Update on Duraye after losing her job

Dear family,

I’m sorry to report that Duraye has lost her job. Or more accurately left her job this week.

She knows that many, if not all, of us are shaking our heads thinking, “Not again! Can’t she keep a job?!” Believe me she feels horrible about this and, after coming so close to getting on her feet financially, to be in this position again is devastating to her, too. 

I don’t know all the details and everything I do get is from her perspective. In short, she was doing very well in the company. She liked them and they, by all appearances, liked her ver much. But last week her company (an investment firm) abruptly got investigated by law enforcement, apparently due to a complaint by two disgruntled former employees. While Duraye said she felt the owner was completely honest and never saw any evidence of fraudulent practices, she felt an obligation to her clients (investors) and both she and her sales manager felt they could no longer represent the company in good conscience with the cloud of an investigation hanging over it. They both resigned along other employees (for all I know they were laid off). She said the company went from 20 to 5 employees overnight. It was a tough decision because she was on the brink of some very lucrative bonuses, but those were lost when she, in good conscience, chose to notify her clients of the investigation.

She feels horrible. not only because she has to find another job but she knows how this makes her appear to the family.

To her credit and much to her own satisfaction, she was able to cover all her expenses for November and even December, including the past-due debt payments. So she was working hard to get on her feet and out from family assistance.

She still has her part-time (contract labor) job at Ann Taylor’s apparel store in the Scottsdale Mall and would work more hours, but because her manager brought on so many part-time workers (wanting extra $$ for the holiday season) it’s difficult for Duraye to get extra hours even though she now has time.

Also, Duraye leaves this Thursday for Utah to spend Christmas with her daughters. We’re so happy for her and, while it may not be a mutual feeling, from Duraye’s perspective her relationship with Olivia is significantly better. So she’s looking forward to this trip and we’re hopeful it will be a bonding and joyful visit for her…and a needed break to be with her family.

So here’s where we stand…

The “financial crisis” has put us back in touch a little more often (not always Duraye’s doing; we’ve been extra busy, too, with family, church, holidays, etc.), maybe a silver lining to it all. 

Thank you for understanding that I can’t give you the assurance that Duraye is doing significantly better in every area of her life or that this “revolving door” of financial issues won’t happen again. But in the end, we’re still her family. And we’re better off working together than separately in trying to help her along this painful path. 

I hope it’s some consolation to share my personal feelings that she is not wrestling with addictions of the past nor do I sense she has a boyfriend.

In fact, she mentioned to me in passing last week (maybe a “set up” comment, I don’t know), but that she was driving to work one day last week and thinking how wonderful her life was now. She said she hardly thinks of Mike any more, that she has a nice apartment, a solid job, and family that loves and is willing to help her. It was one of the first times I’ve heard joy in her voice. It thrilled me to know she had experienced some happiness.

Of course, there was a “but…” to the conversation. She then proceeded to unfold the sad events causing her to question her employer’s integrity and thus the health and longevity of the company that led to her resignation.

So while she’s in desperate need again, I really sensed that part of her joy came from being self-sufficient financially. She was confident again and was so happy that she had been able to cover all the expenses on her own in November, including past-due debt payments.

Furthermore, she is able to cover ALL of her expenses (both past debt and current living expenses) through December. But come January 1, unless she finds a full-time job during the holidays (very unlikely), her sole income will be about $500 per month from her retail part-time job. Sadly there’s no full-time option at Ann Taylor because most of their employees are contract labor (part-time) to avoid benefits and because standing for so long is brutal on her feet and legs. She has to spread out her shifts just to buy time to recover.

So now, for the first time and recognizing that I must come to the family for a sizable contribution, I’m going to share detailed numbers with you. I’ve not done so in the past because there are a few expenses or even fines from her “past life” that are very embarrassing to her. I can tell by how she asks each time if all of you will be seeing these numbers. It’s obvious it’s very shameful to her. I explained that I only send totals.

But I feel it’s important for you to know more details so you can decide if you want to continue to “invest” in our proposal to help Duraye. I have blocked out some of the information that would embarrass her. I have no desire to shame her, but you deserve more details.

So you’ll find two spreadsheets attached. I use both of these with her to help her keep on track in paying past debts and recognize that she doesn’t have any “surplus” to spend frivolously. 

For those who don’t want to go over all the details, here’s the bottom line:

Duraye has $1,256.67 in her check book right now. As you’ll see on page two of the “Duraye Assistance for Jan 2017” document that it is all earmarked in detail for debt and monthly fixed expenses with $75 left for food and other living expenses.

So she’s good through December. Here’s where she needs our help:

As you can see in the same document, Duraye has $4,045 in past-due obligations that she negotiated down from nearly $8,000. We have negotiated monthly payments that total $690.40 per month.

Her fixed living expenses total about $1,625 per month, including the $950 rent payments we’ve been making.

She has around $370 per month in non-fixed living expenses (groceries, personal items, auto fuel, etc.).

