June 25th 2023 SC Meeting
SC Chair: Lauren
SC Members Present: Dennis, Kristen, Lisa, Amy, Donna, Elle
Barbara communicated her absence.
Old Business
I. Lifting Zoom Requirements
II. Anniversary Committee
III. SC Thread (4/28/2023
A. SC members wanted to discuss the GC of Hosts being scheduled as cohosts. Balancing the Host/Cohost responsibilities interchangeably.
B. Donna made the point that Hosts are subject to Cohosting per GC. Schedulers follow this group conscience.
C. Lisa made the point that there are those who do have preferences regarding Hosting/Cohosting. This could be worthy of discussion at the BM. Group Conscience can evolve based on how the group feels about it.
IV. Motion to Bring all three topics to the BM.
A. Seconded and Passed (6 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
New Business
I. Racism Complaint
A. Maya: To the GUTS Service Team: I hope all is well on your end. I am reaching out because I’ve experienced an instance of racism and was called “insane” and “stupid” for expressing my feelings about racist comments. I was then told I was "aggressive" and that slavery was not the person’s fault. That is 100% true, but it does not give someone the right to be racist. I am considering reporting Natalie to AA, but would prefer to handle this internally. Natalie does not have any family she is in touch with, and referred to herself as "in crisis." I am more concerned about her mental state than the offensive comments. I am deeply concerned about her being racist or rude to newcomers. I am so grateful to have GUTS in my life because it’s an inclusive and diverse meeting, and everyone has been so patient with me in my quest for emotional sobriety. I hope this is taken seriously because I don’t feel safe or seen. Thank you for taking the time to read this, I look forward to your response. Best, MRC. (June SC Feedback)
1. Kristen: The person lodging the complaint about racism won’t be able to attend the business meeting the first Sunday of the month in July. They were wondering if there could be a meeting beforehand which they could attend and offer solutions for prejudice and how to establish boundaries. (June SC Thread)
– Lauren motioned to hold a separate meeting on July 9th so that Maya can attend.
– Seconded and Passed (7 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
II. Zoom Background Blurring
A. Jeremy: Can we change the zoom settings to allow us to blur our backgrounds? When we add our zoom account to Guts it is removed from the settings in all meetings. I had to set up a new account so I can do it in the meetings and hosting. But would like to go back to 1 account. (June SC Feedback)
B. SC Response
1. SC members explained that they have seen background blurring from various members in the meeting. They have also been able to blur their own backgrounds.
2. Elle said she would see if she can blur her own background and check into it after the SC Meeting.
3. Elle suggested asking members if they are having problems blurring their background at the BM and direct any issues to Sarah S.
– Bring to the Business Meeting
– Seconded and Passed (7 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
III. Service Practices
A. Lauren: I have been updating the content for the Service Practices section of the Website. I am including Scheduling Group Conscience with this updated document. I was attempting to facilitate the GC vote held at the May SC meeting.
1. Lauren offered to write up a document that gives an overview of current GC on scheduling. (May SC Meeting)
B. The Service Practices included outdated scheduling GC; so, I created a section for scheduling. This document will not be posted until scheduling software is put into place and figured out. Lisa and a scheduler looked over the document.
1. Lisa pointed out that scheduling new service team members 3 times a week for the first 2 weeks isn’t happening. She proposed a discussion about this to see if the group would like to keep this GC.
2. This is what Lisa was referring to: Availability for service shifts will be shared with the schedulers before training. A new member’s first few shifts will be scheduled immediately after training. (Service Practices)
– For the first two weeks of service, a new service member will be scheduled three times a week to put training into practice. (Service Practices)
3. Motion to bring #2 to the BM.
– Seconded and Passed (7 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
IV. SC Feedback (June SC Feedback)
A. Lauren: I will not be bringing certain SC feedback to this meeting unless specifically requested. Discussing the feedback in the group setting could potentially harm the Host involved and may overlook other nuanced aspects of this situation. The placed SC feedback was pertinent to an earlier issue that was resolved privately and maturely between members. Cohosts privately held a group conscience vote to remove a Host’s tags because the Host was incapacitated while Hosting. The Host explained that the incapacitation was due to health issues, and a 7-day break was suggested in accordance with current GC. There were no unilateral decisions made, and a group of SC members met to discuss the situation. Our intention was for the Host to return to service, and we believed that approaching the issue empathetically would be more effective than bringing it to a SC/Business Meeting. The goal was to prevent unnecessary drama or gossip and to protect the individual’s privacy. Handling the situation respectfully was our priority.
