Level of Access for High Councilors and CSM

I have a question on how much access is needed for high councilors and church service missionaries serving within their own stake... When I got into the stake I saw that we had a several asst stake clerks, and now that I've been called a few months ago as stake clerk I've been wondering on what the proper protocol is on giving stake members access. For our high councilors serving in specific wards, they've been put in as asst stake clerks to give them access to reports, and then in order for our church service missionaries to be able to view the missionary progress records we've also been putting them in as asst stake clerks too. Is there any specific policy that I should be following on this or will our work-around suffice for the time being?

The problem with calling people to be a assistant stake clerk is that gives them broad rights that probably goes beyond what they should have. This includes admin access to the stake calendar.

LCR does grant more access to HC then they used to. But you may want to review the following with the stake president:

From Leader and Clerk Resources (LCR) FAQs
"Stake auxiliary leaders and high councilors are primarily responsible to instruct and support ward auxiliary and Melchizedek Priesthood leaders. They orient newly called ward auxiliary and Melchizedek Priesthood leaders and provide encouragement, support, and instruction. They are not responsible for individual ward members. It is the ward clerk’s responsibility to train ward auxiliary and Melchizedek Priesthood leaders on record-keeping tools and responsibilities. If stake auxiliary leaders and high councilors need a list of members for planning purposes, they should request this information through the ward or stake clerk."

It would appear to me, at least for the High Councilor, that there may be a disconnect between what they think their responsibilities are and how the brethren view their responsibilities. They are not managers or supervisors.

Giving several people the calling of stake assistant clerk just so they can have access to certain reports seems like dangerous territory. It's OK (and sometimes helpful) to have legitimate, sustained, and trained assistant clerks, but access for members not involved in record keeping is restricted for a reason.

On Leader and Clerk Resources, there's an access table that shows everything on LCR that the "Stake Assistant Clerk" position has access to:
https://www.lds.org/mls/mbr/access-table?lang=eng
Note that there's both a Membership and a Finance section of the access table (tab at the top).

In addition, the stake assistant clerk calling gives full administrative rights to the LDS.org Calendar at the stake level, and other miscellaneous systems that aren't directly tied to Leader and Clerk Resources (Handbook 1, CDOL, ordering supplies at Store.LDS.org on behalf of the stake, leadership login to SI.LDS.org, etc.).

Thank you for your responses.

People are given their correct access by the calling they have in MLS/LCR. plain and simple - anything other than that, what I'd call 'funny business' better be carefully considered. It likely means that someone other than the correct person is being assigned a task. My absolute favorite thing about the new changes... servers to help enforce the delegated authority structure in place in the handbook, access is given as required by the calling, what what is assumed to be needed or required by individuals in those callings or otherwise, and rather than thinking about how to 'get around' the issue, we should be trying to figure out why we're attempting to do things to 'get around' it rather than work within it.

My stake president recently asked me to remove the high councilors as asst stake clerks since they do have the access they need per their calling, but we still haven't found out what to do about full-time live at home senior couple missionaries within in our stake to make sure they have the access they need. Does anyone have any experience in this area and could help provide some insight?

sgdonovan wrote:but we still haven't found out what to do about full-time live at home senior couple missionaries within in our stake to make sure they have the access they need.

That raises a few questions - what is their mission? What is their responsibilities? Is this a "mission from home" or are their records in another stake?

Depending on their responsibilities, the access given to a normal member of the stake may be sufficient.

They are full-time senior couples missionaries living within their home stake assigned to at least one or more units. They proselyte and attend missionary meetings and report like the younger elders and sisters serving.

If they are in the stake, they have all the needed information. They should work through mission leaders in wards in the unlikely event their default permissions are not enough.

This brings up a question, though, what level of access does a full time young proselytizing missionary get that might bypass the LCR access table?

johnshaw wrote:If they are in the stake, they have all the needed information.

You'd think so. At least in the US. But if we're dealing with an area with UK privacy standards, that's going to be quite restrictive.

I'd expect any rights to be granted by virtue of the mission. So it may be a question of how the mission has entered them. I don't think this is a responsibility of the ward or stake clerk.

russellhltn wrote:I'd expect any rights to be granted by virtue of the mission. So it may be a question of how the mission has entered them.

Even so, I don't believe they are going to get any additional access to member information even in countries where members opt in to the Directory instead of opting out.

russell brings up a good point. There is an advantage on this forum if participants would fill in the "Location" field so we can know from whence their problems/questions originate.

You guys who have actually no church experience crack me up with what HC ought to not see. There are many HC positions that if they don't have the detailed access it will hinder their job. I was one of these not long ago. Called to be the HC over the Stake Young Men's org. You tell me how I'm suppose to know details about YM I'm responsible for within the different units, when I can't even see enough information to do the job I've been asked to do as I travel to their units to support them. Another HC is over the Stake Young Women's, same thing. Church leadership wants to act as though the Council is so critical to the success at the stake and ward levels, yet the access given or lack of access given by Church headquarters to do their job is limited. Yet we inherently trust the stake clerks to have all modes of access no matter what. Please take a look at the actual handbook and the responsibilities of the members. Get the access for each position at least 80% correct, and stop all the "on high" we can't give you access because. Anyone who things MLS gives you the correct access you need today to do your calling, you guys need to become leaders in your wards and stakes and then your eyes will be opened.

cfdrews wrote:You guys who have actually no church experience crack me up with what HC ought to not see. There are many HC positions that if they don't have the detailed access it will hinder their job.

This is a user-to-user support forum. We don't make this stuff up. We just point you to the official manuals and Help Center articles.