I suggested that she devote the $500 she gets from her retail job toward her monthly living expenses.

That means as a family, until she can get work, we would be willing to help her with the balance…trusting that she will get some type of second job (hopefully full-time) before January is over. She is working hard right now to find work.

The balance totals:

$690 Debt payments

$1,625 Fixed living expenses…for a total of…

$2,315

Fortunately, we had a surplus of $451.26 of family contributions that were not needed for December’s rent because Duraye paid nearly half of the rent for that month.

So our true contribution is:

$2,315 Needed

-    451 Surplus

$1,864 Total needed for January

While this is twice what we originally agreed to ($50-$100 per family), as you can see in the “Duraye Pay Timeline Jan 2017 - B” (B means blacked out version) not all of her bills are due at the first of the month. So if she can secure work sooner, hopefully some of those later bills will be paid by her.

So I’m asking for those who feel they can contribute (and please know we fully understand if she’s worn out her welcome to your generosity), that we contribute $300 or more per family this month. For some, $50-$100 is a stretch and please know everything and anything is appreciated and will be adequate. We're so sorry to ask for funds especially around Christmas. But the end of the month is near and we felt it important that you know now and can plan accordingly, if you can help.

We grow weary of this, too, but we want you to know we have not lost faith in our sister...that she wants a happier life and is making a sincere effort to achieve it. It would be doubly difficult if she wasn’t grateful. But she is VERY grateful. And so are we.

Love,

Crismon & Vivienne

Historic day on Dec. 11, 2016 with the creation of the new Pioneer Branch (Spanish) in our stake

Dear Mount Hood Stake Members,

Today, Dec. 11, was historic in our stake.

The new Pioneer Branch (Spanish) for Spanish-speaking members in our stake was officially created with the following called into the Pioneer Branch Presidency:

Carlos H. Ibarra, of the Sandy River Ward, as President; with

Miguel (Mike) A. De Leon, of the Walters Hill Ward, as First Counselor; and 

Cody M. Garrison, of the Evergreen Ward (Gresham Stake), as Second Counselor.

Also sustained were:

Brian L. Allen, of the Damascus Ward, as Branch Clerk;

Craig N. Dobson, of the Sandy River Ward, as Branch Elders Quorum President; with

Margarito (Morgan) Ortiz, of the Walters Hill Ward, as First Counselor.

The Pioneer Branch will continue to meet with the Sandy River Ward through the rest of December. On January 1, 2017, the branch will move to the stake center in Boring where they will overlap with the Damascus Ward, beginning their block meetings at 2:20 pm for second and third hour classes followed by sacrament meeting at 4:10 pm.

We cannot express enough our gratitude to the many in our stake who made this possible:

• The many members and leaders of the Sandy River Ward, who have nurtured this fledgling group of Spanish-speaking members for the past two years;

• The bishoprics, who have encouraged their ward members to accept branch leadership opportunities; and

• The families, who have accepted a “mission call” to attend the branch leaving long-time friendships in their home ward to support the new branch.

We trust the Lord will honor the sacrifice of all who have made today’s proceedings possible. 

We now invite everyone to join with us in praying for the branch’s success in reaching and blessing even more of Heavenly Father’s children in the coming years.

With love and heartfelt appreciation,

The Stake Presidency

Helping a young man, who came home from his mission without honor

Bishop Miller and Brother (name withheld)…

In response to your inquiry as to whether his son can sing in the ward choir, let me see if we can address this in another way so we don’t become “policemen” having to address every question as to what he can and can’t do? All are valid questions, by the way, but let me see if we can set some foundation to help us…and especially him…in deciding how we go forward from here.

I’m sorry to be so directive in this, but it is a serious matter involving an endowed Melchizedek Priesthood holder while serving as a set apart missionary for the Lord. I, too, want only to make the right decisions here to help and, frankly, this is relatively new territory for me, too.

The bottom line is that he should be excommunicated (and may yet be depending on his response to our efforts to help him) for months of deceit, breaking temple covenants and contributing to the possible destruction of a young girl’s future, unless she repents (yes, it was consensual but it was still an adult-minor relationship that cannot be ignored). If I’m not mistaken, in some places in the US it’s considered a form of rape.

In the end, we are talking about a total disregard for both the Lord’s sacred Law of Chastity and Law of Consecration. Because of his upbringing and example in his home, there should be no question as to his level of understanding of those two laws.

So for now, until we can decide the formalities, please hold him accountable for these actions, as if he were excommunicated, even though we do not want to shame him or suggest he cannot repent. But it’s important that he come to realize the gravity of his sins and the level of offense it was to God. So he must be denied the privileges of membership without feeling ostracized, which can be a delicate balance. Fortunately, he has the support of a very loving and caring family, who are going to stand by him and help him in this journey. So will his bishop and stake president, as long as he will allow us to do so by showing a sincere desire to do whatever is asked of him to receive the Lord’s forgiveness.

