May 21, 2025
Danette – Jack, thanks again for doing this—and good morning, Tom. I think I sent out a few conversation starters to everyone. They may not have gotten there until today, but I tried.
Tom M. – Do you remember where we left off, by chance?
Jack B. – [laughs] That’s a funny question. No. But I’ve got the rough transcript in front of me. Let’s see… I know we were talking about setting up another conversation. And before that, Jack, you were sharing what you went through when Bill and Bob Stone came to Narcotics Anonymous.
Danette – Right, and you mentioned that Bill asked you to do something you decided you couldn’t do. Then, Thom, I think you asked about a conference and the board. You made a comment—well, not reading it exactly—but I remember you said, “Nobody showed up, right?” And Jack replied, “Yeah, everyone who attended was considered a conference participant at the time.”
Tom M. – Jack, I’m curious—what’s your clean date?
Jack B. – June 15, 1972.
Danette – Wow. Congratulations.
Jack B. – Thank you.
Tom M. – Did you save any old documents from back in those days?
Jack B. – The only things I still have were from my time as a trustee. When I was packing to move, I gave all the boxes to the World Service Office. The only things I’ve kept are the Yellow and White Book, and a few other things—but I don’t have minutes or anything like that.
Danette – So the boxes you gave were mostly minutes and official documents?
Jack B. – You know what? I have no idea what was in them. I opened one box, started looking, and said, “Nope, nope, nope.” Closed it right back up and sent everything to World Services.
Tom M. – You figured that was the best place to have them archived?
Jack B. – Yeah. I hope they’ve been able to put them to good use.
Danette – Have you ever looked at NAHistoryTree.com?
Jack B. – No.
Danette – A lot of your documents—minutes, board meetings, conference agenda reports—they’re all archived there in a really organized way. It’s useful if you ever want to look something up. I scan documents I come across, and if someone wants them back, I mail them. Then I try to make sense of them for the History Tree.
Tom M. – One of the things you were involved in as a Board of Trustees member was observing what NA was doing as a whole. And we were growing fast. You got clean in ’72—you must have seen it explode, especially during your time as a trustee. What happened to all those expectations that NA would outgrow AA back in the ’80s?
Jack B. – No idea. I don’t think I ever had those expectations or cared about them. It didn’t matter to me whether we were bigger, smaller, or the same size. I never paid attention to that, and I didn’t know anyone else who did.
Danette – I want to jump in—someone who came in a little later than Jack—I don’t recall that ever being on anyone’s radar. That kind of thinking just wasn’t part of the consciousness.
Tom M. – Yeah, maybe it was more of a Midwest thing. Out here, NA didn’t exist in some areas. We’d start with one meeting in a town, then there’d be four. AA might have eight, and we’d say, “We’ll be bigger than AA before long.” Kind of a regional or rural versus urban mindset, I guess. During your time as a board member, the trustees wrote those bulletins—Trustee Bulletin Number One through Twenty or so. After the World Board took over, they basically discontinued them. Any thoughts on why that happened? Could we still use them?
Jack B. – Like I said last week, I think it’s a very small group of people who pay attention to those things. And half the time, I suspect they’re just looking for something to attack. So… no more Board of Trustees, no more bulletins.
Danette – They were helpful, though. I found them useful.
Jack B. – Maybe they were more relevant back then because of the period of growth we were in.
Tom M. – One of those bulletins was about signing slips. Basically, the state made NA responsible for teaching offenders a better way to live. Do you think the fellowship was ready for the onslaught of court slips?
Jack B. – Thankfully, we handled it pretty well. So much has changed since addiction began to be recognized more as a disease instead of a criminal offense. There was an explosion of drug programs. Cri Help and Impact, for instance—since Bill was involved in founding Impact—probably aimed to support NA’s growth, and I think they did.
Danette – Cri Help and Impact were huge in the early days. But I don’t know if Cri Help even has meetings anymore.
Jack B. – Not sure about Impact either. But yeah, we violated the traditions. We used to prohibit people who’d been kicked out of the program from coming on the property—which included NA meetings. We did that for quite a while.
Danette – Wow.
Jack B. – Eventually it became clear to me—at a Hollywood Regional meeting, I think—I was there as a trustee. Someone asked if treatment programs were violating the traditions, and I said, “Programs can’t violate the traditions; they’re not required to follow them.” But as NA members, we did have a responsibility to guide the organizations we were part of. So, we stopped that practice. But it was years after violating the tradition.
Danette – I think you mentioned that last week too.
