REPORT OF THE SECOND ASSEMBLY AD HOC COMMITTEE

January 6, 2007

 

1.         PURPOSE: In recent years many have expressed concerns about the way the Western Washington Area conducts it business at the Area Assembly. In January of 2006, the Area Chairperson asked several people to form an ad hoc committee to look at the possibility of a second assembly to address some of the expressed concerns. The committee was formed to research the feasibility and advisability of WWA 72 holding two Assemblies annually. This committee saw its task as:

 

            1) Determining whether concerns over the current Assembly format could be

            addressed by adding a second annual assembly.

            2) Determine possible formats which would encourage meeting these ends.

            3) Ensuring that what is proposed by this committee is practicable, both

            financially and logistically.

            4) Considering possible impact on the groups within the Area if this committee's

            proposals are implemented.

            5) Reporting this committee's findings to the Area.

 

2.         BACKGROUND: The Area Assembly is a meeting of the Area GSRs and the Area Committee. It is the mainspring of the Conference structure. It is the democratic voice of the movement expressing itself. Assemblies are the responsibility of the Area Committee and they are conducted by the Area Chairperson. The practice of holding one Assembly in the fall began when Area 72 encompassed the entire state of Washington plus parts of British Columbia and Idaho. Motion 62.1 established that the "State Assembly" be held on the first Saturday in October. The event appears to have started as a one day Assembly, but due to the travel involved to attend, additional activities were scheduled for Friday night (when many people arrived) and a "spiritual breakfast" was added on Sunday (for those leaving late).

 

Currently, the Area Assembly is scheduled once a year in October over three days. The agenda is set by the Area Chairperson. Recent Assemblies have been run according to the following format. The Assembly begins on Friday afternoon with panels discussing AA service topics. This is followed by a GSR sharing sessions on Friday evening. On Saturday morning the Assembly begins with reports from Area Officers, special reports, a GSR sharing session, and a DCM sharing session, with new business (debate and decisions on motions) to follow, usually beginning in the afternoon. Saturday evening may include a speaker. In even years, the elections of Area Officers run concurrent with the rest of the agenda on Saturday. On Sunday morning there is a spiritual breakfast, a speaker, and sobriety countdown. The assembly typically ends by noon on Sunday.

 

In 1992, an ad hoc committee reviewed the possible benefits of a second Assembly. Their recommendation was:

 

a) That a spring Assembly take the place of the April quarterly;

            b) That the spring Assembly be a one, or at most, two day affair to keep cost to

            the groups to a minimum;

            c) That the Area Assembly agrees upon a basic format and then direct the Area

            Committee (or a sub-committee thereof) to work out the specifics

 

 

 

3.         GOALS: The committee determined that the main intent of our review was making the GSRs (and by extension, their Home Groups) role in the area process more effective and reviewing current Assembly practices. We initially found that the possible benefits of going to two assemblies were:

 

            a) Increase the overall participation by GSRs, and by extension their Home

            Groups, in Assemblies.

            b) Allow for more meaningful discussion on Area business at the home group

            level and get their input more often.

            c) Increase GSRs sense of participation and understanding of the Area process.

            d) Better familiarize GSRs with current or potential area officers, allowing for

            more informed decisions during elections.

            e) Streamline business process by reducing the perceived immediacy aspect of

            Assemblies. This would hopefully cut down the amount of new business

            introduced at the Assembly (i.e. floor motions).

 

4.         INPUT FROM ATTENDEES: In an effort to assess the effectiveness of our current Western Washington Area Assembly's format and procedures, the committee sought input from Assembly attendees on the following questions:

 

1) How many Assemblies have you attended over the years? Do you regularly attend the Friday workshops/panels? Do you stay for the entire business meeting on Saturday? If not, why?

2) Did you attend the 2005 Assembly? If yes, did you attend the Friday workshops/panels? Did you stay for the entire business meeting on Saturday? If not, why?

3) Is the location of the Assembly a factor in your attendance?

4) Is the cost of the Assembly a factor in your attendance?

5) Is the length of the Assembly a factor in your attendance?

6) Are the Friday workshops/panels useful (i.e. GSR/DCM orientation, etc.)? What changes would you recommend?

7) Do you stay for the optional Sunday morning spiritual breakfast? Is this an important and/or enjoyable part of the Assembly for you? Would you prefer a Saturday evening Banquet?

8) Is the amount of business handled on Saturdays excessive? If yes, should we limit the amount of business we conduct and how should we do this?