Therefore in an “excommunicated” status, he is not to participate in classes, say public prayers, speak in meetings, use his priesthood, serve in callings and participate in ordinances. He is to wear his garments (those excommunicated cannot), attend church meetings (including priesthood quorum meeting) and to do everything he can to draw closer to the Lord in his personal life. While excommunicated members can sing in choirs, just like a non-member, singing in the choir puts him up front and subtly says to the congregation all is well, when he has broken trust with his fellow members (who also made covenants), to say nothing of the trust broken with family, his priesthood leaders and the Lord.

We have agreed to allow him to speak in the Damascus Ward sacrament meeting and to report to the Stake High Council this Sunday in order to avoid public shame that would occur by his absence. But even there he needs to understand that he was allowed to do those two things, not because he is worthy or deserving, but simply to offer some semblance of protection from public shame while he decides if he’s going to make a sincere effort to give the Lord the year he owes Him.

While we desperately want him to feel loved, wanted and needed, as with any excommunicated member, until he shows true contrition by seriously working with us, his parents and, especially, the Lord in creating a plan of repentance that he commits to follow. then he should not expect to serve or enjoy the blessings and benefits of membership in hopes that the denial will help him appreciate the seriousness of covenants, the consequences of breaking them, and the blessings that come from keeping them.

I’m sorry to ask this. But we must remember the balance between justice and mercy. Mercy is waiting for him to begin to turn to the Lord with all of his heart wanting to do whatever it takes to become a different person, to have a new heart and pure desires. It means his parents will begin to see a different young man in the way he lives his life each day, i.e. devotion to scripture study, prayers, cleaning his room, using his time wisely, participating only in wholesome and uplifting entertainment, respect for parents and other family members, desiring only to be with good friends, seeking to help others (especially less fortunate) before concerning himself about his life and his future, etc.

Until then, justice must be answered.

I hope this helps. I apologize for going on so long.

I admire and respect you both and welcome your counsel in this very painful matter for all of us. Please forgive me if I have come across too harshly. I don’t want to forget that he is still a young man and, obviously, in some respects just a boy. So feel free to respond and help make sure I don’t allow my own hurt or disgust cause an imbalance in my judgment.

Gratefully,

President Lewis

Addressing hair coloring concerns for a temple worker in our stake

President Lundgreen,

Thank you for bringing to my attention your concerns about Leslie Hatton, of the Damascus Ward, and her hair coloring as a temple worker.

I can understand your concern as to how hair coloring can distract patrons. I visited personally with Leslie and was surprised to see that the coloring is hardly noticeable and, depending on how she combs her hair, it’s not visible at all.

You can see why she’s dug in her heels a bit over the matter inasmuch as her coloring apparently was not an issue with the previous temple presidency (or at least that we’re aware of) and now it’s one—significant enough to jeopardize her calling if she doesn’t conform. In my opinion, it’s one of those issues that we sometimes face with teenagers, who show a little “wild streak” in their dress. If we don’t react, it eventually goes away. If we react, it becomes “World War III” and eventually there are casualties.

I also understand, though, that standards are important, especially for those who serve in the House of the Lord.

Thank you for wanting to address this with Leslie's spiritual and emotional well-being in mind; especially in light of the fact that she seems to have been a very devoted ordinance worker over the past two years and has willingly and frequently substituted for other workers.

My recommendation is that you simply put her on a form of “probation” requiring her to always conceal the colored portions of her hair while serving in the temple. I believe she can do that with a few hair pins. 

If, however, you feel it is significant enough and, understandably, you don’t want to have to monitor or “police” her, then I am happy to submit the recommendation that she be released. She has had a wonderful experience serving in the temple. It has blessed her tremendously. She’ll be fine in accepting a release.

I hope this helps. If there’s anything more you’d like me to do, I’m happy to do whatever I can to help resolve this matter amicably.

We so appreciate your leadership in the temple and are thrilled about the new temple presidency. You are all mighty men and faithful matrons serving diligently in blessing all of us to enjoy the magnificent blessings of the temple. It is a joy to serve with you.

Crismon Lewis

President, Mount Hood Stake

Will you help us implement the Self-Reliance Initiative in our stake?

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

If you’re receiving this email, you have been selected by the stake presidency to help us launch a new initiative in our stake.

Actually, our stake has been chosen to help “pilot” or implement the Church’s Self-Reliance Initiative that has proven to be extremely successful internationally and now is being introduced in North America.

In short, it’s a very exciting plan that shows members how to implement key self-reliance principles so they can live a more abundant life—both temporally and spiritually. The results have been most remarkable!

A key factor in the success of this initiative is a facilitator working with small groups. That’s where you come in. You have been chosen by the stake presidency as one whom we feel would fulfill this assignment very well because of your understanding of effective teaching. 