Jack B. – Yeah, I’d have to look at the minutes to remember the exact topic. But one thing I do remember from that meeting: we were talking about a member who was close to Jimmy. After we finished picking him apart, someone said, “But he’s so sincere.” And Chuck Skinner responded, “Yeah… so was Adolf Hitler.”
Tom M. – [laughs] Jack, I brought that up because there was a former AA trustee who was a judge. She later said she regretted sending people to meetings, because it ended up being hard on AA members. NA, though—it’s different. The longer I stay clean and serve, the more I see the differences between AA and NA. The way we grew, the way they grew—it’s really different.
Tom M. – That thing about court cards—they’re called “meeting attendance cards” now. I don’t remember that trustee bulletin either.
Danette – Yeah, I don’t either. But the one I still think is relevant—especially with the new MAT stuff—is the one on methadone. When people ask my opinion, I usually avoid giving it unless asked, and then I just refer them to that bulletin. MAT isn’t much different from methadone. Take it how you want, but that bulletin still applies.
Jack B. – I totally agree. The bulletin we wrote then is just as valid today. And I think it’s the treatment programs that are under pressure now when it comes to MAT.
Danette – And court cards—surprising that was such a big issue for you, Jack, when you were with a treatment program. It never really crossed my mind.
Jack B. – Yeah, it was a big deal back then.
Danette – Tom just shared some old meeting directories with me. One may have been the first ever printed. There’s an asterisk next to Cri Help and Impact meetings, with a note saying you had to go through the programs to attend. That asterisk makes sense, given the time.
Danette – So as far as I know—and I’m sure you’ve seen this, Jack—this might be the very first meeting directory. I don’t know if you can see it.
Jack B. – Is it just that one page? DANETTE holds it up to the camera and
JACK continues- Yeah, that’s it. It included Chuck’s phone number, Rags, Woody—though I’m not sure which Woody, since there were two back then. Probably the one in Venice. Bruce and his wife… I think his name was Bruce Hay. I don’t remember his wife’s name—maybe the same last name.
Jack B. – The interesting thing about Bruce—his Higher Power for the first year was a grapefruit. He kept it in the fridge, would open the door and talk to it when he needed to. Kept it until it fell apart.
Danette – That might be the best NA history story I’ve ever heard.
Jack B. – [laughs] Yeah. The directory also had Jimmy’s number, Jay Cavanaugh, Laura, me, and Marlene. There’s a Jeff—I think it was Jeff Brown, but I’m not sure. He was Chuck’s first sponsor out here. Eventually relapsed. I can’t remember his full name or face. I think John Berger was listed too—he was a drummer. Already around when I got clean. One name I don’t recognize at all: Milt
Tom M. – Milt
Jack B. – Yeah, and Louie. I think Louie was from San Fernando. He and his brother—whose name I can’t remember—mostly went to AA. I’ve run into Louie a few times. Last time was with Johnny Harris. Do you remember Johnny?
Danette – Not sure.
Jack B. – He was one of those early drug addicts who found a home in AA but still came around to NA now and then. Sometimes they were asked to speak at conventions or speaker meetings—same thing with “Carrot Top.” I can’t remember his real name. Cochran maybe?
Tom M. – Yeah, that name rings a bell.
Danette – So those people’s phone numbers were listed on the directory?
Jack B. – Yep. The meetings were Sunday at Cri Help, Monday in Moorpark, Tuesday the step study at what was likely the Survivors Club—it doesn’t say it by name, but that’s the address. Wednesday was a candlelight meeting—Chuck was secretary when I was new. Friday was Cri Help again.
Danette – Were all the meetings 90 minutes?
Jack B. – Yeah, an hour and a half back then. With a smoke break. Not that you needed one—you could just smoke during the meeting!
Danette – Oh my gosh! So, was that directory handed to you at your first meeting?
Jack B. – I don’t remember exactly. I had two copies. I gave one to the World Service Office—someone told me it’s in one of the filing cabinets.
Tom M. – What was the address listed for the Survivors Club?
Jack B. – 5154 Tujunga. I think that was Studio City. Actually… now that I think about it, it might’ve been Greg Pierce’s home address. That’s where the meeting started. The Survivors Club didn’t exist yet, so this was probably Greg’s house.
Danette – The Survivors Club was on Moorpark, right?
Jack B. – Yeah. That makes sense. The directory probably said something like, “Next meeting will be at Bill’s house or Chuck’s house.” We just passed it around.
Danette – I know Tom will want a copy to upload.
Tom M. – Yes, please! I’d love a copy.
Jack B. – I’ll scan it and send it to you guys.
TOM & DANETTE. – Awesome. Thank you!
