Albuquerque, New Mexico

WSZF Meeting Record for Albuquerque Meeting

Friday 8/1/03

Meeting opened by Seth S. with a moment of silence followed by the Serenity prayer at 5:15 pm. Seth S. discussed after hours attractions.  

Introduction of the facilitator – Craig J.

Introductions of participants and observers.

California Inland and Southern Idaho are absent.

TOPICS:

Service workshop w/  zonal forum

HRP at region level

WSF support to developing regions

Operation of Co-op areas / Metro services

Basic Text evaluation

Election policies at the WSC

PI Hi guides

Added topics:

–          Ear-marking funds

–          WSL Learning Day

–          Combining H&I PI and Phone-lines into one committee

–          Coordinating Regional events within the forum

–          Resolution A  Minnesota motion

–          Insurance

–          Zonal forum Financial Accountability

–          Consensus based Decision Making

–          Financial Accountability – Better Management of NA funds

–          Assemblies/Car votes

–          Outreach – New Comers

REPORTS:

California Mid-State Region                              Bryan Walker (RD)

                                                                      Christi Weaver (RDA)

Washington-Northern Idaho Region                   Rex Smith (RD)

                                                                      Franney Jardine (RDA)

Pacific Cascade Region                                   Michael Miller (RD)

                                                                                Cathy Klupenger (RDA)

                                                                                Marisha Johnson  2^nd AD

Southern California Region                               Ruben Armas (RD)

**BREAK**  6:30pm

Northern California Region                      Roseann Berthron-Arechiga (RD)

                                                                      Jimmy Lee Provance (RDA)

San Diego Imperial County Region                    Eileen (RD)

                                                                      DW (RDA)

Region 51                                                       Jeff (RD)

                                                                                Rick (RDA)

Arizona Region                                                Greg (RD)

                                                                      Deric (RDA)

Rio Grande Region                                          Seth (RD)

                                                                      Jim (RDA)

Sierra-Sage Region                                         Vince P. (RD)

Central California Region                                  George Littleton (RD)

                                                                      Steve Ferris (RDA)

                                                                      Angie Young (2^nd RDA)

Prioritized topics by giving 4 dots to all participants.

WESTERN STATES ZONAL FORUM TOPICS

Consensus Based Decision Making (13)

Election Policies at the WSC (9)

WSLD (9)

Outreach – New Comers (9)

Insurance (8)

Assemblies / Car Votes (8)

Operation of Co-Op Areas / Metro Services (7)

Ear-Marking Funds (5)

Zonal Forum Financial Accountability (4)

     Minnesota Motion (4)

Did not cover these, they could be included as a start at picking topics at the conference

PI / H & I Guides (3)

Service Workshop with WSZF (2)

     Combining H & I, PI, & Phone lines into 1 Committee (2)

Financial Accountability – Better Management (1)

HRP @ Region (0)

WSF Support to Developing Regions (0)

Basic Text Evaluation (0)

Coordinate Regional Events in Forum (0)

Saturday 8/2/03

Meeting opened at 9:15am with the Serenity Prayer

The Red River Region was invited to join the forum discussion at the table.

I)        Consensus Based Decision Making

• We asked a question got more info and then rock and rolled.
• May be beneficial to have a discussion on resolution 8 by the Board Member.  
• Still a lot of confusion as to what it is.  Most people think it’s everyone being on the same page.  Robert Rules hurt NA.  Discuss the issue until the everyone is willing to support the decision.
• Consensus  – some people think its no opposition.
• Seems to be more difficult to implement at the Area level.  Need to teach the difference between acclimation and consensus.
• Would like to understand the fear behind consensus.
• Would like for the Board member to discuss.
• Taking consensus to home group and hoping that through rotation of service it will funnel down through the service structure.  Finding that older members are more resistant, newcomers are more open to the idea.
• Research into other regions and areas on how they implement consensus has been helpful.  Everyone has a voice and everyone’s opinion is heard.  The process seems to be more loving.
• Region is very resistant to the consensus.  Comparing to companies outside NA did not work.   Looking for ideas in how to implement the process.
• Unanimity does not work.  Using roberts rules and consensus together.  
• Would like to have discussion to see what other regions are doing.  Region is trying to implement.  Open discussion on the motion prior to the motion being on the table on Roberts Rules.  If you discuss a “motion” you are locked into roberts rules.  Need to bring an idea to the table to discuss, not a motion.  
• Regional chairperson did not fully understand consensus, therefore it did not go over well.  The facilitator really needs to understand what they are doing.  So do the participants for it to work.
• This is a tool we need to implement.  Such as the concepts have been.
• Older members are more resistant.  Consensus is simple for a simple program.  Unable to get away from 2/3 vote.  Transition works well.  Not everything at once.  
• Roberts Rules to Consensus is an issue of control.  Facilitator needs to direct the discussion and allow the body to come to a consensus.  Pro – Con pits people against each other and creates hurt feelings.  Introduce consensus through Open Forum.  Older members have a more difficult time letting go of Roberts Rules.
• Roberts Rules has been a way to inflict control over the fellowship.  Region is trying to implement consensus.  Moving away from the formality of Roberts rules.  
• One thing we are missing is literature – guidelines.  Some people say its not fellowship approved and use that to resist.
• Need to help people understand the process.  Important to ask if members understand.  Address what the motion is designed to change.
• Consensus is a more loving atmosphere.  It allows everyone to have a voice.  There is a lot of fear of letting go.  Give it to the newcomer.  Having difficulty with being patient of the teaching process.
• Consensus allows everyone to speak and one person does not dominate.  Gods will can be expressed if the members are working a program.  
• Sometimes the way regions operate is a cultural thing.  Maybe we need flexibility in how we operate.  Need a tool box for consensus similar to roberts rules.  
• Roberts rules can be used along with consensus.    Using group conscience instead of cbdm.  Decisions are made on the basis of seeking and creating broad agreement in an atmosphere of high trust and respect.    1-easy modification of proposal 2-oportunity to express trust in the body after your opinion is heard 3- Close calls with sharp disagreements won’t do.  The equivalent to the no vote is the stand aside.  (I do not assent to the proposal)  We can live with this many people standing aside.  How strong a consensus can we create right now.  The board has taken no action on the motion that was committed to them regarding consensus.  There is a relation between consensus and delegation.  Need to get away from micro managing.  SEZF – starting requesting that the board be prepared to do a presentation at their forum, rather than planting butt in seat.  
• The more that we can get from Board or NAWS at forums is better.  Fear of stepping outside the comfort zone.  Having something in writing to show the fellowship would be helpful.  
• Roberts rules can be a powerful tool.  Roberts rules as adapted in the local guide to service is what we should use, rather than the actual book.  Consensus is the same as conscience.  Consensus can be a tool to use with rr.  Facilitator has lost trust.
• Some things need to be written down.  We sometimes need formality so that everyone understands what the conscience has decided.  Is it a tool or a weapon?  Minutes are invaluable.  Elections need a hand raised.  Using a tool box for the culture you are in.
• Chairperson is a key to the direction of the meeting.  Elections and money were the difficult part of applying consensus.  Seems that 2/3 vote needs to be used for those types of decision.  Flexibility is important.  Using many options as appropriate for the body you are dealing with.  Having a workshop from the Board would be very beneficial. 
• If you have somebody (one person) blocking, what do you do?
• There is no single truth in cbdm.  The board uses a 2/3 vote to overturn a block.  A block should be made this way 1-a tradition or principal is being violated, explaining in detail how.  2-your ethics and morality are being violated, explaining in detail how.
• Validation of roberts rules being part of the cbdm is very helpful.  Financial issues seem to be more difficult to use cbdm.  Should there be smaller decision making groups?
• Legality sometimes dictates a vote.
• Need board to give us a model to work with.

