Wall mounted flat TV Screen in Bishop's office.

I have searched the forum for any help on this subject. Therefore I felt justified in starting a new topic. (Please help if I have missed it.) Much has been explained about the use of media in the meeting house, but I could not find anything said, about use in the Bishop's Office. In our Bishopric meetings and in our Ward Council meeting we have consistently used a flat screen from the library. We have used training s, agenda's, lists, New and returning Member Progress forms and LCR. This has been very helpful in trying to keep the amount of paper down and using digital to keep the bishopric organized. The cart that holds the flat screen TV has been cumbersome, but also more desirable than the projector. Both of these items present an inconvenience, even a challenge in rearranging where one seats to view the material. There is barely a chair for each member of the ward council and an occasional invited guest.

The Bishopric would like to get a large flat screen TV with all the capabilities of connecting to the internet or at least to a laptop and USB! Mount this on the wall and have it readily available for Ward Council and any-other meeting that might be held. It would be helpful to have it on a swivel wall mount. From the encouragement of the Stake President our Bishop has begun having Ward Council every week. Therefore this would greatly increase our ability to be effective and organized, also keeping, the way to much paper, down to a minimum.

I have not seen anywhere that it is part of the churches policy to provide this, but it has become a very desirable and needed item. Can anyone help? Shall we make a request through our Stake President and or FM group? Or are we hopelessly consigned to the cart?

You can discuss it with the stake president, but I wouldn't get your hopes up.

1968leocomeeatabite wrote:it has become a very desirable and needed item.

When your bishop discusses it with your stake president, make sure he mentions that it will get weekly use by the priests quorum that meets in his office. [smile]

That said, I am with russellhltn on this one. Don't get your hopes up. The stake may request it from the FM Group, but I do not see them very often approve such an item for a specific classroom.

Now if you are in a building with a regular Seminary room that is so equipped, perhaps the ward council could meet in that room, instead. Just a thought.

I recently moved into a ward where the Bishop just decided to do this on his own for all the reasons specified above. FM took it off the wall, patched everything back up and didn't say mum about it to anyone.

I echo everyone else, the only way this will happen is if FM is involved from the beginning, through the stake, but I believe they've been instructed not to do it.

Great insight, thank you all.
With all that the Bishop is asked to do, and with the forward progress of technology, the mountain of work that is ever coming through the door into the Bishop, I really think that this has to be part of a future plan. Or Maybe a new meeting house plan with a Ward Council room equipped with media and a table, much like a High Council room. Hmm----- ?

So to go along with this, the church could provide a site (cloud) for confidential agendas for Bishopric, PEC, and Ward Council meetings. With access to those attending the meeting. Hm--?

The Bishops office (IMHO) is a bit different here where the door can be locked and the equipment can be some-what secured. But the issue is that it makes just as much sense to have a mounted TV in the Primary Room, Relief Society Room, Young Woman's and Young Men's areas etc.... but how would one 'secure' this item. The concern would be asset protection and once people know we have Large Screens in each of these rooms they might become targets for thieves or vandals.

As I was involved with a prototype meetinghouse a couple years ago I can tell you that this is not on their minds at all, however, the Seminary Program receive an HDMI/DVD projector that works really well in a small setting etc... so that might be an option. Our walls are typically generic white and don't look too bad if you point against them.

What about using a projector?

1968leocomeeatabite wrote:Great insight, thank you all.
With all that the Bishop is asked to do, and with the forward progress of technology, the mountain of work that is ever coming through the door into the Bishop, I really think that this has to be part of a future plan. Or Maybe a new meeting house plan with a Ward Council room equipped with media and a table, much like a High Council room. Hmm----- ?

Now, multiply that across the number of wards or buildings in the church .... that starts to be a big number.

1968leocomeeatabite wrote:. . . much like a High Council room.

I have not seen a high council room equipped with a projector or large television. We always borrow the projector from the library, or just use the big TV also from the library.

lajackson wrote:

1968leocomeeatabite wrote:. . . much like a High Council room.

I have not seen a high council room equipped with a projector or large television. We always borrow the projector from the library, or just use the big TV also from the library.

I think some years ago there were posts here about just such a install in the HC room. But it's by no means standard. And I think word came down shortly after that that discouraged such installs.

I think its important to remember that the responsibility of equipment (such as TV sets) in meetinghouses falls under the FM Group. They must purchase, install, maintain and inventory those items for each building.

The approved list of equipment has been researched and approved by those who oversee and balance church-wide needs vs. budget, etc. including concerns regarding quality, features, ease-of-use, reliability, obsolescence, etc.

Then there's also the issue of many wards wanting the same thing - which could cause undue demand on budgets and a available time of facility manager employees.

1968leocomeeatabite wrote:With all that the Bishop is asked to do, and with the forward progress of technology, the mountain of work that is ever coming through the door into the Bishop, I really think that this has to be part of a future plan.

This just doesn't resonate with me. Maybe your Bishop likes to do things this way but the next Bishop may have absolutely no interest in having PowerPoint-heavy meetings all the time. (Makes me wonder if your Bishop's professional work involves a lot of this stuff. Otherwise, I don't think the average member expects it.) For many of us, creating such presentations would be far more time-consuming than it's worth, making it specifically impractical. For some (perhaps your ward's leaders) it's easy, but the FM Group isn't going to want to invest in such a project if, a year or two later, it will sit idle week after week.

If this is so important, I'll point out that the last time I was a Sam's Club I saw a remarkably small and affordable projector by LG which seemed (at a glance) to present a nice picture. There must be other, similar items on the market. Maybe the Bishop could just buy one for himself rather than wait for the FM Group. And he could easily take it home and use it for anything else in his media-heavy routine.

There are many, many reasons to have a display solution for all to see other than for a Bishop to have a powerpoint. In my experience meetings like this rarely use powerpoints, but still provide great benefits. Online Leadership training, reviewing leadership training videos, agenda, notes, etc...

the major benefit is not everyone looking at their own devices trying to retrieve data on their own then being distracted by a notification or a text and losing parts of the meeting.

As has been said a couple of times a projector seems a pretty decent alternative.

johnshaw wrote:There are many, many reasons to have a display solution for all to see other than for a Bishop to have a powerpoint. In my experience meetings like this rarely use powerpoints, but still provide great benefits. Online Leadership training, reviewing leadership training videos, agenda, notes, etc...

Quite literally everyone is working off the same page. I could see some leaders using that effectively.

I don't care for projectors. They do not have speakers (or good ones, anyway). They typically require dim ambient lighting. They require a certain amount of unobstructed distance between them and the wall. And, of course, they require a flat white surface.

I would much rather have an LCD/LED TV on the wall of my stake president's office, rather than the small white board that is currently there. As the stake clerk, I could easily connect my laptop to the TV using an HDMI cable. Then I can display whatever the presidency wants to see, such as the meeting agenda, the LCR web site reports, e-mail messages, documents, spreadsheets, or slideshows.

drepouille wrote:I don't care for projectors. They do not have speakers (or good ones, anyway). They typically require dim ambient lighting. They require a certain amount of unobstructed distance between them and the wall. And, of course, they require a flat white surface..

I don't disagree, but we don't even have enough Flat-Panel monitors to accommodate anyone other than the 1st ward attending at that meetinghouse to roll in for meetings like these. So we're left with a Projector as the best alternative that might work within the system.

I don't fall into the 'too expensive crowd' There are too many examples over the years where cost didn't seem to matter if the results were there for Church leaders (satellite dishes? iPad's, etc...)

John, I agree. Several visiting authorities have requested expensive items that we didn't have for stake conference. We usually make those purchases after the conference is over, so we will be ready for the next visiting authority's request.

johnshaw wrote:I recently moved into a ward where the Bishop just decided to do this on his own for all the reasons specified above. FM took it off the wall, patched everything back up and didn't say mum about it to anyone.

That's the story that really saddens me. They could have at least taped a note to the thing telling the Bishop this was unauthorized and they would be removing it. I mean, the FM guys don't show up one day and just happen to have all the material they need to remove such an item and patch up the holes. They knew, in advance, that they planned to do it. This iron-fisted management style just widens the gulf between the FM Group and the members who are trying to do their best, even when they don't quite understand the organization. Who paid for the TV that the FM Group confiscated? Was it out of the Bishop's own pocket?

They didn't go so far as to confiscate the TV (though technically they were within their right to) I don't know what the alternative is at this point.

drepouille wrote:John, I agree. Several visiting authorities have requested expensive items that we didn't have for stake conference. We usually make those purchases after the conference is over, so we will be ready for the next visiting authority's request.

This is interesting. We had a similar situation where the 70 wanted a lapel microphone and we handed him that corded thing, he wasn't too impressed, but I assured him that the FM group told us that all visiting authorities know what is in place in meetinghouses and are supposed to use them.

Additionally, I was asked to come help out my FM when a gathering of mission presidents was in town. Those GA's traveled with a technology packet that included projectors, appleTV, wifi all hdmi and pretty sweet. I had to jump out of bed in the early AM to help my FM out. We had to integrate with the hotel system (the church doesn't pay for that service in hotel rooms apparently and rely on FM to bring microphones, etc...).

I would never encourage my SP to purchase anything beyond what FM is willing to pay for or doesn't come in the standard meetinghouse package. It is important that we fund things as the handbook and policy dictates. And, yes, I have pointed a visiting area authority 70 to a policy prohibiting the purchase of something he asked for.

The real need here is a council room where the ward council can fit. Units that do not share a meetinghouse with other units can find plenty of rooms that would work; but due to busy schedules, these rooms may not be availible when needed if two wards share a meetinghouse and certainly aren't availible to meet the needs of all wards in meetinghouses shared by 3 or more units. Perhaps the bishops offices for new meetinghouse designs should be a little larger than has been typical, but the bishop also needs to be able to conduct very private one-on-one interviews and a larger room might not serve as well at creating the proper atmosphere.

Perhaps a different cart design would help.

I think the meetinghouse design is on purpose. The design of our meetinghouses sends a message (in fact it sends many messages). There is no other reason to some of the decisions and the design space. If this truly is the case, as it seems, then I'd love to see those design thoughts. I think if we scour the handbook we'll find hidden gems around it, but who knows.

I just remembered this training video from about 5 years ago…
https://www.lds.org/media-library/video ... l?lang=eng
…and it struck me that I don't think I've ever seen a Bishop's office that could comfortably hold this many people, not to mention additional guests that might attend like someone from the High Council or the local full-time missionaries. So there has to be the expectation of using a different room.

https://www.lds.org/media-library/video ... l?lang=eng …and it struck me that I don't think I've ever seen a Bishop's office that could comfortably hold this many people, not to mention additional guests that might attend like someone from the High Council or the local full-time missionaries.]

I counted 13 which included the bishopric, in the training video. In our Ward Council we have enough seats in the bishops office for 5 Bishopric members (bishop, 2 counselors, ward clerk, Exec. Sec.), H.P. Group Leader, Elders Quorum President, Ward Mission Leader, S. S. President, R.S. President, Y.W. President, Primary President, Y.M. President, High Councilman, and YSA (1 of the married couples come) which makes a total of 15. This is a full room and occasionally the missionaries will come or another invited guest then we are at 17. All seats are filled with no wall space. Usually a counselor in the Bishopric will put the cart in front of him, then hook his lap-top to the monitor. We are stuffed, but happy to work together an try to get the work done. As has been expressed in this thread, it is difficult to manage a stack of papers and an electronic device on ones lap and keep up with the fast moving necessary pace to get things done. My point being that a wall mounted TV would help keep this not quite so crunched. Big bonus would be a High Council type room that each member of the Ward Council could comfortably sit, take notes and follow the agenda. If you are lucky enough to have the early schedule the W. C. could be in a large multi purpose or R.S. room which would help, but is it a confidential environment?