But as you can see in this video https://www.lds.org/media-library/video/2014-06-2070-how-to-facilitate-a-group?lang=eng&category=group-facilitator we’re looking for facilitators, who teach by involving others in the discovery process—not by instruction.

There is a commitment as a facilitator. For instance, it includes a weekly commitment to meet with a small group of 8-12 stake members and guide them through a 12-week course. We may be able to have more than one facilitator per group or you may find you can select and train a member of your group to serve as the facilitator to allow you flexibility in your time commitment.

We are not asking for such a commitment right now. Instead we are simply creating a “pool” of potential facilitators. So we’re asking you to please join us at a special Self-Reliance Initiative Introductory meeting this Tuesday, Dec 6, at 7:00 pm in the High Council room to learn more about the initiative and how it will be implemented in our stake. We will then contact you individually to determine your interest and availability.

We realize this is very late notice so please do not feel guilty if you cannot attend the meeting this Tuesday. But we wanted to give you, and as many others as possible, first exposure to what this is, how it works and how we believe it will dramatically impact lives in our stake. So we appreciate your attendance, if you’re available.

We would appreciate you replying to this email and telling us whether or not you can attend the meeting this Tuesday, Dec 6, at 7:00 pm.

Thank you for your devotion to the Lord and for dedicating your talents to bless others. We hope you’ll find this a very fulfilling and rewarding opportunity, if you’re able to accept this assignment.

Gratefully,

President Crismon S. Lewis

President Paul S. Hansen

President Steven C. Christiansen

Announcement to Stake Council Members of 2017 Stake Budget

11 November 2016

TO: Stake Council Members

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

First our thanks to all who conducted and participated in the Stake Auxiliary Training this week. It was OUTSTANDING in every way! All of you did a magnificent job!

Hopefully, we’ll have time to report briefly in our Stake Council meeting on Sunday, Nov 20, on how you felt it went and if you have any recommendations to change the format for next year.

You are receiving this email with two attachments:

1. Proposed 2017 Stake Budget: Please review the proposed funds for your organization and reply with any concerns. You’ll notice we made a few comments to give further explanation as to the rationale for certain budget figures.

The 2017 stake budget is a little tighter because the allocation of budget funds (based on average sacrament meeting attendance) from the Church to our stake has been dropping over the past few years due to a reduction in stake membership from 2,835 in 2013 to 2,653 in 2016. Sacrament meeting attendance also has dropped, from 43% in 2013 to 39% in 2016.

2. Proposed 2017 Summer Camp Funding Letter: We hope to distribute next week this letter to all families with children announcing changes to our summer camp funding policy. In short, we have increased the Boy Scout Summer Camp family contribution from $100 to $150 and decreased the summer camp fees for everyone else from $100 to $75).

Despite the reduction in funds available to us as a stake, we continue to feel strongly that the summer camp experiences for the youth and children are among our best “investments” as so many lives are changed and testimonies strengthened at these camps. We hope lightening the financial burden of summer camps will be a blessing to families in our stake.

So please review the attached two documents and reply with any suggestions or corrections, before they become final.

Gratefully,

The Stake Presidency

Announcement of Ward Budget Allocations for 2017

11 November 2016

Bishop Miller,

Due to a number of factors our stake membership is becoming smaller. As a few bishops are now aware, it has caused some staffing concerns for several wards.

We are confident that, in time, the growth will return to our stake.

In the meantime, we are experiencing some budget challenges because both the numbers attending sacrament meeting and the attendance percentage at sacrament meeting have been dropping for the past few years.

For example…

For 1^st Quarter 2013 in our stake:

·   1,169 attended sacrament meeting

·   43% sacrament meeting attendance

Compared to the 3^rd Quarter 2016:

·   1,015 attended sacrament meeting (154 less @ $48/person = $7,398 reduced allocation)

·   39% sacrament meeting attendance (down 4%)

Both dynamics—fewer members and fewer members attending sacrament meeting—affect our budget allocation ($48 per attendee, per year) from Church headquarters. As a consequence, we must make the following changes to your 2017 allocation:

·   Your 2016 Ward Allocation: $5,000 ($1,250 per quarter)

·   Your 2017 Ward Allocation: $3,800 ($950 per quarter, which will vary—see below)

Other funds you currently have to help you make up the difference:

·   Your 2015 Carry Over: $1,725.09

·   Your 2016 Potential Carry Over*: $3,762.00

·   Your Current “Other” Account Balance:  $540.00

Over the years we have not significantly adjusted your allocation even though the allocation to our stake has been dropping. We assumed it would come back, but it didn’t. To avoid this in the future, we will adjust your budget allocation each quarter based on your sacrament meeting attendance. Usually a quarterly adjustment is nominal, but the varying income amount will help you monitor the changes happening in your ward.

Thank you for adjusting your year-end 2016 and your 2017 spending accordingly. We are having to do the same with the stake budget. Together we’ll make it work!

