Page 1 of 1

Building Sheduling for Multiple Stakes in one Building

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:36 pm
by gbogdan7
Our ward building is the meetinghouse for wards from three difference stakes. It appears to me that online building scheduling does not permit coordination across stakes. My Bishop is the agent Bishop for building. Is cross-stake building coordination possible? Suggestions?

Regards,
Greg Bogdan

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:52 pm
by russellhltn
It works. You may want to add the other units to that meetinghouse and insure that the other stakes do not set up a duplicate location.

You'll also have to let go of the idea that the "building scheduler" is the one who schedules the building. That's done by each calendar editor when they place a event on their calendar.

The building scheduler simply coordinates when there is a conflict. They may also need a "private events" calendar if they do the scheduling for family events.

I'd strongly suggest reading the help file. It's a new way of thinking, but it does work.

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:03 pm
by jdlessley
RussellHltn, are the other units in the other stakes added in the agent stake's calendar setup or does the FM Groups FMAT database need to have the other units added as a building user to that database before they are managed at the stake interface in Calendar?

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:46 pm
by russellhltn
jdlessley wrote:RussellHltn, are the other units in the other stakes added in the agent stake's calendar setup or does the FM Groups FMAT database need to have the other units added as a building user to that database before they are managed at the stake interface in Calendar?

See Locations and Resources Shared by Multiple Stakes. It should be done automatically, but if not, the agent stake can add it.

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 3:21 pm
by jdlessley
I asked the question because the help was not clear which FM group was responsible for adding units using a meetinghouse in FMAT.

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 4:02 pm
by russellhltn
I would think there would be only one FM group for that building. Is there ever a case of a stake split across multiple FM groups?

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 5:53 pm
by jdlessley
RussellHltn wrote:I would think there would be only one FM group for that building. Is there ever a case of a stake split across multiple FM groups?
I believe JohnShaw belongs to such a stake.

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 8:49 pm
by lajackson
RussellHltn wrote:Is there ever a case of a stake split across multiple FM groups?

jdlessley points out that there is a stake with two FM groups (there may be others. But I think each individual building is only in one FM group or another. Of the three stakes using the building mentioned by gbogdan7, I would think there would only be one FM group charged with its support, even if the stakes involved have other buildings supported by other FM groups.