This is what our FM Group presented to us when we submitted a similar Request:

Meetinghouse Standard Plan Committee
Meetinghouse Facilities Department

MSPC Decisions Affecting North America Operations
MSPC Meeting: 17 May 2012
Notification to Field: 25 June 2012

Item 3: Fixed Projection Screens, Built-in Projectors, Flat Screen Monitors, etc, in High Council Rooms, Relief Society Rooms, etc.

Under the direction of the Presiding Bishopric, the Meetinghouse Technology Working Group, representing numerous Church departments as well as the priesthood and curriculum departments, is considering the best solution to make it easy to access, display and hear digital content in meetinghouses, for use in teaching classes and conducting training. The desire of the Bishopric is to have consistent, standard solutions and equipment throughout the Church.

The installation of flat screen monitors, built-in projection cameras and fixed screens in high council, relief society and other rooms is out of boundary for Project and Facilities Managers. PMs and FMs should not include these items as part of new meetinghouse projects, or install them in existing buildings, until further notice.

Stake and ward leaders requesting these items from Facilities Managers should be advised that they are NOT allowed until direction is received from the Presiding Bishopric. They should be encouraged not to use donated or local unit budget funds to install these items on their own.

Meetinghouses are the property of the Presiding Bishop of the Church, and local leaders and Church employees should not make any changes to Presiding Bishopric approved standards without permission to do so.

the Meeting House Tech Policy (https://www.lds.org/help/support/meetin ... y?lang=eng) says the following:

"Physical modifications to a meetinghouse, including the mounting of televisions, cameras, digital projectors, and projector screens, may only be done in compliance with MFD standard plans." (MFD = Meetinghouse Facilities Department).

The letter hsbowen posted is from 2012 and the Meetinghouse Tech Policy is from 2014. Anyone know if mounting of TVs is approved now or still not ok?

michaelcox wrote:The letter hsbowen posted is from 2012 and the Meetinghouse Tech Policy is from 2014. Anyone know if mounting of TVs is approved now or still not ok?

I think you'd have to get that answer from your local FM group. They have access to those standards, and it appears they hold the keys to interpreting those standards.

russellhltn wrote:I think you'd have to get that answer from your local FM group. They have access to those standards, and it appears they hold the keys to interpreting those standards.

I submitted a request via FIR earlier today just curious what others have seen.

Has there been any additional experience with this since the last response? There is no room in my office for the 2'x3' black AV cart that rips the skin from every hand, usually sitting idle in the meetinghouse library. Has anyone attempted to maneuver these through halls and doorways? Its like a bad shopping cart.

As a Bishop, I purchased a screen and mount 5 months ago ( great black Friday deal) with personal funds and use it 3-4 times a week for Ward Council, PEC, Bishopric and Priests quorum meeting. I even used it impromptu it during an interview to share a message on hope from one of the First Presidency. I have donated this to the ward and its use. The next Bishop may use or disposes of how he sees fit.

Admittedly I had it sitting on my credenza for about 3 weeks but it was difficult for everyone to view so my clerk and I found a location on the wall and mounted it there. It is a clean install with no dangling, unsightly wires for members of the Deacon's quorum to pull or break.

With no discussion, note or friendly hallway chat from the FM group, I found out this week from my Stake President, that this appropriate use of technology is not permitted by the FM group and I've been asked to take it down. I will certainly do so this coming week as my love for the gospel, my faithful priesthood leader and commitment to the Savior are stronger than screws holding the this screen to the wall. This is not going to be my mote and I will place the TV back on the credenza on some sort of stand other than a fashionable milk crate.

I would hope that by sharing this, first as an encouragement to all others thinking about this. Do it, just don't place it on the wall for now - use the technology we have access to as we teach, minister and spread the gospel. Secondly, I would hope that in the future plans and discussions on meetinghouse tech, we find ways to work and talk together to solve a concern. IMO - FM should not have the final say in productivity or useful tech application in a ward.

FM had turned us down so we have it on the credenza in his office. Not the best option but the one we are doing. We use it nearly every Sunday and during midweek meetings.

ericawaite wrote:I purchased a screen and mount 5 months ago ( great black Friday deal) with personal funds and use it 3-4 times a week for Ward Council, PEC, Bishopric and Priests quorum meeting. I even used it impromptu it during an interview to share a message on hope from one of the First Presidency. I have donated this to the ward and its use.

