[Businessmtg] June 2013 meeting

[Steve Rankin]

Hi ASPers,

About my being the List Owner.  In the beginning, and for the first 10
years, I was the List Owner.  In other words, ASP resided on my personal
server which meant that I literally owned the ASP list.  I should point out
that I'm not the List Owner anymore and haven't been since May 2006.  

About my suggested compromise.  


First, the compromise itself:


===================================================

A.  ASP donate 50% of the funds in excess of the prudent reserve to WSO. 

B.  ASP donate 20% of the funds in excess of the prudent reserve to OLAOC
(aka OLA-IS).

C.  ASP donate 20% of the funds in excess of the prudent reserve to GSO's of
countries representing members of ASP - details to be determined by the
Steering Committee.

D.  ASP hold in trust 10% of the funds in excess of the prudent reserve for
donation to Al-Anon service arm(s) that specifically serve and represent
online meetings. Said service arm must allow for participation by a
representative from ASP to qualify.

E.  ASP repeat the process outlined by A thru D above on a quarterly basis.

===========================================================================


Second, a bit of explanation about the compromise . . .


A.  Most f2f groups donate their excess funds using the 60/40/10 split; 60%
to their District, 40% to their Area and 10% to WSO.  Unfortunately, we
don't yet have a District or an Area, so I increased the percentage to WSO
by 5 times to 50%.  Frankly, that seems rather generous and certainly far
more than any f2f group I've ever known.  


B.  A fact of life about online Al-Anon =>  OLAOC/OLA-IS provided members of
Al-Anon's and folks looking for Al-Anon the ONLY online source of
information about online meetings.  Eventually, WSO offered information
about online meetings, however the information at OLA-IS continues to be
much better and provides the member looking for a meeting valuable
descriptions of the meetings that went far beyond a mere link to a web page.

  FACT: OLA-IS provides a very real and valuable service to the members of
Al-Anon and to ASP.   
  FACT: More members find ASP via OLA-IS than WSO.
We have a duty to support Al-Anon service entities that provide service to
ASP.  
Does it matter if administrative portions of OLA-IS's web site aren't up to
date?  No.  The site still performs the service to the members of Al-Anon.
Does it matter whether OLA-IS is a "registered group" or officially
recognized by WSO as a whatever?  No. Where in our Traditions does it say
that a group must be registered before it is a group?  It doesn't -
registration, etc is part of the bureaucracy of the fellowship, not a part
of the Program.

My suggested compromise is to send 20% of our excess funds to OLAOC in
support of OLAOC & OLA-IS.

Do I believe that OLAOC needs 20%?  Not really.  At least not currently.
That does NOT change our responsibility to support OLAOC, however.  Besides,
I'm sure that if OLAOC started receiving some steady financial support that
OLAOC would respond by sending their excess funds on to WSO.  In other
words, WSO would get a portion of this 20%.  That would raise WSO's portion
above our direct 50%.  How much more?  I don't know.  That's why I'm also
moving forward to represent ASP at OLAOC, and why the SC will be looking
forward to electing a rep to OLAOC.


C.  ASP has many members across the globe.  Some of those members live in
countries with established GSO's.  Citizens of other countries make their
donations to their GSO, not to the WSO of the USA & Canada.  IMHO, we should
do the same and donate a portion of our excess to those GSO's.  Naturally,
this will take a bit of research, which is why I suggested that the details
be worked out by the Steering Committee.  I'm thinking of a rotating
donation, say one quarter the excess goes to Germany, another quarter it
goes to South Africa, etc.  Otherwise currency fees would obliterate our
donations.  


D.  Yes, it was my idea that we retain 10% in a special fund for the day
that some entity becomes available that actually serves the online meetings.


My thinking is that if 50% of the excess funds go to WSO right off the top,
and 20% goes to OLAOC which will most likely wind up going to WSO after
spending some time at OLAOC.  That's 70% that goes to WSO directly and
indirectly.  

Just 20% goes to other GSO - which IMHO would probably serve the members of
Al-Anon more directly than funds sent to WSO.

See, back when I was an Area Treasurer in Panel 37, I did an analysis of how
my Area spent its annual $80K budget.  The analysis divided money into two
categories:
1.	Money spent that directly served Al-Anons in the Area
2.	Money spent that supported the administration of the Area.  
Less than 5% was being spent on projects that directly supported Al-Anons in
Northern California.  Over 95% was spent on paying for the trusted servants
to attend conferences, meetings, etc.  Yes, out of $80,000 the Area spent
each year, less than 5% went directly to supporting the local members of
Northern California who still suffered.  

My thinking is that WSO isn't much different.  

If it's OK for Groups to spend Group funds to pay the expenses of GRs to
attend District, Area meetings and Area Assemblies, why isn't it OK for ASP
to spend money on paying the expenses of an ASP rep to attend a meeting with
other online meeting representatives?

Way back in the late 1990's, the members of OLA-IS worked together with the
cooperation of WSO and hosted an online meeting room at the 1998 Al-Anon
International at Salt Lake City.  It was a rousing success.  Not just for
the members of the online meetings that got to meet each other f2f, but for
the greater fellowship to experience actual online meetings in real time.
This would be a great opportunity for representatives of online meetings to
meet and discuss the business of Al-Anon f2f.

But, if we are going to move forward, we need to be (a) proactive - WSO is
not going to help, and (b) we need to be ready, willing and able to support
our trusted servants in working with other members of online meetings.  

I guestimate is that we might have enough excess funds to set aside
$100/year in a special fund for supporting this service.  That's less than
my group spends sending our GR to our District meetings and Area Assembly
each year.


Hugs,
Steve