Danette – A couple people have looked at the NAHistoryTree.com site—Betsy is one of them—and she’s so happy to have found it. She worked on the IP for Addicts with Additional Needs, and I didn’t know this, but she was also on the review committee for The NA Way magazine for many years. Unfortunately, she’s been very ill for a long time. She said she has to be really careful with her energy and doesn’t think she can do an interview.
Tom M. – That’s too bad. But I’m glad she found the site helpful.
Danette B- It’s such a cool site.
Tom M. – I’m really glad we’ve gotten all this stuff off the shelves and online. Some of what I sent you recently—like the Southern California Regional Directory—took four hours just to clean up. When you scan old documents, there’s handwriting, marks, stains… I have to go in with photo editing software and clean every page. I’ll do it while watching a ball game or listening to music, but yeah—it takes hours. That one directory alone was four hours of cleanup.
Danette – Jack, one of the directories Tom sent me really caught my attention—and this explains why. Back then, everybody’s personal phone number was just listed. One listing even had a contact for the Board of Trustees. It gave a phone number to contact for the Board’s meetings.
Tom M. – So, if someone wanted to go to the meeting, they’d call that number and be told where it was being held?
Danette – Yeah, that’s what it looks like. Pretty interesting.
Jack B. – I can’t even remember where we met half the time. Probably different members’ homes.
Danette – Yeah, it probably just said, “Next meeting at Bill’s house,” or “Chuck’s house.” Makes sense.
Jack B. – It worked for the time.
Tom M. – One of the questions I put out there was about the World Service Conference—how they vote now using “consensus-based decision-making.” Are you familiar with that at all?
Jack B. – Not at all. When I stopped being a trustee, I stopped caring about what was going on at that level. That’s the truth.
Danette – [laughs] Fair enough.
Tom M. – I wrote out that question before I realized it might be kind of outdated for you, Jack.
Danette – One thing you might be able to help with, though—Joe Gossett was office manager, and he only lasted about a year. His take on things was really different from the general direction of World Services. Do you remember anything about that?
Jack B. – Barely. One of you mentioned his name last week, and that jogged my memory a little. I recall he was only in the position for a short time. Beyond that, I don’t remember much—no conversations, no meetings that stood out. Just… nothing.
Danette – Don’t feel bad. I was the same—heard the name, thought “Oh yeah, Joe Gossett.” That’s it. But Tom sent me a copy of a report Joe wrote—maybe to the Conference? He apparently had previously worked for a lot of international nonprofits, and his concern was that NA World Services wanted to heavily manage all literature, translations, everything.
He didn’t think it was practical or realistic. He believed the message could still be preserved with less control from World Services. But that’s not what World Services wanted to hear, I think.
Jack B. – I’m sure he was right from a practical point of view. But I also think if we hadn’t done it the way we did, we wouldn’t have maintained a clear message. It would’ve gotten diluted all over the place.
Danette – I remember when George and maybe Anthony visited AA’s General Service Office. They came back saying AA wished they’d done it like NA—because their message hadn’t stayed as clear.
Jack B. – I don’t remember that, but I do remember that Tom McCall sponsored, for a while, the director of AA’s World Services—who was also a recovering NA member.
Tom M. – Wow. That’s a twist!
Tom M. – On a similar note—this was in the late ’80s—my uncle was visiting from the Philippines. I gave him a Basic Text and asked if he’d bring it back and see about getting it translated there.
He read a few chapters and said, “Addiction is very different in the Philippines.” He told me the addicts there were huffing paint cans at the dump—not spending money on drugs. He didn’t think they’d find a book or a meeting. Just a whole different view of addiction.
I never did find out what happened with that copy or whether it was ever translated.
Danette – Was your uncle an addict himself?
Tom M. – No, just trying to help.
Danette – I know this isn’t my interview, but you’re not going to be able to shut me up [laughs], I really want to push back on that perspective. Addicts find recovery—whether they’re huffing paint or visiting dope doctors. That’s one of the things I love about Narcotics Anonymous. The steps don’t mention drugs. The message isn’t about the substance—it’s about addiction.
Tom M. – Yeah, but back in the late ’80s in the Philippines, it wasn’t just about poverty or education—it was about fear. Duterte wasn’t in power yet, but there were still reports of people being shot in the street just for being drug addicts. They’d leave bodies on the sidewalk.
Danette – That’s horrifying.
Tom M. – And California had its own issues too. Jack, you probably remember this—at one point in New York, and even here in California, felons and addicts weren’t allowed to gather.