The Stake Presidency

* Current balance in your ward budget as of Nov. 1—what you would carry over if you didn’t spend anything the rest of the year. We recognize it’s not realistic that you’ll just stop spending right now, but hopefully it will give you an incentive to monitor carefully your spending for the balance of 2016.

Explanation of 2017 Summer Camp Funding Policy to Bishops

14 November 2016

Bishops,

Attached you’ll find a DRAFT of the announcement about changes to our stake’s 2017 Summer Camp Funding Policy. 

We are sending you this document for your review and feedback before we ask that you distribute the final approved version to all parents with children in your ward.

Fortunately, the change in policy does not reflect a sizable increase over 2016 in the total stake subsidy. It’s just more equitable way to follow the guidance in the handbook to use church funds to lighten the financial burden on families, in this case to minimize the high cost of summer camps. 

You’ll notice that the new policy raises the family contribution for boys attending the expensive Boy Scout Camp. We’re not against Scout camp, but we cannot continue to subsidize so heavily a camp that appears to increase its registration fee by 10% or more every year. 

While the policy raises the family contribution from $100 to $150, we do not feel it is significant enough to allow youth leaders to conduct fundraising. We feel parents can still help their children learn to earn enough to meet the $150 portion of the registration fee. Hence the importance that you to notify parents far in advance.

Understandably some of you will wonder why we continue to subsidize summer camps at all when we’re having to cut stake and ward budgets—announced last week--due to the decrease in budget allocations from SLC?

While the day may come that we must eliminate or reduce the summer camp subsidies, our feeling is that lightening the financial burden on families is one of the most effective use of these sacred funds….funds that originated with these same members in the form of tithes. 

Our summer camp subsidies are a great benefit to the family’s budget and also we hope the subsidies encourage families to send their youth and children to these spiritually beneficial summer camps. We feel strongly this is a very wise use of the generous allocations received each quarter from the Church.

We also feel, as we have continually seen almost every ward (and the stake, for that matter) carry over more than $1,000 in unused budget funds each year, that there is more we can all do to tighten our belts and refine our budgeting processes before we start eliminating or reducing camp subsidy funds that directly bless the family budget.

Thank you for giving this your consideration. We look forward to hearing from you…prior to the Bishop’s Training tomorrow.

Thank you,

The Stake Presidency

By the way, we will no longer require you to receive the family contribution before receiving the reimbursement funds from the stake. Please submit a list immediately after your youth complete each summer camp and we’ll send you a reimbursement check as quickly as possible. As most of you know, by now, if you do not start working with families to submit their family contribution(s) early in the year, it can create a major cash flow problem for you by spring. Please help parents understand the importance of teaching their children how to earn money and to submit their family contribution(s) on time.

Remember, all summer camps are supported by the family contributions and stake funds. NO ward funds are used to support summer camps. However, the cash flow needed to pay for summer camp registration fees, often required in the spring, is the responsibility of the ward. So you have a sizable amount of money that comes in and goes out through your “Other” account. It’s very important that you work with the families and help them to pay on time or you will run the risk of falling short of the money you need to pay the registrations, which will later be reimbursed by the stake.

New 2017 Summer Camp Funding Policy

15 November 2016

TO: All Parents of Youth and Children in the Mount Hood Stake

FROM: The Mount Hood Stake Presidency

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

We value greatly the summer camp experiences the youth of our stake enjoy each year, especially when the gospel is taught and testimonies are strengthened around a campfire with other youth who share their beliefs and standards.

Therefore, we have tried to make these camps as accessible and affordable as possible.

The Church discourages fundraising (see Handbook 2, 13.6.8) and suggests ALL youth activities, including summer camps where possible, should be covered by ward budget funds.

While we have not been able to cover all the camp fees with budget funds, we continue to use these funds to minimize the financial burden on families. For several years we were able to reduce the family’s cost for summer camps to only $100 per child or youth.

We are happy to announce that we now have a new, and hopefully more equitable, fee schedule for families beginning in 2017, as follows:

                  • $150 per boy for Boy Scout Camp (regularly $305 to $320 per boy)

                  • $75 per child or youth for other camps, including:  Young Women Camp
                                    (reg. $125), High Adventure (reg. $150), Camp Helaman for Priests-age
                                    young men (reg. $170), and Cub Scout Day Camp (reg. $125)

                  • NO FEE for Church-operated summer camps for Primary-age children, including:

                                    Primary Activity Days (girls ages 8-11) and 11-Year-Old Scout Day Camp

The subsidized fees above are good for only one summer camp per youth except young men, ages 16-18, who may also attend Camp Helaman at the reduced $75 fee because of the value we believe this multi-stake camp provides in preparing YM to serve full-time missions.

Non-member families pay the full or regular camp fee, unless there is a financial need.

We appreciate your support of this policy and urge parents to teach their children the importance of earning the reduced share (either $75 or $150) of their summer camp fee.

About the 2016 Presidential Race

25 October 2016

In response to Dantzelle asking from Greece (on their mission) who to vote for in this year's presidential race.

