Proposed by both John J and Crissy
Issue:
I would like to propose that, on a 3-month trial-basis, the business meeting be held once a month on the 15th during the regular meeting time, 7:30 to 8:30 Eastern Standard Time, ending at 8:30. After 3 months we could affirm our decision.
Background:
Currently many people are constrained to leave the business meeting or not attend at all. This trial-basis proposal would allow for greater member participation and and provide an opportunity for an after-meeting if desired, or allow rescheduling the regular meeting to begin at 8:30. This format change would be instituted for no more than 12 days a year.
15 thoughts on “Motion 26-1: The Business Meeting Held During the Regular Meeting Time”
A great deal of work is required to support a meeting of this size. If we value this meeting, we must prioritize it’s business needs. If we don’t, I fear the meeting may, eventually, cease to exist.
I really don’t like business meetings and have been negligent and non-attending. This would compel me to attend. I don’t love that, but I love this meeting and want it to thrive. We need more than a tiny fraction of participants attending to the business of the meeting.
Let’s give this change a trial run. Also, thank you to the faithful people who give service day in and day out!
Submission Statement
Motion 26-1: Business Meeting Held During Regular Meeting Hours
In Favor – Literature-Anchored Rationale
Context and Purpose
Motion 26-1 proposes a **three-month trial** of holding one monthly business meeting during the regular meeting time in order to increase participation in group conscience and shared service responsibility. The intent is not to replace recovery meetings, but to align meeting practice more closely with ACA’s Steps, Traditions, Concepts, and literature by ensuring that decisions affecting the whole group are made with the group present.
Current participation context:
Regular meetings typically include approximately 200–260 attendees. Business meetings generally include 10–20 members. The most recent group conscience vote on the ACA name change motion recorded 22 participants.
—
Literature-Anchored Rationale
1. Group Conscience as Defined by ACA Literature (Tradition Two)
Tradition Two places authority in the group conscience rather than in efficiency, convenience, or numerical voting. The “Adult Children of Alcoholics / Dysfunctional Families” Big Red Book (BRB) describes group conscience as a “deliberative, participatory spiritual process” that includes informed discussion, respectful listening, reflection, and consideration of minority viewpoints (BRB, Tradition Two, pp. 529–531).
When participation in business meetings is structurally limited, group conscience can unintentionally become a poll conducted by a small subset of the group. Holding business during regular meeting time restores group conscience to the meeting body itself.
2. Unity and Inclusion (Tradition One)
Tradition One states that personal recovery depends upon ACA unity. The BRB explains that unity is strengthened through transparency, shared responsibility, and trust in group decision-making (BRB, Tradition One, pp. 525–526).
While consistency of meeting format is valued, ACA literature does not elevate personal preference above inclusion or unity. Structural exclusion from group conscience can unintentionally weaken unity through disengagement or lack of clarity.
3. Participation and Shared Responsibility (Concept Four)
Concept Four affirms the Right of Participation. The BRB emphasizes that broad participation protects against burnout, imbalance, and informal authority within service structures (BRB, Concept Four, pp. 568–570).
When participation in business requires additional meetings or extended availability, that right becomes conditional. Integrating business into regular meeting time expands access and aligns practice with Concept Four.
4. Structure Without Governance (Tradition Nine)
Tradition Nine cautions against governance, hierarchy, and control—not against structure, service meetings, or group conscience. ACA literature distinguishes between *organization* (which ACA avoids) and *service structures directly responsible to those they serve* (BRB, Tradition Nine, pp. 537–539).
Holding a business meeting during the regular meeting does not organize ACA “as such.” It keeps service directly accountable to the meeting body and reduces unintended concentration of authority.
5. Recovery, Service, and Daily Meetings (Steps & Literature)
ACA’s Twelve Steps describe recovery as a way of life, not something confined to a single meeting format. Step Twelve emphasizes carrying the message and practicing principles “in all our affairs,” which ACA literature explicitly includes service and responsibility to the group (BRB, Twelve Steps, pp. 229–247; Service, pp. 551–553).
This meeting occurs **every day of the year**; ACA is a **daily meeting**. Members working a program are not dependent on one specific meeting format for recovery, nor does participation in group conscience diminish recovery.
6. Newcomers and Emotional Safety
ACA literature does not state that newcomers must be shielded from service or group conscience. Observation alone is participation, and no member is required to engage in service to belong (BRB, *The ACA Meeting*, pp. 588–591; Tradition Three, pp. 527–528).