Interesting. I did not know that the guidelines for technology in meetinghouses allowed us to donate monitors or televisions to the ward. I know that the guidelines state that no privately-owned equipment may remain in the meetinghouse overnight. They also state that computer donations are not to be accepted.

drepouille wrote:Interesting. I did not know that the guidelines for technology in meetinghouses allowed us to donate monitors or televisions to the ward. I know that the guidelines state that no privately-owned equipment may remain in the meetinghouse overnight. They also state that computer donations are not to be accepted.

All true. And the bishop is also charged to teach his youth in ways they will understand, and usually has the priests quorum in his office each week. And twice a month when the ward council meets and discusses the member progress report and the quarterly report and other items, not all members and leaders have access to this information on their phones.

It's a tough line to draw in this electronic era. But if we roll the television from the library into the bishop's office it becomes the elephant in the room. The Relief Society President, elders quorum president, and high priests group leader no longer have a place to sit, and the other four folks on the same wall can't see the monitor. Or we could throw out the Young Men, Women, and Primary Presidents instead. And this is all contingent on the absence of the fire marshal.

I bring my laptop to church on regular occasions, but I am always cautious, because that same laptop is my own personal computer that replaced my desktop and has all things personal on it, journal, family documents, family finances, everything that used to be on my desktop at home. But it also streams general conference, regional firesides from apostles, training meetings from the area seventy, face to face broadcasts for the youth, and stake conference broadcasts.

So yes, official policy allows a bishop to function in his small office mostly with paper and pencil. I understand why we have the church policies that we do. I have not figured out a better way to obediently comply with current policy than to keep a small monitor in the material center and carry it to the bishop's office each week for use, then return it for safekeeping. This all assumes that a small monitor is even authorized by the FM Group for the meetinghouse.

If I brought a personal small monitor to use in the bishop's office, I would not carry it home every week, either. But I think it might also fall into the same category as the dozen phones, iPads, tablets, and laptops brought in every week by all of the other teachers in the ward. After all, the Handbook says the bishop is a teacher, also.

We must remember that undergirding much of these policies is the reason the equalized budget was implemented in the first place. It avoids the wealthy among the church from decking out the Meetinghouse with HD and TV's everywhere, mounted projectors etc... From those in areas that don't have the means to furnish there buildings on their own.

If everyone had the same standard we avoid the costly apparel syndrome.

There are security issues as well. If someone who thought they needed a television were to think the walls of the church were adorned with such equipment, they may well be tempted to break in and take one. This is the same principle behind the policy that money is never stored at the meetinghouse.

lajackson wrote:There are security issues as well. If someone who thought they needed a television were to think the walls of the church were adorned with such equipment, they may well be tempted to break in and take one. This is the same principle behind the policy that money is never stored at the meetinghouse.

So instead we put them all into one room (the library) and that prevents someone from breaking in?

michaelcox wrote:So instead we put them all into one room (the library) and that prevents someone from breaking in?

Presumably the library is designed with stronger physical security and equipment that is clearly marked - lowering it's value. (Not that that always happens.)

The other thing to remember is that the FM group is responsible for these items, they are considered their items, even if you purchase it it becomes there's if it's in the meetinghouse. We purchased some equipment some years ago for our webcasting and FM took it out of the closet in two of our 9 buildings because another stake requested similar equipment, they took it without asking, without informing, and it was a Wednesday before our Stake Conference webcast (the engineer and FM were both in our stake, they had to know we were having a webcast, the equipment was labeled with webcast support, etc...) It's as if they were trying to prove a point in some way.

I was informed that if I wanted to keep anything like that in the future it needed to be locked up in a Bishop Office Credenza/Desk, that is the only place in the meetinghouse that the FM isn't free to do whatever they want.

