MLS finance transition to CUBS

Discuss questions around local unit policies for budgeting, reconciling, etc. This forum should not contain specific financial or membership information.
ddurocher-p40
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Oshawa, Ontario, Canada

#41

Post by ddurocher-p40 »

Pilotfly wrote:I sincerely hope that was a misquote on the part of the stake clerk up in Canada. I cannot imagine anything more painful than having to have a second person nearby in order to write a check. For me, and I imagine quite a few other folks, that will entail some real issues. None of my Stake Presidency is in the same ward as I so it will necessarily require an extra evening or time before stake meetings to get check printing done (which takes away from their valuable time).

We may be jumping the gun on this and I certainly hope so. However if this really is a coming feature of CUBS then I intend through my Stake President and Area Seventy to see if we can't get this feature stopped. We already have enough security inherant in the system with two signatures needed on a check and approval of either the Stake President in my case or a Bishop for everyone else at ward levels before a check is ever disbursed. Sorry, but this feature of needing two people to print a check just doesn't make sense.

Sorry if I am jumping the gun, but when I read this in the two posts above my heart sunk.

Nope, not a misquote. Now works just as it does when doing a deposit - you now need two people to authorize printing cheques. Perhaps there have been problems with people forging signatures? I am fortunate that my financial clerk and I are in the same Ward.
techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3183
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

#42

Post by techgy »

A response back from the MLS support desk regarding the issue of having two people present to print checks, gave me the following information;
There was a bug in the new CUBS program that reflected the situation that you have outlined in your message but will be corrected before it is released to the US.
This should be good news to those in the US and hopefully it will also be corrected for our Canadian friends as well.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 31299
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#43

Post by russellhltn »

I got a similar response on my queries to Local Unit Support.

A couple of things:

End of year: As of this hour (and it could change), end of year balance will roll over to next year. This may have some significant effects on stakes that have been reclaiming the end of year budget.

Percentages: It appears it's how much goes to the unit. For example, if you put "80%" for "Ward A" in "Sacrament Meeting Attendance" then 80% of the resulting funding will go to the ward and 20% goes to the stake budget.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
ddurocher-p40
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Oshawa, Ontario, Canada

#44

Post by ddurocher-p40 »

techgy wrote:A response back from the MLS support desk regarding the issue of having two people present to print checks, gave me the following information;
There was a bug in the new CUBS program that reflected the situation that you have outlined in your message but will be corrected before it is released to the US.
This should be good news to those in the US and hopefully it will also be corrected for our Canadian friends as well.

We here in Canada are only too happy to be the beta testers for CUBS. Can't wait to download yet another patch!
ddurocher-p40
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Oshawa, Ontario, Canada

#45

Post by ddurocher-p40 »

Alan_Brown wrote:I would think that's a good idea. I've done mine. It seems like we should do everything as normal until the transition date -- that should reduce the number of transition issues we have to resolve.

By no means to I want to encourage laziness but with the new system reconciliations are no longer necessary. I have a branch in my stake that is about a 3 hour drive for me. They have a newly called clerk and I found out that they had not done their reconciliations for 2 years (I've been the stake clerk for almost a year now). I was building up the resolve to head up there and help train this new brother and get the reconciliations done. Then I thought about the fact that with the new system "Leaders will no longer be required to reconcile the statement to MLS". I figured I'd call support first. I was pleasantly surprised when I was told told not to worry about getting this branch caught up, it was not necessary. Wow, it's not often that I get to hear what I want!

So if any of you are in a situation where reconciliations are not up to date, either for your own unit or a unit in your stake, this is non transition issue, but by all means, keep doing your reconciliations! :D

David
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 31299
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#46

Post by russellhltn »

ddurocher wrote:I was pleasantly surprised when I was told told not to worry about getting this branch caught up, it was not necessary.
Interesting. I wondered how things would transition.

If this goes how I think it will, it might not be a bad idea to print off a full listing of all transactions for the year after the last Send/Receive prior to the changeover.

Especially if you've have or had issues where MLS financial records were correct but had to get something on the church side straightened out.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 31299
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#47

Post by russellhltn »

ddurocher wrote:I was pleasantly surprised when I was told told not to worry about getting this branch caught up, it was not necessary.
Interesting. I wondered how things would transition. Especially if you've have or had issues where MLS financial records were correct but had to get something on the church side straightened out.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
rwoodmansee
New Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 1:40 pm
Location: Carrollton, TX USA

#48

Post by rwoodmansee »

RussellHltn wrote:End of year: As of this hour (and it could change), end of year balance will roll over to next year. This may have some significant effects on stakes that have been reclaiming the end of year budget.

If you have ever worked with number for any amout of time, you know that you can manipulate percentages make the end result to be any ting you want. Stakes that reclaim unused ward budgets should still be able to reclaim the year-end balance by reducing the percentage for that particular ward to reflect the amount the stake wants to reclaim.
murraydavidgeorge2
New Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: USA - Grand Rapids, MI

#49

Post by murraydavidgeorge2 »

ddurocher wrote:I have a branch in my stake that is about a 3 hour drive for me. They have a newly called clerk and I found out that they had not done their reconciliations for 2 years

I'm wondering how you can go so long with out reconciling your financial statements. Wouldn't an audit point that out at least twice a year?
jdlessley
Community Moderators
Posts: 8718
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:30 am
Location: USA, TX

#50

Post by jdlessley »

BroMurray wrote:I'm wondering how you can go so long with out reconciling your financial statements. Wouldn't an audit point that out at least twice a year?
That assumes that the audits were done correctly, at all, or that the corrective action follow-up was done. An audit done in accordance with the checklist and following Church procedures would have identified the difficulty. As I have found in my past experience as an auditor is that the follow-up is the most likely difficulty since it involves a significant amount of time to accomplish. By the time the next audit rolls around the corrective action may not have been completed for a variety of reasons. The problem only gets worse as time goes on unless the unit leadership and stake leadership stay on top of the corrective action.
JD Lessley
Have you tried finding your answer on the ChurchofJesusChrist.org Help Center?
Post Reply

Return to “Local Unit Finance”