Five minute break 10:35am

II)       Election Policies at the WSC

• Looking for more understanding.
• Think the procedure for elections is broke.  The human connection has been lost.  Feeling less informed than before.  Need to develop some way of bringing the human part back.  
• Trusting the board, having faith in the hrp.  Allow the process to happen.  There is a lot of confusion.  It seems to be a matter of math.  
• Looking for more information.  First year as a delegate.  
• Attended the hrp workshop.  Hrp did not express a problem with their resources.  Felt comfortable with their nominations because of the process they used.  
• Human part is missing.  Process was explained really well.  The implications of the process were not described well.  Need to vote for all those you feel would be a good candidate and no vote for those you do not feel comfortable with.
• There was not a Spanish translator available at the conference.  People did not trust the individuals in the hrp in their process.  We need to have more time for q&a.  Vote only for those you are comfortable with.
• Should not be locked into a certain number of votes.
• How much time was spent discussing the election process at the board.
• A fair amount of time was spent discussing this.  There will be more discussion.  
• Voting is a serious matter.  It means that I am giving you my confidence.  
• Looking for people to vote for was difficult.  Lack of human interaction is difficult.  Teleconferencing may be a solution.  Only looking at paper is a problem.  
• Is the HRP process not being trusted?  Need to have faith that the hrp is nominating people that are fully qualified to serve on the board.
• We don’t get all the information the hrp gets from interviewing nominees.  
• We chose to vote for everyone unless there was a reason not too.  Should not be based on who we know.  There is a lack of trust with the hrp.  We need to find a way to increase that trust.
• Hrp tries to find appropriate candidates for nominations.  If you leave the box blank, you are voting against the candidate.  Maybe a solution would be to check the box of the person you do not have confidence in.  This is a non-competitive election process.  Do not want to compromise that the board is comprised of people that 60% of the conference approved of.  Must look at the upstream processes in order to find a solution.  Leadership development process.  Need a training ground.  The hrp is not working.  There is an underlying reason why this is not working.  The board is studying the whole issue.  They are going to make recommendations to the upstream processes, rather than the election procedures themselves.  Strategic planning – focusing on the future.  WSO staff is working on those recommendations.  We are still in the developmental stage of most of these processes.
• The hrp and the board will be meeting soon to discuss the problems.  Need to have more volunteers to get the work done.  The board should be more of the visionary part of the process, rather than the workers.  
• Looking people in the eye means a lot.  
• How do we grow trust and unity within the fellowship?  
• The survey results will be studied by the board this weekend.
• Having nominees present seems to be a good thing and a bad thing.
• Hrp workshop was not heavily attended.  Having the hrp presentation on the floor of the board would be very helpful.  That could help build trust.  Personalities can elevate people based on how they interact rather than what their qualifications are.
• There should be more than two to four people on the hrp.  Service in NA is extremely important.  
• There are some questions that should be on the questionnaire.  Especially related to na service, na sponsorship, etc.  Why is the board 24 members, if that is not what is needed?  Need to feel, see and touch the nominees.  Should be allowed to ask questions directly to the nominees.
• Should we fund nominees?
• This is about trust and faith.  Is this important to me and my home group who gets elected to the board?  There are many other issues that are much more important to us.  I don’t have a fear of the good ol’boy network because the fellowship will take care of it if it were to occur.
• Maybe a joint process of the board and the hrp would work.  Need to have trust in leadership.
• Looking at other fellowship’s experience may be helpful.  No faith in process.
• Bringing people in that are known by the board to help work on projects can be a good thing.
• Letting go of the hrp will bring more dissention throughout the fellowship.
• The idea of having the board members nominating people could be a good idea.  
• Having faith in our trusted servants are important.  
• Maybe regional and board nominations would be a solution.  Appreciate the efforts of the board to include many different people in work groups.
• The hrp is too small.  Maybe include volunteer RD in the process.  
• The world board and a work group of RD’s doing the work of the hrp would be a good solution.

Meeting reopened with the serenity prayer at 1:20pm.

World Service Report                                       Ron, World Board Member

• Strategic Planning – The difference between planning and doing the work.  
• This conference will be the first strategic board working with the first strategic conference.
• Attempting to create better relationships with the RD’s.  
• High level of trust cannot translate into no accountability or no partnership.
• The board will continue to have just a few motions for the conference.
• Regions still need to have the option of presenting options at the conference.  However, they should not bog down the conference.
• Key result areas:

     1. communication

               internal

               external

     2. fellowship support

               handbook development

     3. recovery literature

               content

               process

     4. leadership and management

               leadership development

               structure

               operating processes

     5. resources

               financial resources

               staff capacity

·       The CAR  – Recommendations

1.     no more standing committees of the board – committees will be project driven.  Where we really need to be is committees for plan driven projects.

2.     6^th edition basic text – changes to the stories section

3.     reduction in the maximum size of the world board to 18. will not recommend a minimum.

4.     still formulating a recommendation on the hrp.

5.     sponsorship book – will give copies today. – Up for approval of the conf.

6.     PR roundtables – have done one with judges.  The next one will be with doctors.

·       Resolution A – 1993-4 NAWS bogged down.  Multiple corps, multiple budgets.  Resolution group put together resolutions to restructure NAWS.  Everything was implemented except resolution A.  Resolution A is coming back to the conference with an implementation plan from MN.  1. downsize the conference, 2. base representation at the conference on geography instead of population, 3. move toward consensus based decision making.

