- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
As some of you know, my last commitment crisis happened largely as a result of my calling as an HPGL. One of the more minor, but disturbing components of that crisis was the way our Bishop handled funds. We had some very worthy initiatives that cost a bit of money (about $400/year at the time), involving letters to less actives. Our Bishop indicated he felt they made a difference because when he interviewed less active people they often commented that they received and read the monthly letters from Brother Silentdawning. When I visited these people, I would often introduce myself as teh Brother Silentdawning who had been sending them letters — and often, they were appreciative – it was like there was a relationship established before I got there. We also used the letters to up our home teaching/contact numbers and thus, keep the Stake off our back. That was important as we have 14 companionships to home teach 200 families. And of those 14 companionships, only about 5 home teachers were doing home teaching. The letters helped us stop from being railed on by the Stake (which happened a couple times anyway).
Anyway, I paid for the program out of my own pocket, in addition to tithing, fasting offerings, etcetera.
I was suprised that at the end of the year, the clerk told me the budget was not fully spent, and the Bishop was sending it back to SLC (perhaps through the Stake?). I have heard of other priesthood leaders doing this, and seemingly, being proud of it. Meanwhile, I had asked that budget year for the Bishop to fund the $400 in letters I’d been funding out of my own pocket in previous years. He had refused.
This did not sit well with me at all. Already, I felt the adult programs were not well funded (lame pot luck ward socials all the time), our social activities committee was concerned they never had any funds to put on good social activities, and the letter writing project seemed to be making a difference. I remember being bothered for quite a while thinking “reaching the less active is only important to these people if it’s free”.
Anyway, I was talking to a Bishop in my stake yesterday, and he told me that the “sending unspent money back to SLC is not in place anymore”.
So,my question — have you heard this locally, do you know if it’s a churchwide, Stateside-wide, or simply our local Stake leadership who are stopping this (in my view) questionable practice?
Unused funds are no longer sent back to SLC. This is a church wide policy to my knowledge. However, the stake president has to approve carry forward balances, and I believe one reason for that is to prevent a ward from collecting a massive nest egg over time. As far as I know the church owns all the unit accounts, and they have access to the unit accounting. They make a weekly sweep of the deposited tithing, then they make deposits to cover expenses or checks written. I realize the unit may carry some balance, maybe the amount of their budget. If this is how things work the money is actually not sent back to SL as much as it is simply retained by SL. I know effectively it is the same and if you don’t spend your budget you lose it. Yeah, it’s churchwide. The policy was changed a few years ago. I am not sure exactly when, but it had been changed recently when I became ward finance clerk in 2011. As far as I know, before the change any remaining budget at the end of the year had to be returned to church headquarters. Now the leftover budget stays with the ward. Wards generally have a meager budget though. I doubt any ward could get rich off of it 🙂 . In my experience the Boy Scout fees and Primary usually eat away a large portion of it. Adults and YW are left with the crumbs (this could be very different in other wards/branches).It is hard to imagine being asked to provide such an expensive service and then not be reimbursed for the materials. I am sorry that happened to you. Sometimes as the finance clerk I was perplexed at where the bishop chose to spend money and where he chose to withhold it. I always figured I just didn’t know the full story. I’m sure your bishop felt like he was doing the right thing, but it is hard to imagine what his justification would have been.
As others have said, units now can keep unspent money – and the stake is responsible to make sure no leader is hoarding funds. That is good. I thought that was so miserly on the part of the church. I’m glad they changed the policy, and I hope it sticks over time. I am a frugal/borderline hoarder. In the mission I saved up my stipend of about $30 per month. As the mission came to an end I didn’t have enough time to buy enough souvenirs and ended up coming home with unspent money.
If I were a church leader in my TBM days my natural inclination would be to not spend the “Lord’s Money” and think that I was responsible in doing so.
I am probably extreme in my frugality but I can understand how some leaders would spend as little as possible and pat themselves on the back.
Part of leadership roulette perhaps.
I remember the talk at the dinner table and family gatherings that were upsetting were the changes in Church Policy involving the money. How missions went to one equal amount of money. (Which was fine for our family since we were poor, but none of us went to expensive missions anyway). I know that a lot of the fun stuff the Church used to do stopped happening when the Church budget policies changed. I even heard once in my home Stake that a rich member of the Church paid to have the air conditioning overhauled because Salt Lake didn’t want to pay the tab. Talk of money and how it is used is a point of contention in any organization. I’m glad I don’t serve in any capacity of leadership or administration in the Church otherwise, I would probably be ticked-off. Silent Dawning your post just re-awakens reasons why I’m not in leadership, or the Stake for that matter.
Quote:Anyway, I was talking to a Bishop in my stake yesterday, and he told me that the “sending unspent money back to SLC is not in place anymore”.
I don’t believe this is correct. There is an option for a ward to retain some unspent funds but, at least in our stake, the ward must justify the purpose for holding the funds for use in the next year. Maybe it’s for a camp or a special youth activity etc. So it can be done, but unless they have stake authorization, I believe most stakes will pull excess funds back.
They also do this with Fast Offerings to be reappropriated to poorer areas.
As others have said, the stake leadership is supposed to ensure that no ward is hoarding money (that there is a legitimate reason to keep the funds), but wards no longer have to send all unused funds back to SLC. The policy is different now than it used to be.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.