Notes From Central Office

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the fellowship for its deep concern during the recent earthquake. Many of our members sustained terrible damage, and the total loss of their homes and possessions. And yet, these are some of the members calling Central Office to offer assistance if needed. I feel God watches very carefully over this office, and even though this area was severely damaged, the minor damage was readily repaired. All files, tables, cabinets, etc. were down, with all contents spilled out. A lot of elbow grease was necessary but we were back functioning in two days. The building sustained no serious damage. Our Higher Power is truly in charge here. We are accepting donations that will help supply us with much needed equipment that, in case of future disaster, will help keep our records and files safe. Again, may I say thank you for the unity of caring from the Fellowship.

On another topic, the Central Office still needs contact people (name, and phone number) for new inquirers to call. If you live in one of the areas in which we have no contact person, please consider becoming a contact person. Be assured that only first names and telephone numbers will be given out.

COOC Announcement

In order to reduce the amount of fellowship funds needed to maintain a central office, we have been considering the idea of moving the office to a location where costs are lower and where a number of SA groups in the vicinity could provide a high level of support and oversight. We have received expressions of interest from the Baltimore/Washington area, Nashville, TN, and Oklahoma City, OK. We invite all SA groups and members to give thoughtful consideration to this important issue and to give feedback or express interest in proposing a site based upon the above criteria. Please send your comments to the Central Office for forwarding to the COOC committee.

SA Central Office Oversight Committee (COOC) Report
January 1994

During the last six months the COOC met four times and conducted two telephone polls for special votes. The highlights of our work include responding to a Central Office money crisis, maintaining and changing the Essay publication and beginning to develop a Central Office business plan for ordering literature and maintaining services.

The COOC did vote to continue the publication of the Essay as a first priority. The COOC also decided to implement the subscription policy for the Essay as soon as possible. We voted that a separate subscription flyer should be included in each issue of the Essay along with the contribution envelope. The new format was approved and subscriptions currently number about 340. We did request a bulk subscription rate of $5/year for ten or more subscriptions. Bulk mailings to Intergroups have been discontinued.

There is great turnover taking place on the COOC with the resignations of Dan N., Jim O., James M. and Betsy T. The functioning of the COOC has been improved with the inclusion of Pat H. (Central Office manager) and Lawrence M. (Essay Editor) on each COOC call. The willingness of Jim C. in Los Angeles to serve as an active Central Office liaison has helped tremendously.

Other COOC concerns have included pondering the need for SA archives being maintained and an account of our history being prepared. We also maintain contact with Roy K. regarding copyright concerns and his on-going Fellowship interests. A table showing SA Central Office income and expenses for recent years is at the bottom of page 13.

The COOC members serve as liaisons also. Jim C. works with the Central Office. Betsy T. is the Essay contact. Keith D. works with the Literature Committee (in formation). Sylvia J. maintains ties with the General Service Board Study Committee. Jim O., James M. and Jim C. all assist with finances. Larry M. handles special projects such as conference tape policy. The COOC chair has been Betsy T.; she will be replaced by Sylvia J. (per minutes of the COOC meeting on January 15, 1994 in Rochester). The Secretary of the COOC is David M.

Highlights of International Conference Business Meeting
Rochester, New York, January 15, 1994

1. Conference Site Selection Committee Report (This is a permanent committee to solicit sites and to report on them): Mike C., Chair of this committee, reported there are no bids for January 1995. No groups volunteered during the meeting. If no area volunteers by the end of this conference, the Site Committee will make a decision by February 15 in consultation with S-Anon. Roy asked what if we get no bids? Mike said that we might forego a January conference. [The committee subsequently received and accepted a bid from Los Angeles SA to host the January 1995 conference. A bid has been received from Baltimore/Washington SA to host the conference in July 1995. If no additional bids are received, the committee will accept this bid also.]
2. Proposed Service Structure: It was moved and seconded that the proposed Service Structure for SA Service (see text below) be accepted by this body. Motion Carried by 31-6 with 3 abstentions.
3. Prison Committee Report: Bernie M. (Portland) Chairs the Prison Committee. It is a rewarding and demanding position. It is well organized and helps 29 prisoners currently. A new chair is needed. Pat H. sends letters from prisoners to Bernie and tries also to set up a contact with a nearby SA group.

Proposed Service Structure for SA Fellowship

[Submitted January 14, 1994 to 1994 International Conference, Rochester, NY by the Service Structure Study Committee]

This proposed service structure has evolved over the past two and one-half years with the prayerful consultation of members of SA and with the contributions from several other 12-Step fellowships.

The individual SA Group is the basic unit of the Service Structure. Each SA Group sends an Intergroup Representative (IGR) to the local Intergroup meeting, which meets regularly (perhaps monthly).

An Intergroup is formed when there are several SA Groups in a geographic area. This Intergroup helps with the Intergroup service work, i.e., establishes phone lines with answering service, develops 12-Step procedures, tabulates local meeting lists, provides communication and information on a local level, etc. Each Intergroup would select, among its Trusted Servants, one Regional Delegate (RD) to attend an Annual Regional Assembly.

Regions are established as follows (schedule currently in use by this Study Committee and the Central Office Oversight Committee):

Northwest (Keith D., Vancouver): AK, Yukon, NT, BC, ALTA, WA, MT, OR, ID

Southwest (Jim C., Los Angeles and a representative from San Diego, vacant): CA, HI, NV, UT, AZ

North Central (Jim O., Chicago [resigning]): SASK, MAN, ND, SD, MN, WY, NE, IA, WI, MI, IL

South Central (Sylvia J., Oklahoma City): CO, KS, MO, NM, OK, AR, TX, LA

Northeast (Larry M. and James M. [resigning], New York City): QUE, ONT, NB, ME, VT, NH, NY, CT, RI, MA

Mid-Atlantic (Betsy T. [resigning], Washington D.C.): PA, DC, MD, NJ, OH, VA, WV, DE

Southeast (David M., Nashville): IN, KY, TN, NC, SC, MS, AL, FL, PR

International

The Regional Delegate’s term of service would be established by the individual Intergroup, with a recommended term of two years minimum. The sobriety recommendation for a Regional Delegate is established at a minimum of two years SA sobriety. It is recommended that the Regional Delegate be elected by January 1995 and that an annual Regional Assembly meet at some time in 1995.

The Regional Delegates meet annually in their regions to discuss and deal with matters affecting the SA Groups and SA Fellowship in their regions. They select one of their number as the Oversight Representative (OR) to the Annual Oversight Assembly.

The Annual Oversight Assembly would consist, therefore, of the Regional Delegates from each of the Regions above. The International SA Fellowship could also send a Representative, selected through a process to be self-determined, to the Annual Oversight Assembly. The Assembly would concentrate on matters affecting the growth and functioning of the SA Fellowship as a whole. The first Assembly would also nominate and elect the first Oversight Committee (OC), consisting of nine members: five Sexaholics and four non-Sexaholics. One of the Committee members must be elected from the greater Los Angeles area because of proximity to the Central Office. The sobriety requirement for Sexaholic members of the Oversight Committee is five years of SA sobriety.