·       What can NAWS do to help the fellowship carry the message.

·       Annual report – not detailed enough.  

·       The more information the fellowship receives from NAWS, the better.  

·       The challenge is that when you blizzard people with information, they become overwhelmed and won’t read it, when you pare it down too much is not good either.  There is a balancing act.

·       Is downsizing really the answer?  The board is not recommending downsizing.  

·       The board being accountable to the conference.  

·       Basic text revision – there has not been a plan to do the evaluation as noted in the original motion.  

·       Should have World Service Meeting in off conference years.

·       Is there a possibility to having a fact sheet for the annual report?  That way there is more information available for those who want it.

·       The recommendation from the board on specific changes to revising the basic text is premature.  We should go back to the fellowship to decide what those changes should be.

·       The recommendation from the board on the basic text is not the last word.  This recommendation puts some ideas on the table on what could be changed.  

·       The recommendation is that changes should be made to book 2, not book 1.

·       Recommending changes to book 1 right now would hurt the fellowship.

III)      WSLD

• WSLD should be in a 2 year rotation.  
• Members have said that it is a waste of time and money.
• All members of the western regions have a vote at the Sunday morning meeting.  If your region does not want to host, have them attend the meeting and state that.
• It’s supposed to be about teaching how to do service.  If there is this much controversy over this, then there is a problem.  It has not been beneficial for the last two years.
• Why not use an internet site to teach people about service, rather than have a learning day.
• Its not about the money, its about teaching the newcomer.
• Technology can be utilized and save money.
• Teaching can be done on an area level.
• WSLD does not have any real financial accountability.
• This has become a big party that someone else funds people to go to.
• This event is not creating bodies to fill service positions.
• Anything that causes that much controversy can’t be a good thing.
• Let’s take the learning to the area level.
• An area can put a bid in for this event.  Eight years ago this was a good thing, but not now.  
• What about funds flow and who is WSLD accountable too?
• WSLD should not just be PI and H&I.  It should include many facets of service.
• The committee in 1999 was totally accountable to the Region for every penny.
• Not everyone who attends the Sunday meeting has voting privileges.  Only PI reps from the region do.
• The only way to kill an event is not to attend.
• Money is very important; however it is only a part of accountability.  WSLD is accountable to WSLD.  Personalities seem to be a big part of what goes on at this event.
• How many regions really fund their H&I and PI people to go?
• We should use the money to send service people to local areas to hold learning days, instead of sending our service people to the WSLD.
• This seems to be a convention rather than a service learning day.

IV)      Outreach – New Comers

• Proposition 36 – (drug court), If you have been convicted two times of a drug offense you may be sent for treatment.  There have been behavioral problems in meeting with the influx of court cards.  Educate the new comers about NA and educate trusted servants on how to handle new comers.  Weekly new comers workshop.  
• 7^th tradition is not passed at the workshop and court cards are signed.
• We need to discuss this topic throughout the fellowship.  Service Solutions Committee.
• Can do new comer workshop at Area.  Lot’s of q&a.
• We have an extra responsibility to welcome those new comers and let them know we are here.
• Outreach is invaluable.  Through training we can help them to develop the desire to stop using.
• Treatment centers have been more of a problem.
• Holding the court cards until the end of the meeting is holding control over other people.  Allowing people to get their court card right away can bring peace back to the meetings.
• Could workshops replace people reaching out to the newcomer on their own?
• Outreach needs to be along cultural lines as well.

V)       Insurance

• Need information on insurance to take back to region.  Have been operating under no insurance.
• Beginning to research the types of coverage’s needed.  
• Do insurance companies really understand what they are covering?  Are claims paid when something happens at a meeting?
• There is information available from other regions who have done this before.  Just ask.
• Some regions only insure the board members and four events.  Then as events come up, riders are requested.  Our region has a person that deals with insurance specifically.  There should be a single point of responsibility in regards to insurance.
• Who insures high risk non-profit organizations?  Must do a lot of research and find one person of accountability.
• Forming guidelines is very important.  Facilities are asking to be additionally insured.  This jacks up the price of insurance.  Meetings are half the premium and then the other half is events.
• If you do have an incident, you need to research and see if it’s cheaper to pay out of pocket or go through the insurance.
• Policies can include other states for a short period of time.
• Is anyone aware of a situation where you did not have insurance and where sued.  
• Some states individual members can be sued rather than the fellowship itself.
• Not all regions may need to have insurance.
• Need to do cost analysis.
• Most churches etc., want a release of liability from what happens at their facility while in use by the fellowship.
• Buying insurance is not the only way you need to protect.  Putting funds aside to help retain a lawyer is important.

VI)      Assemblies / Car Votes

• How to train facilitators, how to not get burnt out.  Do you vote?  
• How do you get your CAR voting done at assemblies?  What about ballots?
• Pre-conference and Post-conference assemblies have had low attendance.  How do you encourage attendance?
• What are regions doing for their assemblies?
• Could assemblies be open for anyone attending to vote.
• RD’s can offer to do a presentation at the Area post-conference, rather than having a post assembly.
• Having the assemblies at the area level create more attendance.
• A vote of confidence can be asked of the groups on the ballot.
• Is their a set way for group conscience to sent to the Rd’s?
• Regional delegates have a vote of confidence inherently.
• Facilitated discussion is important and helps to come to and understanding of the conscience.
• Involving the rcm’s in facilitating on a particular motion is a great way to have more fellowship involvement.
• What would the CAR look like when the conference is consensus based decision making?  It will look different and we need to look out of the box if we are going to look out of the box for the conference.
• Where are delegates nominated?  What should delegate’s terms be?
• Feedback on terms of RDs’.
• Having several assemblies throughout the region seems to have better results.
• Who helps put regional assemblies on.  Is it regional activities?
• The area is responsible for putting the assembly on. 

Sunday 8/3/03

Meeting re-opened at 9:05am with the serenity prayer.

Region 51 would like to host the next WSZF.  Texas Station 1^st weekend in August 2004.

It was agreed that the RD from Nor Cal will give the WSZF report at the conference in April 2004.