B. Lauren: I propose exploring alternative facilitation to address these types of situations. Current GC is a vote between cohosts in the Live Thread. If the cohosts determine that a Host is not sober, the Host will be asked to pass the Host tag to someone else.
1. There is no defined group conscience on how to handle such issues after the cohosts have requested the Host to pass their tags. I suggest discussing and establishing a group-approved process for these situations.
2. I would like to amend this GC to include the incapacitation of the Host’s ability to perform their duties during the regular meeting.
3. Motion to bring Section B to the BM.
– Seconded and Passed (7 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
C. The anonymous member who posted the feedback expressed concerns regarding long terms, perceived "policing" by the SC, and the believed that SC members were overstepping their boundaries. They argued that issues arising during meetings should not be resolved by the SC.
D. Terms
1. Lisa and Lauren keep track of service team terms through a shared document. When this document was created, there were discrepancies with extended terms. These issues were resolved at the April BM. The members fulfilling their terms fall in line with current GC.
E. SC Response
1. Most SC members believed that this situation was handled respectfully and bringing this further would be unnecessary. Lauren proposed to facilitate the GC itself instead of the situation. This was proposed to address the concern of the person posting feedback and to stay solution based.
2. Kristen pointed out that SC members used to police and handle problems without transparency. It used to create dilemmas within the group. In this case along with other contextual situations, handling situations one on one to protect anonymity and member privacy can be appropriate. She encouraged flexibility in these types of situations. She said that GC was followed except the cohosts did not have the GC vote in the Live Thread.
3. Lauren wholeheartedly agrees with Kristen. Context matters and creates mutual understanding. Allowing flexibility based on the context can resolve conflicts without group involvement.
4. The cohosts did not post the GC vote in the Live Thread because they did not want to embarrass the host or hurt anyone’s feelings. Both Amy and Lisa were proud of the cohosts for their quick response to this issue and the empathy that was given through a challenging situation.
5. SC members seemed to agree that the wording of “incapacitation” was a good idea because it broadens the scope. Amending this GC would prevent the perception that there is an attack on Host’s sobriety. Rather, the GC would include situations where the Host did not relapse, but they are unable to complete their shift due to other factors.
V. Suggestion for Ban Guidelines
A. Susan W: Concerning the committee to develop guidelines for banning people from the group: I have screenshots of a text message sent from Stacy W to Justin F on Wednesday, June 21. Justin was banned from Guts because of her allegations of sexual harassment. She is continuing to pursue him. I believe the new committee should have this evidence to ponder as they formulate policy. Perhaps stern written warnings should be a preliminary intervention before a ban is enforced. When a person making a harassment accusation doesn’t show up to present testimony or evidence to the business meeting, perhaps the issue should be tabled or other interventions given. Banning a member could have serious consequences on his or her recovery.
1. Lauren: Two other women showed up and spoke out about their own experiences with harassment at the BM, and their voices are not discounted. We currently have a GC that topics are tabled when the members don’t show up at the BM after they place their SC feedback. Topics are tabled until the members can attend. Ban guidelines are still a work in progress right now.
2. Members didn’t want to reopen the wounds from this ban and felt that alternate facilitation would be appropriate for this situation.
3. Lisa wondered if we should reach out to people who posted the feedback and let them know their feedback was discussed.
– Lauren responded: Direct members to the SC Notes. The notes are supposed to be on the website, at some point. In the meantime, members can be directed to me, and I can send them the notes. The SC Notes show that everyone’s feedback is discussed by the SC.
4. Dennis: Update group on what committee has so far. The system for issuing bans is mostly worked out. The committee is working on a list of what constitutes a ban and the appropriate timeframes.
– Motion to bring this to the BM.
– Seconded and Passed (7 Yes Votes/No Dissent)
VI. LGBTQIA+ Contact List
A. Mona stepped down from the contact list position. Maya is willing to step in and combine the BIPOC and LGBTQIA+ Contact list. Cultural Resource Coordinator would be the title of this service position. This Coordinator offers resources to the group that are relevant and supportive to the group’s diversity and various cultural backgrounds.
1. Bring this topic to the BM.
2. Seconded and Passed (7 Yes Votes/No Dissent)