April 2nd 2023 BM
BM Chair: Lauren
BM Co-Chair: James
Secretaries: Elle and Lauren
I. Treasurer’s Report-Elle
A. We will be covering the last/current report since a group vote for the last Treasurer’s Report did not get group approval. (March SC Meeting)
1. Both March and April Treasurer’s Reports were approved in their entirety
2. Seconded and Passed (22 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
B. Al-Elle will need authorization through Steve to get into Bank Account.
C. Daren wanted to know about the Delinquent charge. It was a late fee that Al had to pay, and Elle is looking into it more.
D. Dennis and Danielle both brought the group’s attention to H&I. The group will need to decide on a new area to send our donation for next month.
E. Al motioned to officially make Elle the GUTS Treasurer.
1. Seconded and Passed (23 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
II. Changing Password
A. Danielle informed Lauren that a bunch of important emails that had account information were deleted. Most of it can be recovered except for receipts. For security purposes, Danielle will need to change the password on the admin email account.
B. It was suggested that access to that account is restricted to the IT person, Training Coordinator, Treasurer, SC, and Email Coordinator. This also means that anyone who had prior access to the previous password will no longer have it. Any time a position is rotated out, she suggests changing the password each time to keep info secure and free from tampering. Those who have access to the password cannot share it with anyone.
C. Danielle talked about the importance of keeping our information secure. She does not believe that those documents were deleted in a nefarious way, but these measures can prevent anything like that from happening in the future. She motioned for A and B to be put into place.
1. Seconded and Passed (22 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
III. ORC (March SC Meeting)
A. Kristen: Can we add to the agenda discussing Danielle being added as someone who can order for the ORC and be added to the debit card? (March SC Meeting)
1. (Seconded and Passed (20 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
B. Anonymous Member: We should start a chip wall on the website! Encourage members who’ve received a chip through GUTS to send us a picture of their chip with their name (abbreviated) so we can create a collage for the website. (March SC Feedback)
1. Danielle will let us know if this is feasible for the website and will offer suggestions (March SC Meeting)
2. Danielle said that this would be feasible with parameters that the group felt were deal-breakers and more problems could arise than it was worth. It would require a lot of rules to do this. She said that it’s possible but not ideal. If anyone wanted to embark on an endeavor like this, there would need to be a separate email, and people could send pictures at specified times (refreshed quarterly). Pixel and file size would have to work with the website, and the picture would have to be cropped in squares.
3. The other issue that arose during this discussion had to do with Tradition 12. The picture could only be of the chip. No faces, logos, and location names. Danielle also brought up the point that google picks up algorithms can end up being public. Many were offput by the breach of anonymity that this could cause.
4. Members seemed excited by the idea of celebrating people’s milestones in various ways such as using the newsletter or voting for the Chip Meeting.
5. Lauren motioned to not have a chip wall. (24 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
IV. Women’s Meeting
A. Lauren was messaged during the BM to inform her that the Women’s Meeting needed Hosts voted in by the group.
B. Lauren motioned for Mona, Patricia, and Kelly to be the Women’s Meetings Hosts.
1. Seconded and Passed (23 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
V. Fourth Step Workshop/Reviewing Gossip & Infighting Issues for GC Votes
A. There was a fourth step workshop earlier in the month, and there were solutions that were offered to create a safer environment for the regular meeting and the service team.
B. Several members wanted to motion for a ban on MLKC from the GUTS meeting. (Fourth Step Workshop/March SC Meeting)
1. Empathy for the situation was expressed by Daren. He was being a loyal and good friend by sticking up for Mark. He went to bat for him. He wanted to impart that people make mistakes. Hurt people hurt people. Mark is loved by members of the room and has offered a great deal of service too.
2. Glenn talked about the third tradition and that this dangerously falls in line with governance. He wanted to remind the group of the importance of following the traditions.
3. Kristen offered that he isn’t being banned from AA, but this is a ban from the GUTS meeting only. We are not the only Zoom meeting that has a ban list. Ours is very short because we take bans extremely seriously.
