[Businessmtg] Packets, Business Practices, and Unity

[Jerry H.]

Biz-Pals,


The day after tomorrow I'll be speaking at my state's Al-Anon Convention. No biggie really - 15 minutes as part of a panel on Al-Anon's Legacies. I drew the straw for Unity through the Traditions. In reading through many CAL sources on Unity in preparation, with this ASP business discussion rolling through the back of my noggin, it dawned on me how easy it is to become diverted by personalities and just plain pissing contests from our primary spiritual aim: to help friends and families of alcoholics become able to cope with their circumstances.


There's a quote in Al-Anon's original primary reader, 'Living with an Alcoholic with the Help of Al-Anon', 1978 edition, p.55: "Unity of thought and purpose give the best assurance of growth for the group and for each individual." I believe that our KBDM process was edging us toward a unity of thought and purpose. In my estimation it is only impatience which kept us from arriving at unity on this topic.


Why this impatience I have to ask? It's one thing to claim that KBDM isn't working; it's another to say it's not working fast enough. So I have to ask myself, "What's the rush?" I brought this topic up because ASP's "Talk" and "Walk" don't match. In recovery that's about as negative a statement as can be made, yet here we were: saying we offered Beginner Packets, but we don't offer Beginner Packets. Given a little more time KBDM would have gotten us to a unified decision.


Now, since the Secretary felt the need to hurry things along by switching over to Robert's Rules, our List Administrator very quickly made a motion, and another member of the Steering Committee followed closely with a second, we have been forced into a process that's adversarial by design - for or against - where we once were heading toward an agreement we all could swallow.


Let me tell you why this bothers me: Accepting this quick switch solution to satisfy some arbitrary time constraint will give precedent to every future Secretary to switch to Robert's Rules if they are in disagreement with the speed or direction of the Business Committee's discussion of a topic. To go back to that book I mentioned earlier, same page, "[Tradition One] suggests we evaluate every question with an open mind, taking into consideration each member's views......everyone's ideas should be welcomed as a basis for discussion, for freedom of opinion and expression are nowhere greater than in Al-Anon."


Now the only reason to force a solution by switching to Robert's Rules, with a motion and second at the ready I can conjure, with nearly two weeks still left in this Business Meeting, is that somebody wants to get around to the next item on the agenda. If that next item is so important the current topic could have been tabled for later. Or the question could have been posed so: Do you want to resume sending Beginner Packets to newcomers? Yes or No. I believe we would have been done a week ago.


This next set of topics on the agenda could prove to be quite contentious since it involves Al-Anon Traditions and ASP's standing Group Conscience on its Policies and Practices. If a chairperson is so willing to abandon our KBDM process on something so relatively simple as offering packets or not I will be entering into these very complex discussions without an assurance that "...every decision and every action taken by a group must consider its ultimate effect on the group as a whole." (Yep, same book, same page.)


So, while I would normally have no problem going along with this current motion to rescind our formerly approved motion to send packets, I can not in good conscience condone the process which may bring us to this decision. KBDM works, and even where it doesn't seem to be working at any given moment I trust that our Higher Powers have arranged that to be so for some good purpose.


I will be voting against the motion to rescind when these full discussions are past and we come to the vote.


In service,

Jerry

-