Guts Business Meeting – 12/03/2023

12/03/2023 Business Meeting Notes

BM Chair: Mark

BM Co-Chair: Dennis

Secretary: Mark(with MAJOR assistance from Lauren)

SC Members Present: Mark M, Dennis, Kristen, Mark P, Barbara, and Christian

1. Treasurer’s Report – Elle

1. $719.84 Zoom Room Cost, Quarter 4 contributions were given, $1,322 Total expenses, $465.53 given towards 7^th tradition.
2. Reserves – ORC $160.75, Zoom Reserve $130, WordPress $200.
3. Elle explained WordPress which gives functionality for the Website that allows us to have our links and SC Feedback. She has been giving $100 to the domain for AA GUTS to cover that expense. We have our domain through InterServer.
4. Elle responded said that we were officially approved by GSO and given a group number. Elle to get together with Del so the ORC can purchase books through GSO.
5. Motion to approve report.
   **Seconded and Passed (21 Yes Votes/No Dissent)

2. ORC Report – Del

1. For November we provided 3 Big Books, 5 Twelve & Twelves, and 5 Milestone coins which came to a total of $228.70.
2. The ORC might come up a little short on money, but it will be covered.
3. Motion to approve report.
   **Seconded and Passed (21 Yes Votes/No Dissent)

3. Committee Reports/Updates

1. Host Feedback – Lisa

1. Lisa: Not much to report. The committee needs to get together to decide when the make-up workshop will be held. Will most likely have a date for the workshop in January because holiday madness happens in December.
2. Mark M.: Expanded on this more by saying that there will be a grace period for those who haven’t completed the workshop. The date for the make-up workshop can be brought up at the next SC meeting.
3. Lisa: There’s a backlog of people who need to be trained. So far, 10 people have been trained. Explained that we are trying to get some consistency for the Hosts who are already trained so the mandatory attendance for the workshop will not apply to incoming Hosts. Those who have not attended so far have not been pulled from Hosting. She concurred with the grace period that will be offered until the make-up workshop happens. Lisa wanted clarification for the Sister Meeting Hosts and whether or not we will require their attendance.
4. Mark M.: There were 4 meetings already, and we don’t want to nag people. There’s only so much we can do to inform people about attending the workshop.

• (Lisa and Mark were answering questions that were happening in the chat) Members were inquiring about the make-up workshop and what will happen to the Hosts who have not attended yet. 

5. Glenn: The group voted to not require Sister Meeting Hosts to attend. They are encouraged to attend, but he wanted to clarify that attendance is not mandatory for those Hosts. Mark agreed that we are in the land of the grey. 
6. Kelly: Willing to meet with people about attending the workshop. She humorously that she doesn’t want to leave people out in the Bermuda Triangle. Based on scheduling and the impending holidays, she said that she can figure something out.
7. Kristen: Wanted to explain that the group is discussing the Host Feedback Workshop and not regular training for the meeting in case there were new members in the Business Meeting.  She reminded the group that responsibility and accountability comes into play after multiple reminders to attend the workshop have been given. She imparted that the workshops are short and easy. They give a lot of necessary info for Hosts with issues that we struggle with in the service team like redirection.

2. Fourth Step Workshop – Lauren

1. I’m excited to share that the fourth step workshop is nearing completion, and I’ve made significant progress. Upon reviewing our last workshop, I observed the evident growth within our group since April. Given the events of the past months, I believe many of us could benefit from a space to vent. This workshop also delves into handling conflicts and addressing challenging issues within the service team, aligning with the guidelines established in our group conscience. To ensure its effectiveness, I’m seeking input from at least two members to review and offer suggestions. . 

• Additionally, I’d like to discuss the existing group conscience related to this workshop. While the workshop is presently scheduled semiannually and is not mandatory, I’m open to exploring whether the group wishes to adjust these parameters. Perhaps we could hold a few workshops like the Host Feedback Workshop. I welcome any suggestions.