VII)     Operation of Co-Op Areas / Metro Services

• Two areas wanting to share services. Need input on what other regions are doing or have done.
• Regions with areas that are close together might benefit from metro services.
• Are their any models on co-op services?  Have not found any literature.  Finding that they only want to do some services, not all.  
• Break up into districts which are governed by the area body.  Talk about disbanding districts because it’s not working.  Funding seems to be an issue.
• Three areas share services.  All three areas have to agree on all decisions and share funding.
• A single point of accountability must be clearly defined.  Choosing a single Area to become a sub-committee of has worked.  Structure is very important.  
• There are guidelines available in Nor Cal.  The most necessary ingredient is trust.  
• What are the benefits of co-op services?
• An umbrella group is multiple meetings with one rep for area.
• There are not very good guidelines on how to do this, even in the local guide to service.
• Reach out to the WSO with any experience that works.
• How do we reach out and provide services to other areas when there is struggle to meet the originating areas needs itself.
• Policies are important and need to be clearly defined.
• Could we put a request for knowledge of other areas, regions, countries on how they use shared services through NAWS News or something similar?
• There seems to be confusion on metro services in the group level.
• Seems to be issues about financial and decision making.
• Their seems to be cultural differences that split areas, however services can still be provided together.
• Must have a dominate, financially sound area that is a part of the metro.  They can be the single point of accountability.
• Biggest fear of metro services is that it would change an area into a region.
• How is splitting an area best providing services to the area groups?
• When areas split in anger and resentment, metro services seem to be difficult to work.
• Their must be trust for this to work.

VIII)    Ear-Marking funds

• There is a sentiment that this takes away from the fund flow.
• Their seems to be the idea that ear marking funds is the same as hording money.
• Newcomers fund needs to have clearly defined guidelines.
• Ear marking is different than budgeting.  It is not the same thing.
• Ear marking can cause hurt feeling and “owning services”.
• It’s a way to avoid responsibility for putting money in the basket and not trusting the process.
• Ear marked funds are funds that are donated with a specific purpose for its use.
• Ear Marking is violation of group conscience and autonomy.  This allows people to buy what they feel is appropriate, not allowing the collective conscience of the whole to determine what is appropriate for the fellowship.
• Education is important for people to understand the funds flow and to build trust.

IX)      Minnesota Motion

• Motion was read.
• Resolution A was passed and was never put into place.  It is good that is coming back to the floor of the conference.
• Region seems to be happy that Zonal Forum is not a deliberative body.  However it would support that.
• Downsizing is occurring and seems to be a natural process.
• This may cause disunity especially in North America.  There are no guidelines in how to put this into place.
• Second motion needs a lot of reworking.  
• Some of the wording in the motion seems to be a dope fiend mood.  
• Interested in the non-US delegates response.
• Some regions within this Zonal forum will not support this motion in the form that it is in.
• It seems that there is a problem with only two representatives representing the WSZF and it is a very large geographical area.
• This motion does not encompass all the components of Resolution A.  Is this an event that will finally put Resolution A to a rest?
• Diversity is an issue.  It is difficult to imagine two representatives represent such a diverse group of regions.
• Breaking down into zones is a good idea; we need to look at a better way to do that.
• Understanding how non-US delegates feel about this motion would be very beneficial; however seems to be very difficult to obtain.
• There is no perfect solution; however this one just does not seem to be the best solution.
• Will the world board discuss regional motions prior to the conference?  Yes
• Taking away our most experienced representation from the conference is a disservice to the fellowship.
• This would create more forums in order to be able to reach decisions  and voting for representation would be very difficult.
• The service structure has changed since this Resolution was made.
• This body would become more of a political body rather than a sharing body.

1012.00

1049.00

848.00

1400.00

1000.00

1000.00

1365.00

1300.00

1100.00

445.00

1000.00

board & NAWS 400.00

Cost to put on 800.00

Meeting closed at 12:02pm with the 3^rd step prayer.

Regional Reports:

ARIZONA REPORT 2003

AUGUST 1, 2003

 HELLO MEMBERS OF THE WESTERN STATES FORUM.  WE HOPE THAT ALL IS WELL IN YOUR PERSPECTIVE REGIONS.

THE ARIZONA REGION IS GROWING AT A STEADY PACE. WE HAVE OVER 350 MEETINGS IN OUR REGION, WHICH IS THE WHOLE STATE OF ARIZONA.  WE HAVE NINE AREAS IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA AND THIS YEAR WE HAVE BEEN JOINED BY THREE ADDITIONAL AREAS; RIVER VALLEY (CALIFORNIA) LAKE HAVASUE (NEVADA), AND CAN WE ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS OF EVALUATING WAYS OF INSURING THESE AREAS.

WE HAVEN’T HAD A LOT OF CHANGE IN OUR REGION SINCE THE LAST FORUM, BUT WE HAVE A FEW ITEMS TO DISCUSS WITH YOU ABOUT THE ACTIVITIES IN OUR REGION.

·       ARIZONA REGION:  AN AD HOC COMMITTEE WAS ESTABLISHED TO RESEARCH CONCENSUS BASE DECISION MAKING AND IF IT IS FEASIBLE IT WILL BE WRITTEN INTO OUR GUIDELINES. IF ANYONE HAS INFORMATION ON CONCENSUS BASED DECISION MAKING PLEASE LET ME KNOW. WE HAVE ESTABLISHED A LOST AND RECOVERY POLICY TO BE ADDED TO OUR GUIDELINES, THIS IS IN PROGRESS. OUR PI COMMITTEE IS RESEARCHING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CD TO DISTRIBUTE TO HOSPITALS AND INSTITUTIONS.  THERE ARE NOW SEVERAL SPANISH SPEAKING MEETINGS IN PHOENIX AND THAT GROUP IS GROWING. WE HAD ONE REGIONAL ASSEMBLY THIS YEAR AND ATTENDANCE WAS BETTER THAN USUALL BUT UNACCEPTABLE IN REGARDS TO AREA REPRESENTATION. A BOARD MEMBER WAS ELECTED AT THE REGIONAL ASSEMBLY AS PER THE CORPORATE BYLAWS. WE ARE TRYING TO ESTABLISH TWO PER YEAR AND TO HAVE THEM REGIONALLY.  

·       THE CAN AREA AND CONVENTION: 

THIS AREA CONSIST OF THREE UNITS ONE EACH IN CALIFORNIA, ARIZONA, AND NEVADA (CAN). THIS GROUP HAD THREE AREAS THAT OPERATED AS ONE TO PUT ON AN ANNUAL CONVENTION IN LAUGHLIN NEVADA, WHICH HAS ALWAYS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL.  THE AREAS CAME TO OUR REGIONAL MEETING INQUIRED ABOUT INSURANCE, AND HOW WE OPERATED. THE AREAS JOINED OUR REGION BUT ATTENDANCE HAS BEEN SCARCE, CAN HAS HAD REGULAR ATTENDANCE. WE PURCHASED AN INSURANCE POLICY FOR THE CAN AREA CONVENTION. IT IS NOT CLEAR HOW SERIOUS THE OTHER TWO AREAS ARE ABOUT REMAINING IN OUR REGION DUE TO THEIR ATTENDANCE.