I'd suggest reading about what the Brethren think your job is starting with Handbook 2: 7.2.2 and following from there. What I'm seeing in the Handbook backs the view that "Stake auxiliary leaders and high councilors are primarily responsible to instruct and support ward auxiliary and Melchizedek Priesthood leaders. .... They are not responsible for individual ward members."

I'd suggest sitting down with the stake President with Handbook in hand and discuss the conflict of vision. It's the Brethren who hand down the "business rules" to the developers to implement. If you want things to change, either you're going to have to change the mind of the Brethren (and this forum is a completely ineffective venue for doing that), or you're going to have to work with the local leaders to change their vision. I'll let you decide which you want to pursue.

cfdrews wrote:You guys who have actually no church experience crack me up with what HC ought to not see. There are many HC positions that if they don't have the detailed access it will hinder their job. I was one of these not long ago. Called to be the HC over the Stake Young Men's org. You tell me how I'm suppose to know details about YM I'm responsible for within the different units, when I can't even see enough information to do the job I've been asked to do as I travel to their units to support them. Another HC is over the Stake Young Women's, same thing. Church leadership wants to act as though the Council is so critical to the success at the stake and ward levels, yet the access given or lack of access given by Church headquarters to do their job is limited. Yet we inherently trust the stake clerks to have all modes of access no matter what. Please take a look at the actual handbook and the responsibilities of the members. Get the access for each position at least 80% correct, and stop all the "on high" we can't give you access because. Anyone who things MLS gives you the correct access you need today to do your calling, you guys need to become leaders in your wards and stakes and then your eyes will be opened.

Russell was much more kind in his response than I'd be. But his specific information back to you is absolutely correct and your comments reflect frustration with a situation created entirely by people and not the online system. What I've observed in my 20 years of serving in these positions including multiple stakes in multiple states, In Utah and outside Utah and my observation is that church leaders have very little knowledge of the direction of the church in the handbook. Rather, they rely on a tradition of doing something. I love, love, love, love, love that the online church tools are finally helping to refine and define roles and responsibilities. Stake Leaders minister to leaders, ward leaders minister to members.

I agree with the previous suggestion. I would bring it up in the meeting, talk about what it means to serve at the stake level. While I served for 5 years as a Stake Clerk I remember it only took about 7-8 months for HC to start drifting again, and had to be reminded that their job was to make their counterparts the very best at what they were doing.... I watched it over and over... we don't do Stake very well, we always want it to be a Ward-like calling only at the stake level.

The STake President isn't the Bishop of the Stake. a HC over YM isn't the Stake Young President, neither is he the Young Men President for the whole stake.

cfdrews wrote:Get the access for each position at least 80% correct, and stop all the "on high" we can't give you access because.

Please note that almost everyone on the forums is just another user like yourself. Many have been clerks, bishops, high councilors, and even some stake presidents. But almost none of us are employed by the church or have any influence or control over how the systems are programmed. We just try to help others deal with the systems as they've been given to us.

But we do know that the developers themselves never decide the rights themselves. They do not interpret the handbook or otherwise try to figure out policy. The list of rights for each position is given to them very specifically by the general authorities who are in charge of those systems. I'm pretty sure that most of the general authorities have been high councilors in the past.

That, of course, doesn't mean those decision are infallible. And the rights have expanded gradually. I expect at least some of that has been due to feedback submitted either through the feedback link on lds.org or passed up through the priesthood channels from stake president upward. So feel free to submit feedback using the link on lds.org and if your stake president feels strongly as well then he can talk to his area authority. But I would be very specific about what information is needed and why.

eblood66 wrote:

cfdrews wrote:That, of course, doesn't mean those decision are infallible. And the rights have expanded gradually. I expect at least some of that has been due to feedback submitted either through the feedback link on lds.org or passed up through the priesthood channels from stake president upward. So feel free to submit feedback using the link on lds.org and if your stake president feels strongly as well then he can talk to his area authority. But I would be very specific about what information is needed and why.

I can confirm this process, when LCR originally came out there was a mistake in the Access Table that showed at ExecSec with access to something that was clearly labeled in handbook as a Clerk item. I submitted feedback on the tool and was contacted and thanked for pointing it out, it just happened to be a mistake made during the implementation.

But it's been 7-8 years where bishoprics/stake presidencies have had this access worked out. It is unlikely a mistake still exists, and that it's direction based on the handbook.

johnshaw wrote:I can confirm this process,

I seem to recall a few minor quirks like that that were brought up here and sent to feedback. Having the Handbook on your side was a big help.

But in this case, a FAQ has been created indicating why. That would indicate that it was reviewed and that's the answer. The community on this forum had no part in writing that. A staffer at CHQ wrote that. And I doubt if they did it on their own authority.

And here is the faq created addressing the topic.

Leader and Clerk Resources (LCR) FAQs
Why do stake and auxiliary leaders and high councilors have only limited access to LCR?

Stake auxiliary leaders and high councilors are primarily responsible to instruct and support ward auxiliary and Melchizedek Priesthood leaders. They orient newly called ward auxiliary and Melchizedek Priesthood leaders and provide encouragement, support, and instruction. They are not responsible for individual ward members. It is the ward clerk’s responsibility to train ward auxiliary and Melchizedek Priesthood leaders on record-keeping tools and responsibilities. If stake auxiliary leaders and high councilors need a list of members for planning purposes, they should request this information through the ward or stake clerk.

In LCR under the Access Table, when you scroll down to stake high councilor, it indicates what they have access to. There is no way of getting around it.