. If future conventions were to be held they should be financed apart from the New York office. Lois has the dates of these two letters in my letter to her on July 2, 1998 or July 3, 1998. I said that I never contemplated my meeting donations going to finance a big weekend bash for a very limited number of A.A. members; that 2% of A.A. danced and that 98% of A.A. picked up the bill. Sincerely, Bob K~~~~~
|
07/13/98 Lois Fisher reply to Bob K letter response to 07/03/98 fax about International Conventions budget figures
 
July 13, 1998 Bob K~~~~~ c/o Los Angeles Central Office 4311 Wilshire Blvd., #104 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Dear Bob: In response to your fax dated July 3, 1998, Don Meurer, our controller, sent you a letter July 1 in response to your request for a financial breakdown. He gave me a copy of his letter and I noticed that the address he used is different from the address I've been using. In case you didn't receive it, a copy is enclosed. You asked for the dollar amount of cash incentives given in Montreal and the dollar amount of incentives contemplated to be received in 2000. At the 1985 International Convention in Montreal, the provincial government of Quebec contributed $75,000 toward rental costs of the stadium and convention center, following negotiations with the Convention and Tourist Bureau in which we apparently expressed concern about the high rental rates for these facilities. At our request, the Quebec government paid the money to the Montreal Convention and Tourism Bureau to be applied to the rental costs. In 1975, in Denver, we received a one dollar "room rebate" per room to offset busing costs. With regard to the 2000 International Convention in Minneapolis, in March 1991 the Minneapolis Convention and Visitors Association, as part of the bid proposal, provided for "a subsidy of $100,000 toward busing costs." Web Site: www.alcoholics-anonymous.org Bob K~~~~~ Contd. July 13, 1998 Regarding your request that we send you copies of Bill Wilson's letters of November 11, 1957 and December 31, 1957, I have forwarded your request to our archivist. As always, please let us know if we can be of further service. Sincerely yours, /signed/ Lois Fisher General Service Staff LF/ls cc: Judit Santon, Archivist Donald Meurer, Controller Gary Glynn, Chairman of the General Service Board
|
07/20/98 Judit Santon (Archivist) reply to Bob K letter of 07/03/98 regarding Bill W. (Nov & Dec) 1957 letters about International Conventions
  
July 20, 1998 Bob K~~~~~ ℅ Los Angeles Central Office 4311 Wilshire Blvd., #104 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Dear Bob: Your request for the copies of Bill W.'s letters dated November 11, and December 31, 1957 has been forwarded to us. Unfortunately, by the decision of the trustee's Archives Committee, we are not able to send you photocopies of private correspondence. The trustees' were concerned about the confidentiality of our members' private correspondence, the anonymity of our members, and the physical integrity of the collection when they decided not to reproduce original correspondence. However, we are happy provide excerpts from those documents. Both letters were addressed to Stan W. On November 11, 1957 Bill W. wrote: "…In the two prior Conventions, there was a special object in each. At Cleveland, we wished to validate the A.A. Traditions and give Dr. Bob his last look at us. At St. Louis, it was a question of delivering the Legacies Of Alcoholics Anonymous and the management of A.A. affairs into the hands of A.A. itself. In both instances, A.A. Headquarters sponsored these activities, managed them, and underwrote them. This is quite as it should have been. But when it comes to the 1960 affair, I think we have to wait for the sentiment of the movement as to whether it shall be held at all, and then in what state and in what city. …I doubt very much if the General Service Board could think of underwriting a 1960 Convention. You must remember that there is not particular object in view except the establishment of the custom of a five-year international gathering. Certainly no one objects to this. But the state of our finances down here is so uncertain that we could not possibly take the initiative in the matter, nor underwrite it if it was decided that it should be held in California or anywhere else. However, if the Conference does decided that it want such a Convention, then the General Service Board would feel a certain amount of responsibility for its conduct, even though its finances would not permit any underwriting. I think the General Service Board would want to have control of the public relations, because this is a matter of general concern. It might also wish to have something to say about the meetings and the general setup. But I'm sure the GSB won't put itself in the position of advocating a Convention much less deciding on the state or city and in not case could it possibly underwrite the situation under present conditions as we are probably faced with a large deficit which will take a gash out of the Reserve Fund this year. On the Cleveland Convention Web Site: www.alcoholics-anonymous.org $3,00 [sic] was lost and $12,000 more was dropped in the St. Louis Convention. These were good investments, certainly. But we do not thing that we are in the financial position to stand anymore of this kind of loss just now. Therefore, we are left, down here, in the awkward position of refusing underwriting, and demanding that the area having the Convention do this job - at the same time wishing a certain amount of control over the proceedings. Of course this is understandable, but awkward, nevertheless." On December 31, 1957 Bill W. wrote: "Thought I haven't seen your recent letter to the office, I'm told that you are a bit disturbed about the trustee's conclusions not to financially underwrite a convention should it take place in California. I make haste to say that this isn't a conclusion necessarily binding. It was only a tentative opinion, based on the facts of our financial life as we see things here. It seems to me that this question should be presented to the Conference and if they wish to spend money and assume the full responsibility, of course that will be fine with us. In fact, everything I wrote you was intended to be of a tentative nature to give you some sort of advance notice, prior to the Conference, what the possibilities and probabilities might be. …Respecting the under writing of the convention out there, perhaps we are over-cautious. Personally, I thing this one will easily subsidize itself because you have such vast numbers of people within rather easy traveling distance, a state of affairs that we did not have in St Louis