sjdawg Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 Is there anyone here familiar with this stake merger and reorganization? If so, can you provide any details or context behind this move? It seems like a pretty drastic reduction in the number of total units but I might be missing a bigger piece of the puzzle.
Robert F. Smith Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 One would need some idea of the total number of members in each ward, both historically and now. If the overall number of units has been reduced, that may be a matter of consolidation of units which were historically too small in number of members. 1
sjdawg Posted June 13, 2016 Author Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: One would need some idea of the total number of members in each ward, both historically and now. If the overall number of units has been reduced, that may be a matter of consolidation of units which were historically too small in number of members. Yes I agree. That is why I asked if anyone was familiar with this reorganization. Edited June 13, 2016 by sjdawg 1
JAHS Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: One would need some idea of the total number of members in each ward, both historically and now. If the overall number of units has been reduced, that may be a matter of consolidation of units which were historically too small in number of members. Another factor is the number of Melchizedek priesthood holders in each area, that are available to fill leadership positions. Perhaps that number has changed in certain areas of the stake. 2
Kenngo1969 Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) It didn't involve a Stake consolidation, but a number of years ago, I lived in a Stake in which a number of wards were consolidated and stake boundaries realigned. It was in an area where, originally, families lived in many of the homes, but the families moved to the suburbs as their space needs increased while many single people, childless couples, and empty nesters moved into the homes formerly occupied by those families. I don't think there's anything terribly unusual about that kind of thing. Conversely, the area I'm in now is crawling with yuppies, aspiring yuppies, and young families, and my ward recently was divided. My pre-division ward filled the chapel and much of the cultural hall, and skewed heavily younger. Conversely, the ward I attend out of necessity because it's the only block that fits my Sunday schedule (alas, I have to work every Sunday: I took yesterday off as bereavement leave after going to my sister-in-law's funeral on Saturday, and it was the first time in almost a year I was able to attend the three-hour block) skews much older, with far fewer children and young people. Edited June 13, 2016 by Kenngo1969
Kenngo1969 Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) 52 minutes ago, sjdawg said: Yes I agree. That is why I asked if anyone was familiar with this reorganization. The officers of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints at the meeting where the consolidation was announced would've announced (or at least, would've hinted at) the reason for the consolidation. You could've always gone to that meeting. Though, I admit, I'm one to talk: I missed the meeting at which my ward division was announced. (I suspect the rationale for what happened in your case is much similar to the one I discuss in my foregoing post. ) Edited June 13, 2016 by Kenngo1969
sjdawg Posted June 13, 2016 Author Posted June 13, 2016 1 hour ago, JAHS said: Another factor is the number of Melchizedek priesthood holders in each area, that are available to fill leadership positions. Perhaps that number has changed in certain areas of the stake. This is actually key. I worked on a ward reorganization once and this was the most common topic when determining boundaries
Rain Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 2 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: It didn't involve a Stake consolidation, but a number of years ago, I lived in a Stake in which a number of wards were consolidated and stake boundaries realigned. It was in an area where, originally, families lived in many of the homes, but the families moved to the suburbs as their space needs increased while many single people, childless couples, and empty nesters moved into the homes formerly occupied by those families. I don't think there's anything terribly unusual about that kind of thing. Conversely, the area I'm in now is crawling with yuppies, aspiring yuppies, and young families, and my ward recently was divided. My pre-division ward filled the chapel and much of the cultural hall, and skewed heavily younger. Conversely, the ward I attend out of necessity because it's the only block that fits my Sunday schedule (alas, I have to work every Sunday: I took yesterday off as bereavement leave after going to my sister-in-law's funeral on Saturday, and it was the first time in almost a year I was able to attend the three-hour block) skews much older, with far fewer children and young people. This is similar to one of my stakes. Our ward had the biggest primary in the world about a year before we moved in (450 kids). Our first EQ party I sat next to couples with 7, 8 and 10 kids. Over the next 10 years those families mived to bigger houses and non members moved in. 39% of the member households moved out. 1
Jeanne Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 Years ago my ward was consolidated with another just to meet the needs of the youth. Not enough young people to have their own road shows and stuff like that. It was a waste of electricity and other expenses for so few in each ward. That makes sense.
Recommended Posts