See Handbook 1 section 14.4.3 (about Ward Missionary funds) and section 5.2.4 (about Fast Offerings). Neither section allows for these funds to be used for ward budget needs.drepouille wrote:Thanks for that reply.
The bishop says:
Even with the quarterly deposit we are still almost $600 over budget YTD. If we spent virtually nothing (unlikely) we may get caught up by the Fall.
The question was whether or not we are allowed to transfer funds from excess fast Offerings or Excess Missionary funds to cover budget.
Haven't found that MLS option yet, either! [grin]drepouille wrote:Maybe they could print money?
Actually, it sounds as if it is time for the stake to provide the ward some training on how budgeting and the budget allocation system works. Whether that would be stake clerk to ward clerk, or stake president to bishop, it appears there is a need, and this is a good time of the year to do it as they plan ahead for 2013.drepouille wrote:The stake bailed them out once before. Let's see what happens this time.
As I understand it, the first intervention was when the ward's Other account went negative, and they needed help. While I was there today, I reviewed their recent expenditures. Most of them were Fast Offering. There was also a recurring expense for gasoline for a "church van". I don't want to know.russellhltn wrote:Given that the bishop must approve each expense, that either means he hasn't been getting the needed support from the clerks as to how much money the ward has, or he's be authorizing payments when there is no funds. Either way, there's a FUNDamental breakdown in the process. Given this is then second time, I suspect the stake's intervention isn't going to be pretty.
That may be related. In fact that might be where their budget went - zeroing out the "Other".drepouille wrote:As I understand it, the first intervention was when the ward's Other account went negative, and they needed help.
That might raise a different issue, but shouldn't make the budget go negative.drepouille wrote:While I was there today, I reviewed their recent expenditures. Most of them were Fast Offering.
Excuse me while I put some popcorn in the microwave. Shall I toss in a extra bag for you?drepouille wrote:There was also a recurring expense for gasoline for a "church van". I don't want to know.
This sounds like budget funds are not being properly used. The purpose of budget funds is to pay for stake and ward programs and activities. Providing transportation to members to attended Sunday meetings is not in line with this purpose. When members need assistance with transportation expenses then fast offering assistance is used. A review of Handbook 1 may be needed.drepouille wrote:The "church van" is a 15-pax van that is used to ferry poor members from what might be considered a dependent branch to the ward meetinghouse.
I just started doing manual toner refills in our ward along with replacing the chips on our library's MFC drum to try to save some $. It hurts when those huge bills come through. $18 for a drum reset chip is far more palatable than $340 for a new drum.drepouille wrote: Seriously, the ward had a $400 Staples bill for toner in December, and ended with minus $1400 at the end of the year. They received $900 last week for their quarterly budget disbursement.
If the van is actually owned by the ward, there might be something in the Handbook regarding the appropriateness of that, if memory serves. I can see how it would come in handy in many wards, if we could buy a big van or old school bus, and use it to pick up people who need a ride to church, or to take the YM/YW on temple trips or to Youth Conferences, etc. But I think there might be a policy against it.drepouille wrote:Got it. The "church van" is a 15-pax van that is used to ferry poor members ....
Handbook 2, Section 13.6.24: "Church organizations may not own or acquire automobiles or buses for group travel."nrajeff wrote:If the van is actually owned by the ward, there might be something in the Handbook regarding the appropriateness of that, if memory serves.