2. I’m proposing two motions:

• Motion to rename the workshop to the “Unity Workshop.” I was heavily influenced by Tradition 1 while doing the work for this workshop. Calling this a fourth step workshop doesn’t fully encompass the full content, and the ultimate goal is unity. This title feels more fitting, although aspects of the fourth step will still be included.
• One section of the workshop focuses on setting boundaries, and I referenced a source from another 12-step program, specifically a CoDA pamphlet appropriately named “Boundaries.” As I am neither a professional nor anyone’s sponsor, I seek group approval to incorporate this particular source into the workshop. Although not AA literature, CoDA follows the same traditions, and the content of the pamphlet aligns with our workshop’s purpose, offering valuable insights into handling conflict through establishing boundaries. I don’t have the qualifications to dictate what kind of boundaries people should be setting, and this source offers some credibility. There’s a limit in terms of the experiences that I can offer.

3. Mark M: Is The Fourth Step Workshop going to be like a Group Inventory? Lauren-Sort of. I was inspired and influenced by that. I don’t know if I would call it a Group Inventory completely, but there are definitely some aspects of Group Review content in the workshop. I pulled questions that I had used in the October Business Meeting that I thought would be good for the workshop too. 
4. Lisa: Group Inventory hasn’t happened, and she referred to something Lauren and I talked about previously. We had mused about covering 1 tradition per month in a BM. Our main concern was extending the BM longer when there is already a lot of material to cover in a BM setting.
   – Lisa suggested a group discussion about this idea and see if we want to implement this idea.
   – Mark M. Suggested that this idea could go through the next SC meeting. Lisa agreed.
   – SC might have a bigger picture idea for this. As long as we get some type of inventory, then that’s the main goal.
   – Christian: Agreed that we should take this idea to the SC meeting. He also volunteered to read over Lauren’s work. Suzie also expressed that she would like to be included with the workshop.
5. Mark M. asked Lauren to cover the two motions again just so that the group is clear. 1^st motion: Rename workshop to “Unity” Workshop.
   **Seconded and Passed (19 Yes Votes/No Dissent)

2^nd motion: Permission to use the CoDA pamphlet called “Boundaries” as a source for one of the sections in the workshop.
**Seconded and Passed (19 Yes Votes/No Dissent)

3. Intergroup Representative Update – Lauren

1. I simply went over the document that had the edited descriptions for Intergroup. I made very few alterations to the wording in the descriptions that already exist. I added the Zoom Account Instructions in the descriptions which is something we voted on awhile back. I was informed that it does take awhile for the descriptions to update after they are submitted on Intergroup; so, please be patient for the updates. I covered the Newcomer’s Meeting and the change in title along with the description. I know that people wanted to make sure that the language reflected certain aspects of that meeting; so, I made sure to be inclusive of people’s ideas from the last BM. I let the group know that I have a description for the Chip Meeting ready to go because that wasn’t on Intergroup yet. I also created a description for the LGBTQIA+ Meeting, but I will be holding off on that particular description until we have discussed the parameters and name-change which happens later in the BM. Sarah told me that she already submitted a description for the men’s meeting; so, I did not include that one. Changes take a while through Intergroup after it’s submitted. 
2. Brett: Was concerned. He wondered why anyone would be upset about the language and semantics for the descriptions, and that I am a trusted servant of the group. Mark M: Clarified that I am going over the descriptions for the various meetings. We must have descriptions on Intergroup so that people can search the meetings. He would prefer to see the detail that’s listed in the descriptions so that people understand the meeting format and how to get into the room. 
3. Suzie: Expressed that she had a hard time seeing the material and wanted to know if this is information that will be included in the cohost blurb section of the website. Mark M: Explained that this info is only for Intergroup. The descriptions won’t go onto the Website. He explained that when people look up meetings on Intergroup, there are descriptions listed for each online AA meeting that outline the meeting format or any necessary information about gaining access to the Zoom room. That’s what Lauren is covering. 
4. Dennis: Wanted to make sure that we are not going to include the LGBTQIA+ description until it’s discussed in the BM. Lauren explained that she would not be including that description until the matter is settled later in the agenda. 
5. Motion to submit all the new descriptions to Intergroup except the LGBTQIA+ meeting.
    **Seconded and Passed (20 Yes Votes/No Dissent)