4. The dissenting voices believed that alcoholics come into AA after doing reprehensible things and those of us who work the program get the chance to bounce back. They wanted to allow Mark the opportunity to come back with changed behavior.
5. Various members brought up what happened at the 4th step workshop and how the situation had been handled. None of this was done behind closed doors or in a secretive way. Mark removed himself from the meeting, but the ban needed to be addressed at the group level. Clear messages of “This is not okay” have been set for a long time. Hurt people still need to take accountability when lines have been crossed too many times. This ban was not motioned for lightly by anyone. This wasn’t just a matter of fellows harboring a resentment. There was behavior exhibited that fell in line with continuous and repeated harassment. When a member violates the primary purpose repeatedly, the group needs to take that seriously and set necessary/clear-cut action to let a person know that the behavior will not be enabled.
6. There was some debate on how long the ban should be set. Some motioned for a 6-month ban and a group vote and others felt that a year would be a safe amount of time to allow for further recovery work to be done.
7. Danielle/Lauren/Maya motioned for the ban on Mark (MLKC) from the GUTS room for 1 year, and the group must approve his return to the meeting.
– Seconded and Passed (15 Yes Votes/7 No Votes)
C. Members wanted the GC on “If you see something, say something” reiterated and communicated. These are the reminders that the SC wants to bring to the BM for group consideration and/or discussion. (4th Step Workshop/SC Meeting)
1. Members wanted to express that there is a balance with love and tolerance. Sometimes, it is loving/tolerant to set boundaries, common welfare must come first, putting foot down when numerous chances are given, and to look at the principles of the overall situation over personalities. It is everyone’s responsibility to communicate in the Live Thread. It is okay to set kind boundaries with fellows. In terms of love/tolerance, members also expressed that importance of being cognitive when people are struggling and being inclusive of ideas/suggestions. (4th Step Workshop/March SC Meeting)
2. Hosts should be conscientious when people are sharing, and use share re-direction guidelines when appropriate. This was in reference to passive aggressive sharing. Nipping them in the bud by cutting off and communicating the instance in the Live Thread. SC wants to reiterate how important it is to use the Live thread. This is how we stay transparent with the group regarding decisions that are made as a service team and avoid unilateral decisions. (4th Step Workshop/March SC Meeting)
3. These reminders were on the screen for group review during the PowerPoint presentation per March SC meeting.
D. It was proposed that leadership positions (SC or Hosts) should take a more active role in communicating the GC and helping the newer members. (BM Topic/March SC Meeting)
1. Members felt that having SC or Hosts dictating GC could be seen as governance. Most seem to agree that it should be a group effort and that new members could offer a fresh perspective on GC.
2. Mona proposed having a workshop regarding Topic D along the issue of Host share re-direction guidelines so that service members can be retrained.
3. Alternate solutions were proposed to keep within the bounds of the group. Lauren motioned for members to be directed to the appropriate BM notes, sending members the link for the SC feedback form, and that this discussion can be taken to the workshop that will be voted on at the next BM (Host Feedback Topic).
– Seconded and Passed (22 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
E. Certain threads should be used for meeting business only. (BM Topic/March SC Meeting)
1. Jason W offered the suggestion to leave the threads alone and mentioned that members are pretty good about using the appropriate threads.
2. Lisa wanted to remind members that unscheduled members should not be interfering with the Live Thread except in cases of meeting business (for example, bomber patrol, members need help with tricky situations, and assistance with tech problems).
– Seconded and Passed (20 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
F. It was proposed that a “safe word/phrase” starts being used. Basically, setting a boundary within the threads when lines are being crossed. Something like “Take a pause” or “This is not appropriate.” (BM Topic/March SC Meeting)
1. Members felt that we should address situations like this maturely and use our own best judgment. Lauren motioned for “If you see something, say something” as a reinforcement and to keep it simple.