at all. However, this convention is straight international gather with no special purpose in mind. At Cleveland, we wanted Dr. Bob to have a last look and confirm the Traditions. At St. Louis, we wanted to put the movement on its own. The losses in these cases were quite justified, on such grounds. But whether to set the precedent for underwriting a series of such conventions, any of which might incur losses, perhaps heavy ones, is something of another question. If too, we had plenty of money down here, it is probably that no one would hesitate underwriting a whole series of conventions. But we had to ask ourselves whether maintaining the security of Headquarters or underwriting such gatherings is the most important. The country is still in a time of relative prosperity. And yet we may run a deficit of $30,00 [sic] in group contributions for this year Though the bill is mighty small, per capita, and per groups and it isn't paid yet. What, therefore, might happen if we had really hard times in this country. This would be the period in which we would want to maintain A.A.'s services in full strength - it would be more needed than ever. If, under these circumstances, group contributions declined by one-third, we would have to slash essential services accordingly or else gobble up that reserve fund pretty fast. You certainly have a point on the indirect financial benefits of such a convention. The publicity and the gatherings themselves can result in more membership and more literature sales. But how much more? I think we lost $15,000 in St. Louis. The publicity might have brought in a thousand or more members. These members might buy books and put in their dollar or two a year. The public would buy a little more literature. But it would take an awful lot of contributing members and book sales - far more than anyone could imagine - to anywhere near make $15,00 [sic]. Taken altogether, the publicity resulting from St. Louis was nothing very spectacular. This, even though it was a very special occasion. So, although the California project would doubtless pay off, we are nevertheless reluctant to a set a precedent for conventions to come while we are in the present financial conditions. But, as I have said, this is really a question for the Conference. The trustees "first duty is the maintenance of headquarters. But if the Conference wishes to take the responsibility, I am sure all of us here would most cheerfully go along." Bob, I hope you'll find these excerpts helpful. Pleas do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions. Warm regards from the G.S.O. Archives. Sincerely, /signed/ Judit Santon Archivist
|
≈07/98 "Concerned AA Members" to All LA County AA Groups: Memo about Cash Incentives from City of San Diego to the 1995 International Convention.
 MEMORANDUMTO: All AA Groups in Los Angeles County From: Concerned Members of Alcoholics Anonymous Re: Receipt by General Services of Payment from the City of San Diego, California Enclosed are two memoranda, and some related correspondence, explaining the concerns some of us have about the receipt, by AA General Services, of a cash payment in the amount of $250,000 from the City of San Diego, California in connection with the 1995 International AA Convention. One of these memoranda is from those of us here in the Los Angeles are who are concerned that the receipt of this money may violate the Traditions of Alcoholics Anonymous. The other, entitle "Historical Events Leading Up To Writing The 'Minor Report'" is from Ms. Gay G~~~~~, a former Regional Trustee of the AA General Service Conference, explaining her efforts to have this issue heard by the General Service Conference. Also enclosed are copies of correspondence between Mr. Bob K~~~~~, former trustee of the Los Angeles Central Office and Mr. Donald Meurer, Controller of Alcoholics Anonymous World Services regarding certain correspondence written by Bill Wilson concerning his view on the holding of International AA Conventions.
|
03/04/99 Joyce K to AA Friends Letter regarding Cash Incentives from City of San Diego to the 1995 International Convention.
This document is currently unavailable. The content is to the left. March 4, 1999 Dear AA Friend, Enclosed is a newspaper article for your information. It clearly shows that taxpayer funds were set aside in May of 1988 to subsidize our AA International Convention. It was a 'new' policy for the city of San Diego.
The General Service Board's "policy statement" that was sent from the Trustees' Committee on Finance to be put on this year's Conference Finance Committee agenda actually had nothing to do with the above negotiation. The Board's "policy statement" was drafted in 1989. It was in response to a group of alcoholics, traveling to an International AA convention, who had inquired of the Board whether or not the group could take advantage of an offered group fare rate on an airline. This was approximately 9 months 'after' the negotiations in San Diego.
The current Board is retroactively "borrowing" the statement as a justification for accepting outside monies for AA's International Conventions. Several Areas have requested that we put on the Conference agenda a discussion about returning the money to San Diego and not accepting the $100,000 from the city of Minneapolis in the year 2000. It appears that the Trustees' Finance Committee has again linked their "policy statement" to this request. This issue has been of grave concern to many members of AA around the country. Many of us believe that we now have a re-interpretation of the Seventh Tradition. As you well know, for that to happen, we would need a 3/4 vote from all of the groups known to the General Service Office. Since the last Conference, another chilling comparison has come to light-the International Olympic Committee's bidding practices. Does our Board really want to continue with the present "policy statement" that: "Whenever a discount or subsidy is that which would be offered to any other organization of similar size requiring a purchased service or product of similar character and magnitude i.e., convention rates at hotels, it may be accepted. Whenever a discount or subsidy is partly or in total offered because we are Alcoholics Anonymous, it must be declined." This statement implies, for example, that if its okay for the Olympic Committee or any other organization (Kiwanis, Rotary, Moose etc.), it's okay for US. IT IS DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE ARE (OR EVER COULD BE) LIKE ANY OTHER ORGANIZATION-WE, AS A FELLOWSHIP, PRACTICE THE SPIRITUAL PRINCIPLE OF CORPORATE POVERTY AND REFUSE OUTSIDE CONTRIBUTIONS. Wishing you well as you do God's work, In Love and Service, Joyce K. DCM District 9, Area 15 |