4. LNG Ending Time

1. The 1:00 meeting frequently goes on way past 2:00am and some members have taken advantage of “no time limit” to sometimes share from 10 -20 minutes while positioning themselves as the last share of the meeting. We need to address this matter in a healthy way so that more members are willing to do service for this meeting.    
2. Lauren: Gave background on GC that was voted on in May. We voted to have the cutoff for hands at 1:30. We removed Host Discretion to ensure consistency between Hosts. This cutoff for hands worked, and the meeting was ending in a timely way without having the change the format of the meeting. It wasn’t necessary. We tried the 5-minute shares after 2am, but that did not work and did not affect how soon the meeting ended. It wasn’t consistent with the rest of the meeting’s GC for unlimited timing for shares. The 1:30 cutoff worked. I propose using what is tried and true and give the new cutoff two months rather than changing the whole format for the last hour. If it doesn’t work out, then implement the 2am cutoff. However, like we agreed previously, I think only newcomers and burning desires should be exempt from this rule and given priority.
3. It was also brought up that Hosts can mention that there are other 24/7 marathon meetings online if people needed a meeting after 2:00am PST.
4. After MUCH discussion and stops and starts AND revisits, Glen made a motion which stated:
   1.  5:00 Shares starting at the beginning of the meeting.

2. “Burning Desire” allowance for NEWCOMERS.
3. 1:30am cutoff for hands.
4. 2:00am Hard Stop for meeting.
**Seconded and Passed (18 Yes Votes/2 No Votes)

5. Proposed change to the Title of the LGBTQIA+ meeting

1. SC Action (November SC Meeting):
   1. Motion passed that a name clarification is necessary to make sure the attendees and/or potential attendees are comfortable with the parameters of the meeting.
2. BM Response

1. After discussion, we came to an agreement and motion that the name of the meeting will be changed to “The LGBTQIA+ and Allies Meeting” with an update supplied by Mona to the meeting script.
   **Seconded and Passed 20 Yes Votes/2 No Votes)

6. Thread Overhaul 

1. Lauren explained this topic: I went over what was screenshared and gave a summary of what I wrote. I covered the purpose of the Thread Overhaul, the discrepancies that I noticed when I initially outlined the overhaul and kept the info current to reflect the past few months. Having the threads updated helps all of us follow GC that’s in place for return to service processes and breaks from service. There’s also safety or tech issues that can happen. I reiterated that it’s difficult to implement even small changes that occur in GC. Members can have up to a 30-day break from service as long as it is communicated with the schedulers. If members do not communicate with the schedulers for 7 days, then they are removed from the threads. Of course, we always welcome people back if they want to return to service. We just ask that people do not ghost the schedulers or the group. I explained the importance of the SC Thread in terms of maintaining transparency/communication with the group. There are often difficult discussions that take place, just like Business Meetings, but it’s a way for us all to stay on the same page with any pertinent changes. Lisa has updated the threads regularly. 

1. Lisa: Gave the reminder that certain threads like the Announcement Thread and GUTS Thread are not mandatory. These threads are discussed and fully explained during training, but new members are given a TON of info. It’s hard to remember all of the various threads and the GC that goes along with them. 
2. Sebastian: He is one of the Thread Admins and will be looking over the documents so that he can get started on the work involved.
3. Mark M: Perhaps we could have some sort of WhatsApp Thread designed to outline the different threads. Perhaps that’s an idea that could be given through the SC.
4. Lauren: Explained that there is a WhatsApp document on the Website that outlines the threads and the GC that goes along with them. I can also post that info in the threads, if needed.

Items Tabled

1. Specifying Job Roles
2. 24/7 Contact List
3. GC Manual
4. Non-Facilitated Topics