– Seconded and Passed (21 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
VI. BIPOC Resource Coordinator
A. Maya: Thank you for all of the hard work you put into service every day. I am reaching out to add something to the agenda for the next business meeting. I’d like to vote on having a BIPOC resources coordinator. I am so happy about the appointment of a LGBTQ resources coordinator. Thank you for taking the time to read this, I look forward to discussing next month’s agenda further. (Feb SC Feedback)
B. Al: Maya is requesting a GC on BIPOC service despite her not being cohost/host trained. (Feb SC Meeting)
C. Maya was nominated for this position in the Feb BM
1. Lauren motioned for Maya to be the BIPOC Resource Coordinator and work alongside the LGBTQIA Contact List Coordinator (Mona). They will work together to get the work done as a team. These are new positions, and we will be able to establish more GC votes as time goes on. It will be a “learn as we go” kind of deal.
VII. Burning Desire Blurb
A. As per the GC vote from the March BM, Lauren typed up a blurb for the cohosts to post sporadically/throughout the meeting. (March SC Meeting)
B. Lauren: “Burning Desires: If you are in immediate danger of picking up the first drink, or you are on the precipice of a relapse, reach out to a Host or Cohost. Tell them that you have a Burning Desire and must share ASAP. Hang in there until you are called upon to share and reach out in the chat for support. You do not have to struggle in silence. This meeting is here for you.” (March SC Meeting)
1. Seconded and Passed (19 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
VIII. SC Feedback Discussion (Feb SC Meeting)
A. There was a proposition regarding members who issue complaints in the SC feedback forms. They should show up to defend their feedback and offer their own perspective at the BM. If they don’t show up, then the complaint gets tabled. (Feb SC Meeting)
1. Members seemed to agree that those who issue complaints should be present when the matter is discussed. Having the issue tabled allows leeway for any absences that may occur. It was suggested to communicate the absence.
2. Seconded and Passed (20 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
B. Lisa suggested that people use names when they issue complaints in feedback form. It can be awkward to give out names, but we can get further context for the situation. (Feb SC Meeting)
1. Daren expressed that anonymity is not a cloak and that it’s important to identify oneself.
2. Members can’t be fully aware of what happened when names aren’t used. The group can make an informed decision when the situation is understood and communicated.
– Seconded and Passed (18 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
C. It was suggested that if a topic is discussed 2 Business Meetings in a row and no changes were made to GC, the group conscience vote cannot be re-visited for another 6 months. (Jan SC Meeting/March SC Meeting)
1. Seconded and Passed (16 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
IX. TC Tuna was voted back into service (13 Yes Votes/12 No Votes). There are clearly strong feelings regarding this poll. SC believes that addressing the dissenting concerns is important. (Topic was brought forward at March SC Meeting)
A. There are reasons why people were saying “no.” We aren’t discounting the GC vote, but we need to listen to the “no” voices of the group on this matter because people need to be heard. (March SC Meeting)
1. Listening to dissenting voices of the group when they are in high volume does follow traditions. It goes along with not being a governing force. Listening to those voices gives the group a chance to reevaluate because GC evolves over time. Lisa didn’t think it was wise to not make the group aware. Not simply going along with the vote when nothing like this has happened previously with a returning to service poll. This was brought to the BM for group discussion and for the sake of transparency.
B. Daren made the point that if he wants to return to service, put the past behind him by letting people air out what they need (Say what they need to say), then there should be no problem letting him come back with the approval of another group vote. (March SC Meeting)
C. Dennis proposed that we require 2/3 for readmittance to service. For most, it would not be an issue. But for cases like this, it would solve the problem. (SC Thread 3/37/2023)
1. Members had various opinions on this topic. Ultimately, many pulled together and believed that most of these polls have a vast majority “Yes” vote and adding this GC might add further confusion. Keeping it simple by abiding by majority vote.
D. The group will decide whether or not we will re-vote, stand by the polling outcome, or hold a re-vote. (March SC Meeting)
1. Glenn offered that we run the risk of governance when we do not adhere to the majority vote of the group. We need to stand by the decision that was made despite the consequences and give it over to our HP’s.
E. Lisa messaged Tuna regarding this situation per SC Thread (2/27/2023)
1. Members had various opinions on this matter. Some were uncomfortable with the fact that he was not present at the BM.
F. Glenn/Lisa motioned for no 2/3 vote and to stand by the GC vote.
1. Seconded and Passed (16 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
X. ZPolls (Per Lisa in SC Thread/March SC Meeting)
A. Specific polling meeting using the training acct.
B. Meeting will be open concurrently to GUTS meeting, 7-11 pm.
C. Members can log in and vote and leave, under 5-minute commitment.
D. Doorperson will keep a running list of people who came in (just in case, notice patterns, observe). Might be more trouble than is worth.