·       INSURANCE:

OUR INSURANCE POLICY WAS AROUND $3000 LAST YEAR AND WHEN WE TRIED TO RENUE OUR POLICY THE COMPANY WANTED $10,000 PER YEAR. THE PROBLEM WAS THE REALIZED THAT THEY WERE INSURING ALL OF OUR MEETINGS AND THAT WAS A HUGE LIABILITY TO THEM. WE SEARCHED AROUND FOR ANOTHER AGENT AND GOT THE SAME RESPONSE. WE WENT BACK TO OUR AGENT AND NOW WE JUST INSURE THE CONVENTION, TWO REGIONAL EVENTS, AND THE CORORATE BOARD.  AREAS EVENTS AND MEETINGS CAN PURCHASE A RYDER UPON REQUEST FROM THE CORPORATE BOARD WHO MANAGES OUR INSURANCE. THERE HAVE BEEN INQUIRIES FROM HOME GROUPS FOR INSURANCE BECAUES SOME CHURCHES REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE IT. WE ARE EXPLORING WAYS TO HELP THE HOME GROUPS BECAUSE MOST HOME GROUPS CANNOT AFFORD A RYDER.

·       CONVENTION:

OUR CONVENTION WAS HELD ON MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND. WE HAD GREAT ATTENDANCE BUT WE DID NOT MAKE OUR ROOM BLOCK AND WE ORDERED TOO MUCH MERCHANDISE. THE CONVENTION WAS HELD IN SCOTTSDALE ARIZONA AT A 3 STAR RESORT GREAT ROOM RATES GREAT FOOD, BUT WE BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE IT WAS HELD IN THE PHOENIX METRO AREA THAT A LOT OF OUR MEMBERS DECIDED NOT TO GET A ROOM AND SAVE FOR THE WORLD CONVENTION WHICH WAS ONLY A 6 HOUR DRIVE AWAY.  WE ARE REVISING OUR CONVENTION GUIDELINES SO THAT THE SUBCOMMITTIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE AND WORK MORE AS A TEAM THAN A COMMITTEE OF ONE. THE ARIZONA CONVENTION WILL BE HELD IN TUCSON ARIZONA NEXT YEAR ON MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND, AND YOU ARE ALL WELCOME TO ATTEND.

·       AREA CONVENTION: 

THERE IS A MOTION THAT HAVE BEEN TABLED IN THE PHOENIX AREA TO HOLD AN AREA CONVENTION IN OCTOBER EITHER YEARLY OR WHEN THE REGIONAL CONVENTION IS NOT IN THE PHOENIX METRO AREA. GUIDELINES HAVE BEEN WRIITEN AND IF THE AREA APPROVES OF THE MOTION A CONVENTION MANUAL WILL BE CREATED TO OUTLINE A PROCESS ON HOW TO RUN A CONVENTION. THE GUIDELINES ARE GOVERNED BY THE CONCENSIS BASED DECISION MAKING PROCESS. COMMITTEE DOES NOT INTEND TO COMPETE WITH THE REGIONAL CONVENTION.

·       WESTERN SERVICE LEARNING DAYS (WSLD):  

THE COMMITTEE REQUESTED $4,000 AND RECEIVED ABOUT $2,000 FROM THE REGION AS SEED MONEY SO THAT THE REGION COULD HONOR ITS OWN BUDGET. AT THIS TIME THE COMMITTEE HAS A BUDGET OF OVER $12,000. THE COMMITTEE IS MEETING REGUALLY HAS MOST COMMITTEE POSITIONS FILLED AND WORKING. THE COMMITTEE IS A LITTLE DISCOURAGED BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY A VERY FEW REGISTRANTS.  OUR REGION TOOK THE RISK OF SUPPORTING THIS EVENT AND WE EXPECTED TO RECEIVE MORE THAN THE 10 TO 20 REGISTRATIONS THAT WE HAVE SO I AM PUTTING OUT AN ALERT. PLEASE GO BACK TO YOUR REGIONS AND LET YOU LOCAL FELLOWSHIP KNOWS ABOUT THIS EVENT, I HAVE BROUGHT SOME REGISTRATION WITH ME. THE COMMITTEE HAS NOT RECEIVED CONFIRMATION FROM NAS REGARDING THE REQUEST FOR SERVICE MEMBER PARTICIPATION. THE PROGRAM CHAIR INFORMED ME THAT HE WAS TOLD TO WAIT TILL AFTER THE NEW BUDGET. IF THAT IS THE CASE THE DATE OF THIS EVENT SHOULD BE CHANGED IN THE FUTURE.  THE COMMITTEE IS WORKING VERY HARD TO RAISE FUNDS FOR THIS EVENT AND IT MAY LOOK MORE LIKE A CONVENTION THAN A VENUE FOR LEARNING ABOUT SERVICE BUT THE GUIDELINES AREN’T SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT ASPECT. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CORPORATION COMMITTEE TO AUDIT COMMITTEES UPON REQUEST, A REQUEST WAS MADE AND A COMMITTEE MEMBER GOT OFFENDED THE AUDIT WAS COMPLETED AND ALL MONIES WERE ACCOUNTED FOR. ONCE AGAIN PLEASE GET THE WORD OUT THAT THIS EVENT IS HAPPENING.  OCTOBER 31 TO NOVEMBER 2, 2003, THE BEST WESTERN GRACE INN AT AHWATUKEE, 10831 SOUTH 51^ST AVENUE, PHOENIX, ARIZONA RESERVATIONS 1-800-843-6010, ROOM RATE 89.00, MENTION WSLD OR ARSC, ALL ROOMS ARE SUITES, AND THERE WILL BE A BIG TRI-AREA HOLLOWEEN DANCE ON FRIDAY NIGHT SO BRING A HOLLOWEEN COSTOME, THERE MAY BE A PRIZE FOR THE BEST COSTUME. REGISTRATION IS $15.00 AND THE FRIDAY NIGHT BANQUET IS $20.00. THERE WILL ALSO BE A COMEDY SHOW ON SATURDAY.