9) Is the agenda (order of business) for the Assembly effective? If not, what changes would you recommend?

10) With our current Area Quarterly process for establishing the Assembly agenda motions and pre-Assemblies to discuss these motions, do you feel adequately prepared to conduct business on Saturdays? If not, why and what could be done to improve this?

11) In even numbered years, we elect out Area Delegate, Chair, Treasurer, and alternates for these positions. How do you feel about holding elections and conducting business simultaneously?

12) A majority of Areas in the U. S. and Canada hold multiple (2 or more) Assemblies a year. Do you think this would be an effective way of conducting business in the Western Washington Area? Would holding 2 Assemblies a year address your concerns over current Assembly procedures? How do see this happening?

 

Initially, the questionnaire was distributed to all DCMs (including a translated version to Districts 1 and 57), printed in the Area Newsletter, and posted as a fill-out form on the Area website. From that set, the committee received 50 responses. Note that in volunteer surveys like this, those that respond are usually the ones with strong opinions. Apathetic people usually don't respond. It is unsure whether all DCMs distributed the questionnaire. The response size was not sufficient to represent the group conscience of the Area. The survey was passed out at the 2006 Area Assembly and 449 responses were received. This sample better represented the Area's "conscience" on the matter.

 

Attached is a statistical summary of the responses. In general:

 

?    A clear majority of respondents said that cost, location, and length of the Assembly did not affect their attendance. Costs, however, were a matter of concern for GSRs. There was an expressed desire to keep costs for attending the Assembly down to a reasonable level.

 

?    47% of the respondents attended the Friday night events and a little over 60% stayed for the spiritual breakfast. Many comments were received to start the Friday night panels later (for people arriving late from work) and focusing the GSR sharing by providing topics. There was no significant support for replacing the Sunday morning breakfast with a Saturday evening dinner.

 

?    61% of the respondents felt that the Friday workshops were useful.

 

?    A simple majority of the respondents with an opinion felt that the business conducted on Saturdays was excessive and that the amount of business should be limited (about 1/3 of respondents had no opinion). Most respondents felt that the Area should do away with, or limit, floor motions. There were recommendations to eliminate DCM/GSR sharing, polling for availability during elections, and "extraneous" items (undefined).

 

?    65% of the respondents with an opinion felt that the current Assembly agenda was effective. Comments were received to stick to the agenda time schedule and start the "business" (motions) earlier. 80% of the respondents felt they were prepared to conduct business at the Assembly. Many cited the current Pre-Assembly format as being effective in preparing them.

 

?    45% of the respondents were opposed to a second Assembly; 32% were in favor. Many of those stating no preference and some opposing felt they needed more information (How many days? What would the format be?).

 

?    It appears that the general perception is that the "business" of the Area, and focus of the Assembly, is dealing with motions. With this attitude came the belief that reports, etc. interfered with conducting business.

 

5.        INPUT FROM OTHER AREAS: The committee attempted to contact all areas in North America to get an idea of what others do that might help meet our aims. The committee collected information on 53 Areas from direct responce, Final Conference Reports, Area websites, or other sources. The following points were noted:

 

?    Only 4 Areas (including Area 72) of the 93 Areas in the US and Canada hold only 1 Assembly a year---one of those Areas does business at the Area Committee rather than at the Assembly.

?    Almost all Areas rotated their Assembly's location -- only a few Areas reported that this had any affect on attendance and all said attendance picked back up after a few years.

?    Most areas spent much more time in sharing and less time in business sessions during assemblies than we do. Several areas broke into roundtables, workshops or the like as the greatest part of their assembly. It appears that motions are produced as a result of the discussions instead of being the initiator for discussion on a topic.

?    We found only one area that had recently switched from one to two annual assemblies (Area 92).

?    12 of the 53 Areas that responded use their spring assembly as either a Pre-Conference Assembly or as a Delegate's report.

 

6.        FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: A significant number of respondents to the '06 Assembly Questionnaire expressed the idea that the Area should factor in costs and the demand on time when organizing service events. While service work has always involved "sacrifices" for those participating (as well as providing great rewards), the constraint on time and resources in modern days should be considered. To keep cost to a minimum we considered a one day, or at most a two day 2^nd assembly. This would keep the cost to the WWA roughly where it is at now, assuming that the April assembly supplants the April quarterly. It is realized that due to the geographical size of our area, groups on the perimeter of the area may encounter at least a one night's lodging even for a one day assembly. If we got to a format where several break-out rooms are necessary, schools or fairgrounds could fulfill our needs and keep registration fees in a reasonable price range. A lunch-only format would serve to both keep the cost to assembly participants down, and to keep the planning demands on the host committee more manageable.