Jack B. – It’s interesting, because my perception is that California was worse, especially earlier on. There was an entire unit in L.A. County where the police would go around checking people’s arms. If you were a known addict, you ended up in CRC.
Danette – The California Rehabilitation Center?
Jack B. – Yep. It was a prison—let’s not call it anything else. We later got a contract at Cri Help to help get people out of CRC. When we went to the orientation—which ironically was held at CRC—we found out the county had already issued contracts to half a dozen programs to do the same thing, and none of them knew about each other.
Danette – That’s wild.
Jack B. – The orientation itself was revealing. The director of CRC actually started his talk by saying it was “the best kept secret—the most effective treatment program in California.”
Afterward, each program director gave a short presentation. I talked about Cri Help and Narcotics Anonymous. The part that stunned me was how many of their counselors had never even heard of NA. They didn’t know people were staying clean on the streets.
Danette – Wow.
Jack B. – I told them there was a Southern California Convention happening the next week. A lot of them seemed interested. I told them to look me up if they showed up. But… not a single one did.
Danette – Just before this call, I reread a 1990 report from the External Affairs Committee. I think maybe Tom pointed it out. It was supposed to be a “brief report,” but it was 10 or 12 pages long.
Kim was the one who received the report from Steve Lantos— He worked closely with Barbara Jorgensen, and it was all about meeting with federal and national-level corrections people. They were trying to bridge the gap between institutional needs and NA’s principles and traditions.
Reading it gave me chills. That was back in 1990, and it fits with what you were saying, about how little people understood about addiction or bringing NA panels into facilities. It’s been a long, hard fight to get addiction recognized. That report really lays it out.
Danette – It’s amazing we got anything done at all. Just reading through some of those old reports—how did we even make decisions with all that paper?
Jack B. – One of the things I remember, not from NA work directly, but from being Executive Director at Cri Help—I got invited to a Southern California AA H&I meeting. I went, along with the guy who started the Sober Living Coalition and a couple other program directors.
After we gave our talks, there was a break, and then a Q&A session. Someone asked, “Why are drug programs sending so many people to AA meetings?”
Nobody wanted to answer that one.
Danette – [laughs] Of course.
Jack B. – So, I went up and said, “Well, I’ve stuck my head in the lion’s mouth before, might as well do it again.” The guy who asked the question identified as a long-time sober AA member. I said, “Because of you guys.”
They told us, “If you’re going to come to AA meetings, you need to identify as an alcoholic.” But nobody ever explained what that meant. And we’re not that bright, so we just started saying it. Even though our problem wasn’t alcohol, we just added “alcoholic” to our identity.
Danette – Wow.
Jack B. – That went on for a while. Then years later, I was having breakfast with someone in Venice. We finished and they said, “There’s an AA meeting on the beach. Want to go?” I said, “Sure.”
It was right after the AA World Service Conference—Rehmar might have gone to it on NA’s behalf, in Toronto I think. Anyway, the woman leading the meeting said AA had adopted a new clarity statement. When she read it, it was basically our Message of Clarity—just written for AA.
I thought, “Wow. That’s cool.”
But then she said, “My name’s So-and-So, I’m an alcoholic and addict,” and proceeded to share about her heroin addiction.
And I thought, “Even after reading that clarity statement… you still don’t get it.”
Danette – So this Message of Clarity—I was going to ask you about that. I know meetings have had their own versions. Do you remember any official paragraph or literature about it?
Jack B. – Not really. It was more a perception—something you’d hear in most meetings I went to. So more about practice than literature.
Danette – That’s too bad. It would’ve been good to have a consistent message.
Jack B. – What was interesting was how the AA woman presented it. It almost sounded like AA had adopted our clarity message and made it theirs.
Danette – Do you remember what year that was?
Jack B. – Had to be in the ’90s. I don’t think I was still on the Board, so probably mid- to late-90s.
Tom M. – When I was doing NA meetings at a local prison, I had to walk all the way through the yard down to the chapel with my box of literature. I’d get down there and usually there’d be five or six people who just wanted something to prove they’d been to a meeting—something to stick in their jacket for the court.
One Sunday, I’m walking down the yard and all the inmates are over on the right-hand side. Nobody’s on the side I’m walking. Then this one guy breaks off from the group and heads toward me. Everyone’s watching like I’m about to get jumped.
Turns out, he was a friend of mine—he’d landed in there—and he was kind of the king of the hill. We stood there talking, catching up. I tried to hand him a White Book and he said, “No thanks, I’m good.”
Then I kept walking to the chapel, and when I got there, all the guys who came to the meeting wanted to know who I was talking to. Apparently, just having him come talk to me gave me some street cred. [laughs]
Danette – That’s wild.