I assume, Dantzelle, you’re asking our opinion on who to vote for (if not too late for those of you half way around the world). This is the first time when so many patriotic, Constitution-loving Americans are feeling totally disenfranchised. The two main parties have failed us and have given us the worst possible candidates. 

It’s the perfect storm of pathetic politics!

In my opinion, we either vote on principle or pragmatics. 

If on principle, then you write in the name of a good and wise person, otherwise you contribute to “evil” and the people further mourning (see D&C 98:9-10). 

If on pragmatics, then you vote to block Hillary, who is the more sinister of the two and has shown in her many years of government service she embraces policies counter to the Lord’s plan of agency and freedom. (But I have little hope a self-serving, narcissistic man like Trump will do much better.)

Because both candidates are so horrible, I personally feel a deeper responsibility to answer to God (principle) than to a party or even America (pragmatics) this year. 

I’m still shaking my head and asking, “How did we go from a Mitt Romney four years ago to a Donald Trump today?”

We’ve seen a lot of things turn revolting in America during our years in this wonderful land, but this…ahem…trumps them all. No wonder we see billboards by realtors offering to sell our homes when we move to Canada!

Sorry, this probably doesn’t help.

Love,

Crismon

Stake Auxiliary Training guidelines for Nov 8, 2016

25 October 2016

Stake Auxiliary Presidents (RS, YW, Primary, SS)...

Thank you for the preparations you are making for your one-hour break-out sessions at Stake Auxiliary Training meeting. 

We recognize this once-a-year training opportunity makes this a precious hour. We will do everything we can to make sure you have the full hour immediately following the 20-minute opening devotional in the chapel under the direction of the stake presidency.

In case we have not communicated to you already, we would appreciate you giving emphasis in your training to “Teaching in the Savior’s Way.” We encourage you, in your training, to model principles and practices taught in this Church-wide initiative available online and in the "Teaching in the Savior’s Way" booklet.

As additional resources:

• Feel free to contact Scott Emery, our Stake Sunday School President, who is our stake resource just as ward Sunday School presidencies serve as the resource for the ward council in helping to implement this initiative;

• Attend the live broadcast of the “Teaching in the Savior’s Way” training meeting at the stake center on Saturday, Nov 5, at 12:00 to 2:30 pm; be flexible and ready, if you feel prompted, to adjust your Stake Auxiliary Training break-out session plans based on what we receive in the broadcast just three days earlier;

• Remember you will be training leaders on how to help teachers so you may want to draw from the online instruction on the role of leaders in overseeing the implementation of “Teaching in the Savior’s Way” in each ward;

• If you want to use any of the training videos available online, please contact Russ Hokanson, of the Tickle Creek Ward and our Stake Technology Specialist, as soon as possible so he can help arrange for you to have the technology support you need.

We recognize you likely have other training matters you want to address with your ward counterparts. Please know we do not expect you to devote the entire time to the above topic, but we appreciate very much you giving it emphasis in your break-out session.

Finally, a couple of additional thoughts…

…While this is a “precious hour” of training, let’s remember that this one hour of training will not likely make a huge impact in and of itself. In the end, our greatest influence in helping ward leaders will be in our ongoing ward visits, stewardship interviews and one-on-one training. So please do not stress over making this the “perfect” training meeting.

…It is sometimes customary to provide refreshments after a training meeting like this. While it’s a nice way to encourage leaders to linger and visit, we discourage refreshments for several reasons: (1) it inappropriately models the very thing we ask teachers NOT to do—bring food to the classroom; (2) it burdens you and your leaders in having to prepare temporal food when we want your full effort to be on preparing a spiritual feast; and (3) it sometimes places auxiliaries in competition with each other to offer bigger and better after-meeting treats.

Thank you again for your stake service—for your deep and abiding love of the Lord that motivates us to give Him our very best effort in blessing His children. 

Please know we love you and are so honored to associate with you in this mighty and marvelous work.

President Lewis

Discussion about moving wards with the creation of YSA and Spanish branches in our stake

3 October 2016

Dear Brian (Yates),

Thank you for the clarification. I apologize for any misunderstanding or mischaracterization. I accept your apology and ask that you forgive me, as well.

You are right, you did send me a thorough and helpful email on 9/16, to which I failed to respond (I’ve included below for all to review). I apologize for not responding.  I shared, however, with the stake presidency that I was not inclined to approve a move of the YSA Branch to the Institute (or any other building in the Gresham Stake), but forgot to communicate my feelings to you after you so kindly shared your thoughts.