·       ARIZONA REGIONAL CORPORATION INCORPORATED:

THE CORPORATION COMMITTEE IS DOING WELL. WE HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED PROJECTS BY THE REGION; WRITE GUIDELINES FOR THE REGIONAL CONVENTION, REVIEW THE REGIONAL GUIDELINES AND THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION TO LOOK FOR CONFLICTS, AND WRITE GUIDELINES FOR SITE LOCATION. THE CORPORATION COMMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE TO THE REGION ONLY AND RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING BANK ACCOUNTS FOR ALL REGIONAL COMMITTEES, CONVENTION SITE LOCATION, INSURANCE, AND ANY OTHER FIDICUARY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE REGIONS. THIS YEAR WE PURCHASED CREDIT CARD MACHINES AND SET UP AN ACCOUNT SO THAT THE MACHINES CAN BE USED FOR ALL REGIONAL AND AREA UPON REQUEST FUNDRAISING EVENTS. THESE MACHINES ARE HANDLED BY THE CORPORATION COMMITTEE FOR FINANCIAL AND SECURITY REASONS. AT THIS YEARS CONVENTION WE RAN OVER $4,000 THESE MACINES, THE CHARGE FOR THE USE OF THESE MACHINES WAS INCORPORATED IN THE COST OF THE MERCHANDISE.

·       THE MINNESOTA REPORT: 

THE ARIZONA REGION IS NOT INTERESTED IN THE MINNESOTA SOLUTION TO THE RESOLUTION.

IF THERE IS ANY REGIONAL COMMITTEE IN NEED OF MY ASSISTANCE FEEL FREE TO CALL: 602-285-1947, OR GDWILL2U@QWEST.NET   

IN LOVING SERVICE

                                          GREG W.  REGIONAL DELEGATE

                                          DERIC W. REGIONAL DELEGALE ALTENATE

Northern California Report 2003

Greetings Western States Zonal Forum,

The Northern California Region consists of 20 areas and approximately 1200 meetings. Just last month we had an area spilt, we will see how these areas function in the future. The RSC meets monthly at the RSO Office in Vacaville, consisting of the RCM’s, H&I, PI, NCCNA (convention), RSO Board (an incorporated entity). We had elections in June and approved our budget last month. The regional web page is www.norcalna.org.

The H&I and PI committees meet bi monthly at the RSO office before the RSC meeting, the PI committee is without leadership and has been struggling some with participation. We have had some primarily discussions about changing the structure of the Regional PI and H&I committees, but are not yet ready to make any changes to the structure. We have a working group to host WSLD to Northern CA in 2004. The budget that was approved by our RSC was $46,000 and our RSO Board serves as the fiduciary for this event. This event continues to be a topic and cause some controversy every month at our RSC and RSO. 

NCCNA 25 was held in San Jose this year; we have not gotten a final accounting of the convention as of yet at the RSC. The NCCNA committee financially reports directly to the RSO Board which serves as the fiduciary for this committee, this information is flowing through the structure. 

The RSO Board meets monthly at the RSO office. The RSO Board supplies insurance for all meetings in our region that is paid for by the RSC. We moved our RSO to Fairfield to a bigger location in this last year. This has been a good move for us and all the committees that meet at our office. The RSO Board workload has continued to grow as the need for the RSO Board to sign contracts for events and to serve as the legal entity that provides protection to our fellowship. As a result of this the RSO Board has developed event criteria guidelines that they are requiring all events to follow in order to receive this protection.

Most of our Areas have functioning PI and H&I Subcommittees, Phonelines, monthly ASC’s and Dance or Activities Committees, the new areas are still attempting to start providing services. Some of our areas in the more rural part of the state are experiencing problems common to us in NA, more work to be done, with too few people to do it.

We are doing both pre CAR assemblies in the four zones within the region. We have decided to do just one post CAR assembly due to the lack of interest in this assembly. The Areas have communicated that they do not attend the post CAR assemblies because they receive the information about what happened at the WSC from the reporting that the RD’s give at the RSC.

In loving service,

Roseann Berthron-Arechiga RD

                                      Jimmy Lee Provance RDA

Region 51 Report 2003

Greetings from region 51,

Region 51 is currently comprised of three member areas with approximately 100 meetings per week. The RSC meets quarterly. An assembly is held in March of the conference year to obtain the regional conscience of the CAR through discussion and straw polls.  At this assembly the RD and RDA are elected. A June assembly is scheduled to present the information obtained from the World Service Conference. 

Region 51 functions primarily as a resource committee for its member areas.  Our guidelines are based on the Guide to Local Service.  We implement consensus-based decision-making at our RSC. We have no formal committees at this level of service. We hold quarterly sharing sessions for PI and H&I.  These sharing sessions are facilitated by a member RCM to encourage an exchange of ideas and discuss concerns.  The region is used as a resource to be supportive and offer guidance when needed.  We have made progress with implementing consensus-based decision-making. Many of our members still find it difficult to let go of formal voting procedures.  We hope to once again receive input and experience of other regions that currently operate in this manner. 

It was the decision of the Regional Committee to form an Ad-Hoc committee to update our guidelines. After several lengthy and constructive meetings the committee finished the document to present at our next Regional Assembly for approval. 

We continue to experience problems with fulfilling all regional commitments from our member areas.  The high turn over of trusted servants continues to add frustration and duplication of information. At our Region RCM’s fulfill all administrative committee positions such as chair, secretary, and treasurer.  

We would like to present a bid to host the WSZF in 2004. We have inquired with the Texas Hotel and currently have a tentative contract. 

In Loving Service

Jeff Horn                                  Rick Whitman

RD                                            RDA

Southern California Report 2003

Our region has approximately 1127 meetings and 151 Spanish speaking only meetings throughout its 19 areas.  Of those 1127 meetings, 4 are Armenian, 3 are Farsi, 1 is Hebrew and 3 are American Sign Language. The RSC recently revised its regional guideline. On the off year of WSC with the help of the RDA of Central California Region we held an Infofaire.  The infofaire was presented in the same fashion as NAW’s does it’s World Wide Workshops that they currently holding. It wasn’t as well attended as we had hoped for it to be.  We are currently working with our Regional Activities committee on holding 2 Regional Assembly’s next year so that we may generate more attendance from our GSR’s . One in the northern part of our region and one in the southern part of the region.

Regional Service Office (RSO):  Our RSO is maintaining itself. They had fallen way below it prudent reserve earlier in the year and were able to bring it self back to its prudent reserve, but have once again fallen below it. They currently have only 7 directors of the 13 positions. The RSO carry’s insurance for the regions 19 areas as well as, our events. 

