Any Update on Single Young Adults Records Transfers?

Discuss questions around local unit policies for membership (creating records, transferring records, etc.) This forum should not contain specific financial or membership information.
jhigbee
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:42 pm

Any Update on Single Young Adults Records Transfers?

Postby jhigbee » Sun Apr 17, 2011 5:26 pm

We’re all excited about the re-structuring of YSA wards and stakes (which began a year ago in southern Utah, then to Cache Valley, now announced to be hitting SL & Davis counties). The Conference Center meeting on the 28th of this month was announced today in this regard. It sounds like several new wards and stakes will be created with the re-structuring.

[font="]I would assume and hope that the MLS system won’t just grab all records of the YSA members of our wards- rather each bishop will be given the chance to review his YSA list and determine which are to go, and which are to stay within the home wards. Any feedback on guidelines of which young singles can stay in their home wards? I could speculate, but I’d like to hear something more definitive. I want to give the other ward membership clerks in our Stake some kind of heads up to motivate them to put more emphasis on updating their YSA membership records.[/font]

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20754
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Sun Apr 17, 2011 5:40 pm

I'd read Handbook 2:16 and any similar sections in Handbook 1.

If there is a change in this (which I personaly think is unlikely), you'll be notified by official channels.
Have you searched the Wiki?
Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

jhigbee
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:42 pm

Postby jhigbee » Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:29 pm

I didn’t see anything there in 16.2 that was really related to which YSA’s should have their records transferred to singles wards; and it seems to me that 16.3 will likely need some revisions with this re-structuring (like possibly excluding callings as YSA representatives and advisors in home wards and stakes). I would expect we’ll be seeing something on this come down thru the Brethren shortly.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20754
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Sun Apr 17, 2011 7:59 pm

jhigbee wrote:I didn’t see anything there in 16.2 that was really related to which YSA’s should have their records transferred to singles wards;


16.4: "Eligible members may, in consultation with their parents, choose to be members of the young single adult ward or to remain in their conventional ward. The stake president may authorize the young single adult ward to find and fellowship other young single adult members of the stake who are less active. Those who become active may then choose to belong to the young single adult ward or to their conventional ward."

Bottom line: YSA who choose to go to the YSA ward have their membership transferred. There is no automatic "let's move all the singles to the YSA ward". Keep in mind that a fair number of those "singles" are actually less-active marrieds that haven't had their records updated because they're less active.

jhigbee wrote:and it seems to me that 16.3 will likely need some revisions with this re-structuring (like possibly excluding callings as YSA representatives and advisors in home wards and stakes). I would expect we’ll be seeing something on this come down thru the Brethren shortly.


"In a ward with a sufficient number of young single adults, the bishopric may call a young single adult brother and a young single adult sister to serve as young single adult leaders."

Why would it need to be changed?
Have you searched the Wiki?

Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

jdlessley
Community Moderators
Posts: 6526
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:30 pm
Location: USA, TX

Postby jdlessley » Sun Apr 17, 2011 8:22 pm

jhigbee wrote:I didn’t see anything there in 16.2 that was really related to which YSA’s should have their records transferred to singles wards; and it seems to me that 16.3 will likely need some revisions with this re-structuring (like possibly excluding callings as YSA representatives and advisors in home wards and stakes). I would expect we’ll be seeing something on this come down thru the Brethren shortly.
16.4, 16.5, and 16.6 provide information on the setting up YSA wards and stakes. In paragraph two of 16.4 you will note that it is a decision by the eligible YSA in consultation with their parents as to which ward they will be a member of -their conventional ward or the YSA ward. More detailed guidance on YSA eligibility is found in Handbook 1. Handbook 2, 16.6.6 addresses the membership records of the young single adults. To me that means that if a YSA decides to be a member of a YSA ward then their records will reside in that YSA ward.

In theLDS Newsroom the featured articledescribes the reorganization as a simplification to reduce the confusion for YSA as to where they should attend worship services. This does not create a new situation that requires revision of the Handbook but rather creates location based wards and eliminating overlapping YSA organizations. This reorganization is in alignment with the structure outlined in the Handbook.
JD Lessley
Have you tried finding your answer on the LDS.org Help Center page or the LDSTech wiki?

crislapi
Senior Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: USA

Postby crislapi » Sun Apr 17, 2011 11:16 pm

jhigbee wrote:It sounds like several new wards and stakes will be created with the re-structuring.