So you’re aware, here are three major reasons I see for not moving the YSA branch into the Institute building or a location in Gresham: (1) I was the bishop that moved the YSA Ward out of the Institute into a church building and it made a huge difference in helping the YSA feel they were a true Church unit and they began to grow (40 to 75 in average attendance) and  function (accept leadership roles) as such; (2) the full-time missionaries in our stake would not be able to attend the YSA branch meetings without some special permission, which may be hard to get inasmuch as crossing mission boundaries is, as one Area 70 said, a send-home transgression; and (3) placing the YSA branch within the Gresham Stake boundaries would inherently undermine the Springwater YSA Ward. While it may make sense to us to rescue the many YSA on the east side seemingly being neglected right now, this is not an appropriate way to get priesthood leaders to change direction.

If there’s a silver lining, hopefully this discussion on both the Spanish and YSA units has now been broached with all the “key players” (the stake presidency and you, as the HC over both units) so that we can once-and-for-all put to rest any rumors or hidden agendas among any of us with regard to thoughts of moving an existing ward or branch into the Estacada building. And while the idea of creating a fourth ward out of E-SR-TC is enticing, we are not seeing enough growth (either in converts or move-ins) to justify such a consideration at least not until we consistently see 250+ attendance in at least two of the three wards and even there I believe SLC might balk at such a recommendation in part due to the thin numbers in the TC Ward (they’ve stopped opening the first curtain for sacrament meeting).

Brian, thank you for taking the time to explain what happened. We value very much your service on the high council and for your faithful service to two units—the YSA and Spanish. The fact that you serve both units speaks to how much confidence we have in you. We are equally grateful for your willingness to provide double-duty service.

Gratefully,

Crismon

Your email to which I never responded (my apologies!):

When I was asked to work with the Spanish group, I began to look to the future and began looking for the solutions to the problems we addressed last night, as well as some others.

Growth of the group was one thing I looked at and the fact is, at some future date, the Sandy building will not be able to accommodate both the Spanish Branch/Ward and the YSA Branch/Ward.

President Hansen and I discussed this and he asked me to explore what options exist, and to get the opinions of Pres. Westover and of Bro. G - from a YSA, not Spanish, point of view.

Pres. Westover is not concerned about the possibility of having to move, as long as Estacada is not the destination building.  We both believe moving the Branch there would be damaging to our efforts. He likes the idea of the Stake Center or the Institute or the Troutdale building.

Brother G hopes we choose the Institute, but he also likes the idea of the Troutdale building.

My thoughts are that having the YSAs meet at the Stake Center would be the best option for the Stake, but I recognize it will likely not happen.

Why do I say it is best for the Stake?  Moving Damascus Ward for a short time to the Estacada building would give the minimum required 2 units per existing building, which then would allow us to petition Salt Lake to build another building.  We will need that building because the SR/Tickle Creek/Estacada combination will soon birth a 4th Ward.

At that point, the YSAs could move to Troutdale, (because by then, they will have outgrown the possibility of using the Institute) also by then, our relationship with the Gresham Stake YSAs will be so solid that the Gresham location will be desireable. Or they could just stay in the Stake Center with Damascus and the Spanish Branch. The 2 Gresham Wards would meet in the new building located in Gresham proper.

The units per building would be:

Sandy - 2 Units

Estacada - 2 Units (Estacada + the new Ward)

The Stake Center - 3 Units

The new building - 2 Units

So, if the YSAs don't go to the Stake Center, I recommend they go to the Institute, and when they outgrow it, the Troutdale building (which currently houses 2 wards) will be nice.  And yes, I know we will outgrow the Institute in a year, but there are benefits to meeting there until we do outgrow it.

Thanks,

Brian

In response to this email chain:

Brian,

I appreciate your vision and enthusiasm for growth, but SLC is doing everything possible to avoid building in the USA since most of the growth (and need) is in Africa and Latin America.

So our chances of getting a building in Gresham are very remote because…

1. The Church sold the land where the Hogan building was located in Gresham and there are few pieces of suitable size remaining, that I can tell;

2. We would have to have sacrament meeting attendance in multiple wards of 300 or more before they’d start looking at dividing wards (we only have two wards that pull more than 200 sacrament meeting attendance and that’s only on an occasional basis);

3. We need 3 units, not 2, in every building before they’ll consider building;

4. The Church is monitoring attendance and growth in every building (we are required to submit an annual report) and they require wards to attend in “open” slots in buildings even located in other stakes before they’ll build a new meetinghouse, i.e. they would require WH and PV wards attend meetings in the Gresham Stake Center or Stark or Troutdale before building again;

5. City of Gresham has a reputation of making it difficult to build within the city limits, partly because there is so little land left so they can be tough.

In short, it is extremely remote that we’ll ever see another meetinghouse in Gresham. So I appreciate your eagerness for growth, but—because of your stake calling—anything you say can be taken as a reflection of the stake presidency. So please do not drop hints or suggest to leaders or members that someday a Sandy unit will be going to Estacada. That just isn’t practical. In fact, to force a Sandy congregation anytime soon to drive to Estacada just because leaders want to create the appearance of growth is both unrealistic and unkind. Please do not instigate rumors.

Thanks,

Crismon

FROM BRIAN: I would never instigate rumors. I have not made suggestions or dropped hints to anyone - leaders or otherwise - that one of the Sandy units would be going to Estacada.  What has made you think that I had?

FROM CRISMON:

During our Spanish Branch discussion meeting you mentioned openly that you had already communicated to President Westover that he should be thinking about a possible change in location (due to the possibility of a Spanish branch), maybe even Estacada. President Westover confirmed with me later that you had dropped a hint to him that the branch may move, possibly to Estacada. I assured him that would not happen.

Later I was told (I believe in a stake presidency meeting) that Bishop Howes, hearing that there was a possibility a Sandy unit might eventually move to Estacada, supposedly said, “Well, if any ward should go to Estacada it would be our ward” since he has a number of members who live off of Highway 211 half way to Estacada.

I am concerned that this idea (rumor) is even being discussed anywhere outside of the stake presidency (where it’s NOT being discussed). It just creates unnecessary instability and insecurity in the hearts of leaders and members.

I concluded that such a rumor came from you because of the comment I heard you make at the Spanish Branch discussion meeting. That’s when I began probing as it raised a deep concern with me. Then when you asked the question in the email below about moving a ward to Estacada (an idea that I have never suggested, proposed or entertained, that I recall), it further concerned me that the idea (and rumor) was coming from you. Hence this email chain.

If I’ve misunderstood or unfairly judged, please accept my apology.

FROM BRIAN:

That is not accurate.  During the Spanish meeting, when we talked about a potential meeting-time conflict I said that I don't think we need to be concerned with the YSA branch in regard to meeting time conflicts. Only after the meeting and then in a private email to you did I talk about speaking with President Westover.  I have never openly discussed this.

Here is the related portion of the email I sent to you:

"Growth of the group was one thing I looked at and the fact is, at some future date, the Sandy building will not be able to accommodate both the Spanish Branch/Ward and the YSA Branch/Ward.

President Hansen and I discussed this and he asked me to explore what options exist, and to get the opinions of Pres. Westover and of Bro. G - from a YSA, not Spanish, point of view.

Pres. Westover is not concerned about the possibilty of having to move, as long as Estacada is not the destination building.  We both believe moving the Branch there would be damaging to our efforts. He likes the idea of the Stake Center or the Institute or the Troutdale building.

Brother G hopes we choose the Institute, but he also likes the idea of the Troutdale building."

I believe the idea of a ward splitting occurs to most people when they see the overflow being opened, and especially when the second overflow is opened. When the Stake has the creation of two new units as a goal, you are guaranteeing discussion, at the members level, regarding which ward will split and where the new units will meet.  Hopefully, it does not strike fear or insecurity into the hearts of leaders when they consider this goal, it should make them consider what they can do to help bring it about.

I can't speak to what Bishop Howes thinks or said, or as you wrote: "supposedly" said; I have never talked to him about this. And speaking of not talking to someone about this, if in the future you need to probe about me, please feel free to talk to me. I'll give you first hand information.

If I have done anything wrong I sincerely apologize, and I will publicly apologize to whoever I have wronged.

Helping leaders with callings recommendations so ward and stake auxiliary leaders' recommendations are not rejected

The following is prepared to assist priesthood and auxiliary leaders in making recommendations for callings, including instances where inspiration is received but recommendations are declined.

Doctrinal foundations of callings:

• This is the Lord’s true church, He will reveal His will to us (D&C 1:30, 112:10, AofF 1:5)
• Revelation, and thus final decisions, flow through priesthood keys (D&C 28:7, 35:25)
• Whom the Lord calls, the Lord qualifies (Thomas S. Monson, April Conference 1996)
• The Lord sometimes withholds communication so leaders learn to develop judgment and become like God; the Lord then stands behind those decisions (see Moses 1:25)

How do we reconcile ‘competing revelation’ when a recommendation is rejected?

• Right person, wrong time
• As in marriage, there’s no “one-and-only”
• Natural to feel right about those we like or who are dependable
• Additional information was needed before asking in prayer
• Feeling an urgency to decide quickly

Key factors in approving callings: peace of heart, a settled feeling among all in the bishopric or presidency, worthiness, availability, personal and family circumstances

Other factors that may affect approvals: dependability, length of service in current calling, willingness to serve, talent, teachable, respect for authority, enthusiasm for work

Three Approaches to Making Recommendations

Directed by priesthood leader

Your priesthood leader selects the candidates for you

• Pro: No rejection rate, no frustration from rejection
• Con: No participation in the revelatory experience, may not prefer candidates chosen

Select from a narrow group

Your priesthood leader gives you a group of 4-5 names to choose from

• Pro: Some revelatory experience, low rejection rate, low frustration
• Con: Limited flexibility, may not prefer any of the candidates offered for consideration

Choose from general membership

You choose from the entire stake or ward membership

• Pro: A sweet, revelatory experience
• Con: Sometimes high frustration from number of rejections due to above factors

-- September 2016