 

7.        POSSIBLE FORMATS FOR CONDUCTING BUSINESS: Based on input from the Area, we believe that a second Assembly should be limited to a one day event with the possibility of optional events on the Friday night preceding the Assembly. Possible Friday events include GSR orientations/schools, DCM/Area Officer meetings (similar to Quarterly attendance), and Area inventories. A second Assembly should replace the current April Quarterly and may include a Pre-Conference session, Committee roundtables or discussions on topics of concern, and review of new motions (to be voted on at the subsequent Fall Assembly). The Fall Assembly would remain as a three day event with minor revisions to the format -- use Friday evening for GSR orientation (for new GSRs) and GSR/DCM sharing on selected topics. Saturday events could include committee/officer reports (with emphasis on what the committee is doing, not what the Chairperson is doing) or roundtable sessions, voting on motions, and elections.

 

For roundtables/discussions - Assembly participants could be assigned to one of ten assembly committees: PI, CPC, Corrections, Treatment, Archives, Grapevine, Literature, Finance, Polices and Procedures/Agenda, or Newsletter. New motions or topics of interest could be discussed in appropriate committees during this session. New business could be introduced at the assembly, either via one of the committees or on the floor. However, introducing a new business motion would only allow discussion to place it onto the subsequent Fall Assembly's agenda as old business. This would give groups in the Area ample time to discuss new motions as well as giving the Area committee time to clean them up, where necessary. Motions carried forward from the previous Assembly would be voted on, hopefully with minimal discussion.

 

This committee also discussed the logistics of this format and agreed that this format is reasonable. We also felt that the exact structure and process should be worked out by the Area committee with final approval by the Area Assembly.

 

8.        POINTS TO CONSIDER:

?    The committee realizes that this proposal is drastically different from what we now do but saw these potential benefits:

a) Gives GSRs a chance to see firsthand the needs of the various standing committees and to relay this information to Home Groups.

b) Gives standing committee chairs a chance at direct, involved contact with GSRs.

c) New ideas could be developed by a much broader cross-section of views and experiences than is currently done.

?    Given that the purpose of the Area is to facilitate the passing of information upward (to Home Groups) and downward (to the General Service Conference) and to assist the Districts and Home Groups in 12^th Step efforts to carry the message, the role of discussion before the fact (before motions are made) via roundtables/panels seems important.

?    By concluding the assembly at 5 p.m. most participants would be able to make it home that same evening.

?    The addition of a second Assembly could streamline the Area's business process and greatly reduce the amount of new business brought to the floor of the assemblies as a result of extensive discussion and Home Group input on topics before motions are made.

?    As in all instances of change, there would be a period of uncertainty and confusion until people adjusted to the new format and procedures.

?    How would our current Committee Quarterly and Pre-Assembly practices fit in with the revised Assembly format?

 

7.        SUMMARY:

Although there was no strong support for a second Assembly from the '06 Assembly Questionnaire respondents, this committee found possible benefits to the area in going to two assemblies annually and recommends it. We feel that the formats given in this report would meet the goals identified by this committee, and are worthy of consideration. If the Area decides to go to two assemblies, we recommend:

 

            a) That a spring assembly take the place of the April quarterly;

            b) That the spring assembly be a one, or at most, two day affair to keep cost to

            the groups to a minimum;

            c) That the Area Assembly agrees upon a basic format and then direct the Area

            committee (or a sub-committee thereof) to work out the specifics.

d) That additional discussion on the findings of the ad-hoc committee be held at Area Quarterlies and referred back to Districts for discussions by GSRs.

 

In addition, we believe the Area should address the following concerns:

 

a) It appears that the general perception is that the "business" of the Area, and focus of the Assembly, is dealing with motions. The perception of the "business" of the Area needs to change from a focus on motions to one of sharing information and experience.

b) Given that the one of the purposes of the Area is to assist the Districts and Home Groups in 12^th Step efforts to carry the message, the focus of the Committees should be on generating more Home Group involvement and supporting Home Group efforts. There is a current perception of a "disconnect" between Area Committees and Home Groups resulting in a lack of interest by GSRs in Committee activities and thus, in Committee reports at Assemblies.

 

Respectfully submitted by the 2006 Second Assembly Ad Hoc Committee.