Hospitals and Institutions (H&I):  All 19 areas including the Spanish Speaking region attend the monthly H&I subcommittee meeting. The region carries 57 panels that goes into our Hospitals and Institutions. The 19 areas, along with the Spanish Speaking region carry approximately 518 panels. The subcommittee holds an annual Learning Day in the month of May.

Public Information (PI):  The subcommittee continues to reach out to the community, via the 2 county fairs and by educating our young people by carrying presentations into the schools. They have formed an ad-hoc committee to deal with Prop 36. They have currently met with a group of judges and made a Power Point presentation explaining to them how NA works in the community. The chair of the ad-hoc is also working with WSO on their project for reaching out to the law enforcement community.  The website committee works under the guidance of the PI committee. The website committee this year has now posted maps on the website to better help the addict find a meeting. We are currently running at about 90% accuracy for meeting information on the website.  8 of the 19 areas have websites.  We are setting up a meeting with NAW’s to take a look at their database so that we can function together in updating meeting information on the World’s website.

.

Regional Activities:  The regional activities committee puts on 4 major events per year. The NA Birthday, New Years Eve, Bi-Regional Campout and this year they also put on a Bi-Regional Winter Retreat with the California Inland Region. They also help with the H&I Learning Day and the Regional Assembly Workshop. They help out the 19 areas with there events by providing a calendar so that the areas can have regional dates so that no area event conflict with another areas regional event. They post all areas events whether they are a regional or area event on the regional web site.

Phone lines (PL):   Phone lines are currently running a 24 hour 7 days 800 number with live addicts answering the phones. 7 areas are helping accomplish this.  The Spanish speaking region is starting to get the Spanish phone lines going.

Literature:  We currently have no Literature Review committee because of lack of participation.

Regional Convention:  The Convention committee is getting ready for this years convention which will be held over the Thanksgiving weekend. They had a successful convention last year, donating a little over $7,000 to the region.

Cruise Committee:  In the first year of this subcommittees venture they had a very successful event. They were able to donate to the region a little under $25,000. They are working on the final touches for this years cruise to be held September 26 – 29 of 2003.

Spring Gathering Committee:  The Spring Gathering committee had a successful event this year, donating a little over $700.00. This is a small but active committee showing how diverse our region is.

Thank you for letting us be of Service

Ruben A.  RD

Ken M.      RDA

Pacific Cascade Report 2003

  Greetings from the Pacific Cascade Region.  We are still located in the beautiful Pacific Northwest, our  Region encompasses the western half of Oregon, a small section of northern California and a small section of south central Washington.  We cover about 60,000 square miles (about 300 miles north to south and 200 miles east to west).  We have 13 Areas and approximately 380 meetings.  The Portland Area is the largest Area with about 110 Groups and 170 meetings per week.

           The Pacific Cascade Region meets quarterly on a rotating basis around the Region based on a bid system.  We held our 10^th Regional G.S.R. Assembly on July 19^th,  2003.  There were between 30 and 50 in the sessions at any given time, with many attending for the first time.  From the feedback we received it continues to be an extremely valuable addition to our Region’s service structure.  While we continue to feel this is an extremely constructive and rewarding event, we continue to struggle with what we can do to increase over all attendance.  The form and function of our assembly has not changed:  We meet twice a year, once in early February and then again in July.  The assembly is held in conjunction with our winter and summer quarterly RSC meetings, with the assembly held on Saturday and the RSC on Sunday.  In February of 2004 we are planning on a 2 day assembly separate from the RSC so that we may present the CAR and go over the fellowship wide discussion issues picked at the preceding WSC, as well as leaving time for group level issues to be discussed.  We are excited to see how this 2-day event works out and may consider separating the assemblies from the RSC if it is a success.  The Assembly held in July is to go over the results of the WSC and to devote more time to group level discussions. Our Assemblies are discussion based only; there is currently no voting taking place.  It is our hope that this introduction to discussion based formats will open the door to allow us to learn how to use discussion rather than debate of motions in our decision-making processes.  We continue to believe that the addition of a Regional Assembly will have a lasting and positive effect on our continued efforts to share information and strive for increased unity among the N.A. fellowship in the Pacific Cascade Region.  

          The RSC continues to be motion based in it’s decision making process however we have begun to have a consensus based discussion prior to considering the motions.  We have active H&I, PI, Activities, Literature, Conferences and Conventions and Policy and Procedure Subcommittees.  The H&I subcommittee reports we currently have 159 panel presentations in 54 facilities.  In 1999 the Regional Literature Committee completed a set of Literature Stockpile Guidelines and uses its quarterly allotment of RSC funds to accumulate a stockpile package of literature to assist Areas without a literature stockpile to get one started.  There are a list of criteria that an Area must meet to acquire the stockpile startup package to help insure continued growth and success of their Area’s literature stockpile.  Five Areas have been given the Stockpile Package and they are continuing to grow and provide the Area’s Groups with the Literature they need for their tables.  The last disbursement made by this committee was to the Umpqua Valley Area when they formed a literature committee in July 2002.  

          We continue to discuss the possibility of incorporating, but it seems as though each time we move in that direction we get information that causes us to stop and rethink the strategy a little longer.  We have an insurance policy for the RSC.  We do not have a web site or a Service Office in the Region currently.

           We held our Regional Convention on May 30-June 1, 2003 in Seaside, Oregon.  This was the first time the North Coast Area ever held a convention and it took some support from outside the Area to get a full committee.  In the end it was a true success, spiritually and financially.  This was particularly meaningful as a scheduling conflict resulted in Washington Northern Idaho Region having their convention in Portland the same weekend.  The convention continues to rotate around the Region on a bid system, but increased involvement by our Conventions and Conferences Sub Committee will hopefully allow for transition to more a  Regional and less of an Area event in the actually facilitation.  As always we continue to discuss financial accountability around the Regional Convention.

           The Pacific Cascade Region is proud to host the Pacific Northwest Convention of Narcotics Anonymous #29  October 6-8, 2006 in Eugene, OR.  We look forward to seeing you all back in Oregon for this event.

          Our Region plans to fund a 2^nd alternate delegate to the WSC in May 2004.  There was great deal of discussion at our RSC about our current policy given the extremely limited roll a 2^nd alternate plays at this event.  At present our decision appears to be continuing to funding a 2^nd alternate position for 2 more conference cycles, and review the policy at that time.  

