Handbook or Facilities Policy for Cancelling Church Meetings?

[nathangg]

A counselor in the bishopric just asked me, "What is the policy for cancelling sacrament meeting for snow or other weather related reasons?"

I imagine that each ward/stake may have their own policies/procedures on this, however, I was trying to find something in the facilities handbook or the general handbook about this sort of thing.

What I found in the handbook and the church website was information about "emergency response" and "disasters". I can imagine a multi-day blizzard that prevents access to basic services could definitely qualify as a disaster and fall under the "emergency response" procedures that the stake and ward councils create.

But in my mind's eye I'm not sure I'd categorize 8 inches of snow in the hours leading up to sacrament meeting or 3 hours of white-out conditions from 7am to 11am when sacrament meeting starts at 10:30am as a "disaster". Instead, those seem like "events affecting members ability to safely attend church meetings".

Is there any information to help a church leader (namely: bishopric) decide when to cancel a youth night or Sunday meetings? (and if the answer is, "consult with the stake president", then what information would the stake president use in these cases? Good judgement, of course, but are there any written policies that would help a Bishop and/or Stake President in deciding when meetings should be cancelled?)

Thank you~!

References I found:

GHB 22.7 -

Ward councils also prepare a simple written plan for the ward to respond to emergencies. This plan should be coordinated with the stake’s emergency plan (see “Stake and Ward Preparedness”; see also 22.9.1.3 in this handbook).

GHB 22.9.1 - Stake President and His Counselors

Direct the stake’s efforts to prepare for and respond to emergencies (see 22.9.1.3).

GHB 22.9.1.3 - Respond to Emergencies - which includes a link to the "Emergency Response Procedures"

[russellhltn]

Good question. I'm not finding any answer.

I'd expect one criteria would be if local civil leaders are urging people not to travel or to meet (such as the recent pandemic).

I'd expect another criteria would be if the chapel has power and water. There might be ways to work around loss of power, but water is needed for sanitation. At the very least, I'd think the meetings would be cut short.

[lajackson]

I can scarcely believe it. What a wonderful lead in to one of Uncle Larry's Bedtime Stories:

When the first car drives into the stake center parking lot and cannot get back out because of the ice, it is time to cancel. One day at our meetinghouse where everything was wet but otherwise fine, the stake presidency heard that meetings had been cancelled at the stake center by one of the bishops. The stake president drove over to have a "visit" with the bishop in question. A few minutes later I drove over, carefully staying on the road and not going into the parking lot, to pick up the stake president and bishop and take them home. They picked up their cars later in the afternoon after the wind had subsided and the temperature had risen a degree or two.

I think common sense is the best indicator. And safety. I also think it would have been good for the bishop to consult with his stake president and explain what he was doing and why. I have never seen anything in the handbook about it other than safety. I do not know if there is anything in the facilities handbook. I suspect there might be.

And there will be different tipping points in different places. A meetinghouse in Idaho will probably shovel the snow and salt the walkways. A meetinghouse in Texas would cancel if it snowed and the sidewalk stayed white. Except in the panhandle.

[russellhltn]

I also think it would have been good for the bishop to consult with his stake president and explain what he was doing and why.

Which leads us to General Handbook 0.4 (no, that's not a typo):

If leaders have questions about information in this handbook or about issues it does not address, they counsel with their immediate presiding authority.

[BrianEdwards]

Great question. As mentioned in other threads, once you start proscribing specifics for different scenarios, often it can be too easy to cause more confusion. The lack of specifics about this in the Handbook definitely points to GHB 0.4 as the guide to follow.

Another consideration is to include the ward council in these discussions. Especially if you live in a region with multiple potential cancellations per year, you'll always find a wide range of perspectives about meeting cancellation policies. I've known YW leaders who will silently stew about how a Bishop never cancels anything because he seems more interested in having a youth activity than considering safety... and also known YW leaders who wonder why the Bishop never asks them for input and is always canceling activities at the slightest possible inconvenience. There's won't always be 100% agreement amongst leaders, but proactive discussion about the ward's policy, and truly considering feedback, is always key (GHB 4.4).

[jsorens6]

I live in Indiana and served as a bishopric counselor a couple of times before serving as bishop. As a counselor, I never looked forward to the, inevitable, someone drive to the church at 5:00 am on Sunday morning , each time it snowed and provide their feedback on the road situation, or, we all drive in for bishopric and then make a decision.

As bishop I started just using the local county travel advisory. If they recommended only essential travel then we cancelled. If it was not recommended but could be rough, we asked everyone to use their best judgement in choosing to attend and did the best we could with who was there.

The point is, I relied on an external, experienced group to make the decision for me, relieved a lot of stress for everyone involved in making the decision for the group, and made people feel comfortable to make their own choice based on their circumstance.