LETTER from AUSTIN MacCORMCK of New York NY a non-AA
Trustee. Austin is a member of the Nominating Committee.
Public Information Committee and the Finance & Budgetary Committee
Dear Jack:
This is to give you my final thoughts, as requested, on the Recommendations prepared by Bill. To avoid a lengthy statement, I am not discussing the Concepts and am confining my remarks to Recommendation 1, the only one on which my views appear to by widely at variance with those of the other members of the Board.
The remainder of this letter is a repetition of the opinion which I have previously stated, and which remains unchanged after most careful consideration. I wish to preface it, however, by saying that I give great weight to the views of the other Trustees, and especially to the opposition of the Class B Trustees and many, if not most, Delegates to a change in the Board membership ratio. For that reason, I do not wish to be considered a dissident who feels so strongly on the subject that he does not care what anyone else thinks. I am merely holding to an opinion which my mind and conscience will not permit me to change.
I concur with both parts of Recommendation 1" (1) that the present bar to ratio changes should be removed, and (2) that we should set aside the General Service Board tradition which precludes AA Trustees from holding its chief posts. I believe that both steps should be taken because AA has now reached the point in its development where it is no longer necessary to have a majority of nonalcoholic Trustees or to bar AA Trustees from holding top official posts.
A ratio which gives non-alcoholic Trustees a majority of one vote has little meaning in actual practice, since non-AA and AA Trustees do not vote en bloc. The provision for a majority of one is thus little more than an expression of policy. This policy, I am convinced, AA has outgrown.
I have no firm opinion on what new ratio it would be most wise to adopt, and am content to leave that matter to the General Service Board for recommendation and to the Conference for action. I would see no harm in providing for a clear majority of AA Trustees, and believe it would probably be a step forward. This would make it possible to add area or at-large Trustees (AA's) without increasing the Board to an unwieldy size.
As for the second part of Recommendation I, I believe the time has come to abandon the tradition, or the unwritten understanding, that the positions of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Board of Trustees must always be filled by nonAA members. The Board should be free to elect whatever Trustees are best fitted for these posts, whether they are nonalcoholic or AA Trustees.
An exclusion of either category seems to me to imply that those in it are unfitted for some reason or other to hold office, or that the best interests of AA will be impaired if they are elected. We nonalcoholic Trustees are fortunate to have been accepted by the Fellowship, and we should not insist that the positions of Chairman and Vice-Chairman always be filled from our ranks, thus implying that AA trustees are not fitted to serve in these positions. On the other hand, it is reasonable for us to feel that non-alcoholic Trustees should not be excluded from consideration.
I hope my opinions will be accepted in the spirit in which they are written.
Cordially,
Austin MacCormick
February 9, 1962