In loving Service,

Michael Miller   RD                      Cathy Klupenger   AD                  Marisha Johnson  2^nd AD

(503) 234-1842                           (541) 736-9435                             (541) 440-8967

michael@mam2.com                    cathyklup@msn.com                    marisha@rio.com

San Diego Imperial Report 2003

San Diego Imperial Region is the southwest most region in the USA. We have eight areas in the region with over 300+ meetings. Including meetings in Spanish. Our regional meeting meets once per month. 

·       SDICR has a web site we invite you to visit. The web site includes all sub committee information, meeting schedule, meeting finder, and links to other NA web sites. We also have a chat room and other interesting spots on our web site. sandiegona.org

·       As you all know the world convention was in our region last month. It was great to celebrate our recovery and the 50^th anniversary of Narcotics Anonymous.  Our own regional convention took this time to do a thorough inventory of themselves.

·       We have active PI, H&I, Theatrical, and Outreach committees.

·       We will have both pre& post assemblies to the Conference.

·       Some interesting but not fun issues that have been happening in our region, includes:

1.     San Diego NA is being sued by two members in the amount of $309,000. Apparently, they had a car accident at a NA sponsored campout. A road had washed out and they found the hole. The insurance adjuster assured the Board of Trusties, who in turn assured the regional members that this was being handled. 

2.     During the Convention committees financial report the chair reported the fact that there is money ear marked for the newcomer. This money exceeded the prudent reserve.  A board of trusties member pointed out that ear marking money for the new comer is not in the polices. He requested the convention committee follow there polices and give the region any money over the prudent reserve of $50,000.  The chair of the region agreed, and went on about giving her opinions on the matter. This chaos lead to areas wanting their newcomer donations back, and to an area making a motion to recall the chair. ( as you can see we are Californians)  After motions being made, motions being tabled, and the chair not being recalled, but defiantly not being voted back in during the September elections. We now have polices allowing the newcomer fund. Also a policy on how exactly the chair is to conduct themselves. 

In Loving Services, 

 Eileen George RD

 DW Donahoo  RDA 

 Robert George  RD2

Rio Grande Report 2003

The Rio Grande Region and the Albuquerque Area are very pleased to be hosting WSZF 2003 and to have all of you here. 

The Rio Grande Region stretches from Ciudad Juarez, Mexico/El Paso, Texas through the State of New Mexico and to the Southwestern portion of Colorado.  It contains six Areas including: the Four Corners Area, which includes groups in Durango, Colorado, Farmington, New Mexico and Aztec, New Mexico; the Northern New Mexico Area, which includes groups in Santa Fe, Espanola, Las Vegas, Los Alamos and Taos; the Greater Albuquerque Area, which includes groups in the Albuquerque metropolitan area, Gallup, Jemez Pueblo and Socorro; the Sacramento Area, which includes groups in Roswell, Carlsbad, Alamogordo and Ruidoso; the Lower Organ Mountain Area, which includes groups in Las Cruces, Deming, Silver City and the surrounding geographic area; and the Ciudades Gemelas (Twin Cities) Area, which includes groups in El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico.  We have 151 meetings a week in our Region.

The Rio Grande Region had a tremendous year since the last WSZF.  There are now many NA meetings in Ciudad Juarez and those groups are part of what used to be the El Paso Area.  The El Paso Area is now called Ciudades Gemelas, which means the Twin Cities Area.  The Ciudades Gemelas Area and the Rio Grande Region support the groups in Juarez through attendance and by purchasing literature and related materials for their use.  The fellowship in Ciudad Juarez is growing very quickly and their presence has added new energy into our Region.  The Fellowship in Juarez is so appreciative of us and NA that we cannot help but be energized when hearing about them and how much NA means to them.

Another big change for our Region is that we have begun making use of the corporation that we set-up to serve as a single source of accountability for the convention and maintain all of the funds for the Region.  We completed a set of Regional Policies and Procedures, which among other things order the relationship between the Region and the Corporation and between the Corporation and the Local Support Committee, hosting committee, in general terms.  We also elected a new board of directors who are getting started in developing specific guidelines for the relationship between the Corporation and the convention’s Local Support Committee.  This is a major development for our Region in terms of increasing financial and legal accountability.  The Corporation has been certified as non-profit under state law, but we have not yet sought 501(c)(3) tax exemption.  Therefore, we will pay taxes for the first time for 2003.

Our last Regional Convention was held in Farmington, New Mexico, which is in the Four Corners Area.  It was a small convention, with about 250 registered attendees.  Nevertheless, the convention was awesome.  It had a great heart and energy and was quite successful financially.  Our next convention will be in Albuquerque during the weekend of March 19 – 21, 2004 at the Marriot Hotel, 2101 Louisiana Blvd NE.  The e-mail address for the convention is Convention@riograndena.org  The theme is Lost Dreams Awaken / Los Sueños Perdidos Despiertan.  Hopefully, you we will see you there.

Having WSZF here really tops-off the excellent year our Region has had.  Thank you all for coming.

In Service, 

Seth S.                        Jim W.

RD                               AD

Washington-Northern Idaho Report 2003

Greetings:

                  The WNIRNA is comprised of nineteen areas providing approximately 510 meetings weekly in the states of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. Any day we should have twenty areas as our north westernmost area, North Puget Sound, is going through a peaceful reformation into two areas. The Olympia Area has renamed itself South Puget Sound Area.

               Typical attendance at our RSC is at least seventeen areas. Currently, all our RSC admin positions are filled.

                The WNIRNA continues to hold two annual conventions, WNIRCNA and Clean & Free By The Sea. And once every four years we host NA’s second oldest convention, PNWCNA, which travels on a set cycle between the regions of WNIR, British Columbia, Pacific Cascade, and Southern Idaho. This year it’s in Boise, Idaho. See ya there!

                 At our last RSC, a motion passed to request that NAWS,if possible, send someone to assist us in exploring ways to make both our RSC and especially our Regional Conventions Association more streamlined,increase communication and accountability(RCA)to the fellowship, and merging the bodies into one entity. The RCA is an Inc, the RSC is not. This motion was driven somewhat by the challenges the region faced when our RCA treasurer stole approximately 56,000. This is old news in our region but this is the first time I have been able to report it formally here. The member in question is being pursued civilly and criminally.

                  We merged our PI and H&I Learning Days into one. The first one was a rousing success and planning for number two is well under way. We are holding an All-Service Learning Days(weekend). Please contact Franney or me, or www.wnir-na.org.

                 In addition to four CAR workshops and a post conference workshop, the RD team is now also doing two annual regional assemblies.

                 In service with More Gratitude Less Attitude…..Rex & Franney