If you buy a TV for your meetinghouse and it falls outside the standard (meaning # of large/small tv's per meetinghouse) and another one breaks in the area where the FM covers they could, in all reality, take the one from your meetinghouse to replace the one that broke. It's their inventory. Maybe your experiences are different than mine, but FM are pretty free to do as they please and are determined to come in under budget as a huge majority of their compensation increase is based on being under-budget and not on pleasing the Stake President.

johnshaw wrote:The other thing to remember is that the FM group is responsible for these items, they are considered their items, even if you purchase it it becomes there's if it's in the meetinghouse.

While that may be your unfortunate experience, I doubt if that's policy. The Meetinghouse Technology Policy makes it pretty clear that FM inventories what FM buys, but the unit inventories what the unit buys. To say that FM can move around inventory bought by the unit is incredulous.

johnshaw wrote:If you buy a TV for your meetinghouse and it falls outside the standard (meaning # of large/small tv's per meetinghouse) and another one breaks in the area where the FM covers they could, in all reality, take the one from your meetinghouse to replace the one that broke.

To prevent theft, I encourage "vandalizing" the equipment with an obvious lettering on who it belongs to. Something like the old soldering iron on the plastic bezel trick. That would also discourage "reassignment" as well. On the back, I'd include "bought with unit funds".

It would not have discouraged this particular FM - He told the SP and that was final. We locked things up in the Bishop Credenza afterwords. This same FM moved into some Stake Offices after a new Stake Center was built and proceeded to make internal changes to the Building that weren't discussed with the SP, put locks on doors that previous agreement said they'd remain available to ward use, etc. It became very contentions, but the FM held all the cards and openly said that you can be on the top of my list or the bottom (yes it was a threat).

Everyone's individual experiences vary.

michaelcox wrote:the Meeting House Tech Policy (https://www.lds.org/help/support/meetin ... y?lang=eng) says the following:

"Physical modifications to a meetinghouse, including the mounting of televisions, cameras, digital projectors, and projector screens, may only be done in compliance with MFD standard plans." (MFD = Meetinghouse Facilities Department).

The letter hsbowen posted is from 2012 and the Meetinghouse Tech Policy is from 2014. Anyone know if mounting of TVs is approved now or still not ok?

Still not ok, though, it is frequently discussed. As alluded to in other places, questions about safety, fairness to both rich and poor wards, and costs abound.

johnshaw wrote:This same FM moved into some Stake Offices after a new Stake Center was built and proceeded to make internal changes to the Building that weren't discussed with the SP, put locks on doors that previous agreement said they'd remain available to ward use, etc. It became very contentions, but the FM held all the cards and openly said that you can be on the top of my list or the bottom (yes it was a threat).

The FM may hold the cards but the SP is the dealer. If the SP sent a complaint up the chain there is no question who would come out on top of that situation.

Maybe. FM plays by the FM manual - a book we don't get to read.

As long as FM is following their manual, the chances of a contrary ruling is unlikely.

According to my FM, with only limited exceptions they do what the SP and the bishops tell them to do. They do not own the keying rights to the building,the SP does. If the SP says they can't lock the members out of a room then they can't lock members out of a room. If they tell the SP no, in most cases - especially for something piddly like that - the SP can always call the area office and get things done. That there was an explicit threat is something that should have been reported to the area FM office, if not directly to the OPB as well.

Sorry, I was reacting more to the title of the thread rather than the quote back. In the case you cited, I'd start a documentation trail.

aclawson wrote:According to my FM, with only limited exceptions they do what the SP and the bishops tell them to do. They do not own the keying rights to the building,the SP does. If the SP says they can't lock the members out of a room then they can't lock members out of a room. If they tell the SP no, in most cases - especially for something piddly like that - the SP can always call the area office and get things done. That there was an explicit threat is something that should have been reported to the area FM office, if not directly to the OPB as well.

Nope, you've been severely misinformed - it was the experience we had.

That's what the FM himself said. That's also what the FM before him said. I can only go by what I've been told.

YMMV, some FMs will be less cooperative than others.

FM groups certainly vary by location and personalities. We are all on the same team, and when there is a disagreement, the solution is to have the Stake President get involved. He can work with the Area Authority Seventy assigned to his Coordinating Council to sort out issues he feels need to be addressed.