Tom M. – Did you get a chance to look at any of the stuff I sent ahead of the meeting? I know it was a stretch—we’ve only got about 10 minutes left.
Danette – Jack, do you need to go?
Jack B. – No, I’m on baby watch. She’s napping, so unless she wakes up, I’m good.
Danette – Ah, one of your favorite trusted servant positions ever.
Jack B. – Absolutely.
Danette – Okay, I’m just now looking at the questions you put together from last week, Thom. I think we actually covered most of the early ones already. One thing I’d like to hear is Jack’s take on the World Services inventory—do you remember that, Jack?
Jack B. – No. I don’t even remember it being there.
Danette – [laughs] Well, that’s simple then!
Tom M. – What about the International Committee? I think it later became International Fellowship Development. Was that started by Mary Kay Banner?
Jack B. – I only remember her as Mary Banner.
Tom M. – Do you have any thoughts on that—or on Tradition Eleven, about being a program of attraction rather than promotion?
Jack B. – I doubt they came to the trustees for input. I’d guess they were trying to be responsive rather than promotional. If they were just promoting NA, that would’ve been a mistake. But I think the International Committee was responding to requests from different countries.
Tom M. – What I found is that they sent letters to international meetings, areas, and regions, offering to fund people to attend the World Service Conference—maybe in Dallas in ’92 or ’93. They picked names out of a hat from whoever responded and brought a group over.
Jack B. – That doesn’t even ring a bell. Definitely not something that happened while I was on the Board of Trustees. Maybe later, but I don’t remember that many international attendees, at least not officially sponsored by World Services.
Jack B. – Funny thing—at one point, the Board of Trustees discussed whether we should send a representative to the World Convention. I argued against it. I said there was a good chance at least one of us would be there anyway.
To my surprise, the Board disagreed. They decided we should send someone officially. And ironically, during my ten years, I was the one sent most often.
Danette – I’m glad it was you.
Jack B. – I was there anyway. Maybe the thinking was, “If we’re paying your way, you should do some service while you’re there.”
Danette – Makes sense.
Tom M. – Jack, were you at the Australia Convention in 1990?
Jack B. – Yeah, had to be ’91 or ’92. I was still on the Board. I don’t think I was officially sent—I went with my wife at the time. What I remember most was settling into our room and my wife complaining about this nagging discomfort. I looked at her and said, “You don’t get it, do you? You’re pregnant.”
She didn’t believe me—her doctor had told her there was no way she could get pregnant. But after I told her, she went home, bought a pregnancy test, and it came back positive.
She went back to her doctor, and he told her, “Get the f*** out of my office—you can’t be pregnant.” And yet… she was. That’s the daughter who popped into the room a few minutes ago. Her birthday was just two days ago.
Danette – That’s amazing.
Tom M. – I asked about the Australia convention because I was there. I’ll never forget the Thursday or Friday night speaker—a guy from Japan. He spoke entirely in Japanese to a crowd of Americans and Australians. Nobody understood a word. But he was so passionate.
Then at the very end, he said in English, “Higher Power.”
You could feel the whole room light up. It gave me chills.
Jack B. – Yeah, I was there for that. It was incredible.
Danette – Well, we’re at the hour. Thom, you’ve got your list. I know you still have a bunch of things we haven’t touched on.
Tom M. – Of course I do. Always. [laughs] A lot of it’s in the weeds, though.
Danette – Yeah. I mean, Jack, if you’re open to coming back for another session, we could easily go another 20 minutes next time.
Danette – Jack, have there been any things crossing your mind over these last two weeks—stuff you want to bring up?
Jack B. – My suggestion: let’s meet again next week. I’ll take a look at what Tom sent, and who knows—something else might come to mind between now and then.
Danette – Perfect. I’ll go back through the materials too—there are a few things Tom sent that made me go, “Oh wow, I forgot all about that.” Some of it might jog your memory too, Jack.
Tom M. – I think during our earlier interviews, I kept saying, “Jack would know about this!” I’ve got some notes and highlights from those recordings. I’ll revisit them and make a list for next time.
Danette – Jack, thanks so much—not just for joining us today, but for all the service you’ve done over the years. And especially for the work you’re doing right now.
Tom M. – Absolutely. For me, it was reading the White Book back in 1983 or ’85—that changed everything. That was when I really got it.
Danette – I was talking to Ron Hofius about that too.
Jack B. – [laughs] The election will be good—but I’ve got my own memories of that. ?
Everyone: [laughing]
Danette – We’ll see!
Tom M. – Thanks, everyone. See you next week.