1. Zoom Admin will be able to check for any funny business with the polls per March BM GC vote.
E. Advertise the vote for 24-48 hrs. so people can prepare and plan.
F. Can advertise in the main meeting during the meeting, but people will need to ask the service team for the link. DM’d only
G. Lisa discussed this further to allow for any questions or concerns to be answered, but her explanation was straight-forward and well-understood.
H. Lauren motioned for this to be a collective vote and put all topics into place by the group.
1. Seconded and Passed (16 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
XI. No Shows (Topic was brought forward at March SC Meeting)
A. Dennis wanted to add this as a topic for the BM. Hosts and cohosts have not been showing up without any form of communication. It can be frustrating to show up as the Host without any cohosts. He is emphasizing the need to communicate absences. (March SC Meeting)
B. Elle proposed for schedulers post the schedule a day in advance. (March SC Meeting)
C. Lisa proposed that schedulers allow members to see the availability worksheet that schedulers use. Dennis proposed for the worksheet to be seen based on request. (March SC Meeting)
1. Schedulers were not opposed to posting the schedule a little bit in advance, but they did think that posting the availability worksheet would work well.
2. Mona offered that we are able to see our own availability.
3. Lisa and Daniel talked about making a google doc that maps out availability and working together on a project like that. Daniel offered maybe having a spreadsheet that is linked to the website.
4. Donna told the group that schedulers tend to fill in 3 days ahead of time. Posting 3 days in advance, however, would be more work (but doable), and maybe getting some help from the Thread Admins to keep track of the availability being posted.
5. Holly suggested that the best form of communication for giving availability with the schedulers is through the Req Thread rather than DM’s. Schedulers are aware that they need to check that thread regularly for updates or changes. It’s part of their commitment. They tend to be on top of the REQ thread and prompt about making necessary changes.
6. Members emphasized the need to for Hosts to communicate with schedulers when no shows happen. They wanted a reiteration of communicating availability/absences with the schedulers in the REQ Thread.
7. Leona brought up scheduling software that had been voted on by the group, and Danielle offered to bring scheduling software to the SC so that we can bring it to the next BM.
D. Lauren motioned to include Holly’s discussion about pertinent scheduling info in the group announcements which are posted a few days after the BM. She also motioned for #7 to be brought to the next BM.
1. Seconded and Passed (18 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
XII. Alternate Sister Meetings (Been on the Agenda for a Very Long Time)
A. Men’s Meeting, Chip Meeting, or Concepts Meeting
B. Mark P suggested merging the Big Book Study and Steps Study Meeting to make room for a Men’s meeting on Thursday and has offered to be a Host for this meeting.
1. Mark P proposed having the Men’s Meeting on Saturday at 5:30PM PST/8:30PM EST, and he will be the Host for that meeting.
2. Seconded and Passed (16 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
C. Anonymous Member: Chip meeting last Sunday of every month @ 5:30 pm PST! (March SC Feedback)
1. This was proposed as an alternate solution to the Chip Wall and a way to give a big “Wahoo” to the members celebrating milestones.
– Seconded and Passed (16 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
2. Daren proposed rotating Hosts for the Chip Meeting.
– Seconded and Passed (15 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
D. Jason W also brought up an issue with the link for the ORC email.
1. Danielle explained that an ORC page for the website is in the works. There are a lot of details that need to sorted before that becomes an option. She gave a bit of an update about ORC which was much appreciated by the group.
2. Kristen suggested to encourage members, “Copy and paste this email link to your email.”
Tabled
I. Self-Regulating Host Feedback
II. LNG Ending/Sharing Time
III. Removing Sister Meeting Service Members from "Current & Daily SCHED Request"
IV. Lifting Zoom Account Requirements
V. Adding “Additional Resources”
VI. Placing SC Notes on the Website