The proposed change applies to **no more than 12 meetings per year**, is clearly announced, and is subject to review, preserving transparency and emotional safety.
7. Trial Basis and Spiritual Principles
A three-month trial reflects ACA spiritual principles of **willingness, humility, and openness**, allowing evaluation without rigidity or permanence (BRB, esp. pp. 35–37, 229–231, 563–565).
Conclusion
Motion 26-1 does not replace recovery with business. It integrates recovery, service, and group conscience in a manner consistent with ACA Steps, Traditions, Concepts, and literature. The greater risk to ACA principles is not a limited, transparent format adjustment, but the continued exclusion of most members from decisions that affect the whole group.
This conflicts with the ninth tradition. ACA, as such, ought never be organized, but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve. The meeting is ACA as such. The business meeting is the service board or committees that the ninth tradition refers to. Having a business meeting that takes up time during the regularly scheduled meeting makes ACA, as such, organized.
I am in favor of trying this. I get it that people are worried about how this might impact a newcomer who shows up when we are having a business meeting. But an analogy might be to think of it like building a house. If I only want to spend money on the living space of the house and don’t want to put any money into the foundation, the house will collapse. Meetings that don’t have a healthy business meeting often fold unexpectedly, and the percentage of people participating in the business meeting for such a large group isn’t healthy currently. If this proposal doesn’t pass, we might consider trying a business meeting at 8:00, so we have a mini meeting first.
I would like to keep the meeting at the same time and have the business meeting after the regular meeting. If we had the business meeting on the 15th instead of the regular meeting, not that many people would stay for the business meeting in my opinion. My experience is that there is going to be a small % of people that attend the business meeting. And I would hate for a newcomer to come on the 15th and it is a business meeting and not our regular meeting.
Let’s try it. We can always change back to our old way.
I certainly believe that it should be as easy as possible for anyone who wants to participate.
Tradition five, regarding our primary purpose to the still-suffering ACA (quoted in another comment), should control here, however. The standard meeting is our chief manifestation of our living out tradition five.
I would consider an amended proposal, however, to have the business meeting begin at 8:15, however, probably in a separate breakout room.
I support this motion because having to move to a breakout room or stay an additional 45 minutes to an hour after the regular meeting to participate in a business meeting can come across as an added burden rather than a positive opportunity to contribute.
I do not support this motion. For many years, people have come to this meeting—365 days a year, seven days a week—with the understanding that this is a space dedicated to the daily reading and recovery-focused sharing. Replacing that time with a business meeting represents a significant shift away from what members have consistently relied upon.
According to Tradition One, our common welfare should come first, and unity is best served when we protect the meeting’s primary function. Tradition Five reminds us that each group has but one primary purpose: to carry the ACA message to the adult child who still suffers. The daily reading directly supports that purpose by offering consistency, safety, and recovery-focused content.
Introducing business matters into this established meeting time risks prioritizing administration over recovery, which may unintentionally place barriers between the meeting and those who come here seeking healing. From that perspective, I do not see how this change supports our primary purpose.
I prefer to keep it as is. I like having the option to follow the link to join the Business Meeting after the regular program.
I think holding the meeting at the time suggested might allow more of those who are shy, those who might be considering serving, or those who are just curious about the service structure of our SMR meeting to attend and participate. I feel that having to move to a breakout room or stay an additional 45 minutes to an hour after the regular meeting to participate in a business meeting can come across as an added burden rather than a positive opportunity to contribute.
What if a newcomer were to up for their first meeting on the 15th of the month? I’ve tried to attend the business meeting several times and found it long-winded and challenging, and made a decision that it is not a good fit for me at this time. I do want to serve the meeting in some capacity, but not by attending the business meeting yet, it may be that I need to make more progress in my recovery first.
were to show up, I mean.
I’d prefer to keep the regular meeting at the 7:30 time and not shift it to accommodate the business meeting. I think keeping the regular meeting reliably at the same time and place every day is important.
If I heard this correctly during an after-meeting: one person is carrying a larger share of the service responsibilities for this meeting. Maybe having the business meeting shifted to 7:30 might offer more opportunities for others to become involved in service: Concept 4 boils down to this: participation is the key to harmony.
Comments are closed.