I know Davis County and Salt Lake County currently are covered by 6 Student Single Stakes as well as numerous YSA wards. In total, i think there are around 140 single wards between the two. The restructuring is supposed to reduce the total number of wards to about 100, but increase the number of single stakes to 10 (plus 2 in Northern Utah County).

jhigbee wrote:I would assume and hope that the MLS system won’t just grab all records of the YSA members of our wards- rather each bishop will be given the chance to review his YSA list and determine which are to go, and which are to stay within the home wards. Any feedback on guidelines of which young singles can stay in their home wards? I could speculate, but I’d like to hear something more definitive. I want to give the other ward membership clerks in our Stake some kind of heads up to motivate them to put more emphasis on updating their YSA membership records.

I can't say for sure because I did not attend, but tonight there was a meeting for all Bishops and Stake Presidencies. Hopefully your stake president and/or bishops attended. Among to items mentioned was that all membership records would be redistributed automatically by CHQ - clerks do not have to move the records. I am part of a student stake, and this is the info that was passed on to me by the stake president. It was of note to us because the task would have been monumental otherwise. I can't say if there was an exception made for home stakes, but I'd probably recommend the bishop make a list of those he'd like to keep at home, and then either request them back if they get pulled, or pass the names on to the stake president so he can discuss them in his meetings with the coordinating councils.

I have no official guidelines, however. I've "heard" that 18-30 year olds are by default in the YSA ward unless an exception is granted to attend the home ward. As for updating, the best thing I would suggest is to get addresses and contact info correct ASAP. If the new ward can't find them and can't contact them, they will truly be lost.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20754
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:33 am

crislapi wrote:Among to items mentioned was that all membership records would be redistributed automatically by CHQ - clerks do not have to move the records.


I could see the records of the members of the discontinued wards being redistributed automatically, but it seem to me that it would cause more problems if they redistributed ALL the ysa. Time will tell.
Have you searched the Wiki?

Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20754
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:41 am

jdlessley wrote:In theLDS Newsroom the featured articledescribes the reorganization as a simplification to reduce the confusion for YSA as to where they should attend worship services.


That explains a lot. Between the Conventional wards, Singles wards and Student wards; there were three different places one might attend. (And if you didn't want to play strictly by the rules, probably more.) The singles could "ward-hop". I can also see it as causing a problem if a ward became aware of a less-active single moving into their area. Which ward should handle them? Now it's just down one Conventional and one Singles ward for given location. Much easier to coordinate.
Have you searched the Wiki?

Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 6138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:27 pm
Location: US

Postby lajackson » Mon Apr 18, 2011 7:49 am

crislapi wrote:I can't say for sure because I did not attend, but tonight there was a meeting for all Bishops and Stake Presidencies. Hopefully your stake president and/or bishops attended. Among to items mentioned was that all membership records would be redistributed automatically by CHQ - clerks do not have to move the records. I am part of a student stake, and this is the info that was passed on to me by the stake president. It was of note to us because the task would have been monumental otherwise.


I would think that the best action would be to make certain that the current address shown on the membership record is correct. I would follow the instructions received at the meeting.

And I would think that, for the discontinued student wards, the Church would automatically reassign those records, based on the address on the record, to the new YSA ward that covers the address. This makes sense, and would be based on the assumption that anyone attending a student single ward had already decided to attend the single ward rather than the conventional ward.

If a student attending a student single ward wanted to return to a home ward, rather than the new YSA ward, that would require a separate membership request action to get the record into the correct unit. But that would have to happen anyway, without the additional excitement of the stake/ward young single ward alignments also taking place.

idjeeper2
Member
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Boise, Idaho, USA

Postby idjeeper2 » Fri Apr 22, 2011 8:57 am

crislapi wrote: Among to items mentioned was that all membership records would be redistributed automatically by CHQ - clerks do not have to move the records.


This is what we were told last fall when the Boise YSA Stake was created. Turned out not to be the case. I had to move the records to the new ward myself using the Boundary Realignment function. It was pretty easy but I had a branch of only YSAs and they were all going to the same YSA Ward. I think it took all of about 2 minutes. The Church may have changed the way to do things since then, but I think in many cases it is far easier for the local unit to move the records than it is for CHQ to do it.

Your suggestion to get the records updated is spot-on. It's really unfair to saddle the new unit with all of one's undone housekeeping. One other suggestion I have is to make a backup of MLS prior to the move and one after. The former stake may have a need to recreate the old unit to handle leftover finance issues, etc. I know we left our computer functional for several months (it may still be) with only myself, the Stake Clerk, and the Stake Tech guy having logon capability.


Return to “Membership Help”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest