Friday, September 13, 2013

Updated Potential New Temples Map

In preparation for General Conference in early October, I updated my potential new temples map.  Likely stakes and districts serviced by these potential new temples are provided for each location.  Only a few minor changes were made, including the removal of Cedar City, Utah and Rio de Janiero, Brazil due to temple announcements in these locations and the addition of La Paz, Bolivia.



View Potential New Temples in a larger map

31 comments:

Christopher Nicholson said...

I don't think a temple in India would service Pakistan. Those two countries aren't exactly friends.

Could a temple in Zimbabwe also service the Lubumbashi area of the DR Congo? It would be much closer than the Kinshasa temple but I'm not sure about the relations between those two countries.

Bakersfield is listed as "Bakersville".

Mike Johnson said...

The Kingasani 4th Ward, Kinshasa Democratic Republic of the Congo Mokali Stake, was created on 8 September. There are now 8 wards in the stake:

Du Rail Ward
Fer Bois Ward
Kingasani 1st Ward
Kingasani 4th Ward
Mapela Ward
Masina 2nd Ward
Masina 3rd Ward
Siforco Ward


The Fruitland 4th Ward, Ontario Oregon Stake, was created on 8 September. There are now 11 wards and 1 branch in the stake:

Fruitland 1st Ward
Fruitland 2nd Ward
Fruitland 3rd Ward
Fruitland 4th Ward
New Plymouth 1st Ward
New Plymouth 2nd Ward
Ontario 1st Ward
Ontario 2nd Ward
Ontario 3rd Ward
Ontario 4th Ward
Ontario YSA Ward
Ontario 6th Branch (Spanish)

Michael Worley said...

The India New Dehli Mission serves Pakistan. I wouldn't be surprised to see an India temple announced. The saints have been very faithful and the Hong Kong temple is very far away. 1 stake now, more stakes later? Plus India, unlike Thailand, has two missions.

My picks:
1. 5th Salt Lake Valley
2. Bangalore India
3. Zimbabwe
4. Pocatello Idaho
5. Richmond Virginia

Backup: North Utah County, Utah (Lehi/Saratoga Springs)

Michael Worley said...

Apologies--Hyderabad, India-- I always forget which one has a stake.

Iris and Craig said...

Why the drop with Cedar City, Utah?

Ed Clinch said...

Some of these temple projections seem very necessary, like India and Papua New Guinea. Some of the stateside predictions would be very nice, like getting a third in Florida.

Should be exciting as always at the Conference.

Mike Johnson said...

Cedar City was dropped from Matt's list of possible cities that might be announced in October (or at General Conference in the near term) to receive a temple, because it has already graduated from this list with the announcement in April of a temple in Cedar City.

Adam said...

It takes more than one stake worth of high priests to run a temple. I doubt India will get one within the next five years or so.

Christopher Nicholson said...

Also, the districts in India are spread over such a vast area (to say nothing of traffic) that only the members from the one stake in Hyderabad would be able to attend with any frequency. (For this same reason I think we will also have to wait a few years for a temple in Cape Verde.) And given the population size of India, having two missions compared to Thailand's one isn't really impressive. (If we had as many missionaries in North America as in India, on a per capita basis, there would be 35-40 missionaries on the whole continent.) My guess for the next Asian temple would be Singapore, because I read on Cumorah.com's country profile that an area authority or somebody told them a few years ago they had already reached the membership requirement but needed to become more forgiving first. Singapore would be somewhat centrally located for India, Thailand, and Malaysia, all of which need a closer temple but don't seem quite ready for their own.

I forgot to mention, wouldn't a temple in Abidjan also service Liberia and Sierra Leone? That should make it even more likely.

Will said...

I think Brazil will get another. Any of the cities Matt listed are ideal, but I'll say Brasilia. Another temple in the Mexico City area, I'll say Puebla. One for Virginia in Richmond. Singapore. Lastly, another one in the Philippines in Cayagan de Oro.

tl;dr - in no particular order
1. Brasilia, Brazil
2. Puebla, Mexico
3. Richmond, Virginia
4. Singapore
5. Cayagan de Oro, Philippines

Anonymous said...

I agree with Will, but believe Layton, UT and Pocatello, ID are not far behind. I think it's a safe bet 3-5 temples are announced.

Michael Worley said...

I picture the India temple being announced for much the same reasons we had a Kiev temple announced in 1998-- it might take a while and it is so far away from any other temple.

Xavier Raveau said...

The Rome stake has been divided today and became the Rome East stake. There are 5 wards and 2 branches in the stake:
Roma 2nd ward
Roma 3rd ward
Roma 6th ward
Terni ward
Pescara ward
Roma 5th branch
L’Aquila branch.

The new stake is the Rome West stake. It includes the former Sardinia and Naples districts. There are 5 wards and 7 branches in the stake:
Roma 1st ward
Roma 4th ward
Ladispoli ward
Cagliari ward (ex Sardinia district)
Caserta ward (ex Naples district)
Battipaglia branch (ex Naples district)
Castellammare branch (ex Naples district)
Flegreo branch (ex Naples district)
Napoli branch (ex Naples district)
Olbia branch (ex Sardinia district)
Oristano branch (ex Sardinia district)
Sassari branch (ex Sardinia district)

Mike Johnson said...

I have mixed feelings about India and a temple. It is true that if a temple is in Hyderabad, most of the patrons would be from that stake. But we would see districts arranging trips to the temple every year or so. Right now, it is very hard for the saints in India to serve in temples.

I see Mongolia in a similar situation, although members of the two districts would be able to serve more often.

The problem is difficulty getting to a temple otherwise. Temples come because of maturity in members, but maturity in members comes because of temples.

The Hawaii temple in 1919 and the temples in Switzerland, London, and New Zealand were built in areas without stakes, but where districts were maturing to the point where they could become stakes.

Gnesileah said...

I agree with Mike Johnson's keen observation about some early temples being built before stakes came along. The Mesa Temple was dedicated in 1927, with only three stakes in the whole state, all of them (Thatcher, St. Johns, and Snowflake) quite a distance away. The first stake in the Phoenix/Mesa Metro area was Phoenix (1938) followed by Mesa (1946).

Granted, that was a practice primarily with some early temples. But in more recent times we have seen similar situations with the Kyiv Temple (announced in 1998, but the first stake didn't come until 2004), and the Winnipeg Temple, which will likely service only one stake, and maybe part of one district.

I feel a Singapore Temple will come before a temple in India (remember Sri Lanka and Pakistan used to pertain to the Singapore Mission not too long ago), but it would not surprise me to have a temple for India announced in the near future.

My top 5 picks for this General Conference:

1-Managua Nicaragua
2-Pocatello Idaho
3-Richmond/Virginia Beach Virginia
4-Puebla/Benemérito México
5-Brasilia Brazil

Mike Johnson said...

Thank you for your kind words, Gnesileah. Except for one small point, I fully agree with your post.

The third stake in Arizona was the Maricopa Stake established on 10 December 1882 with Alexander F. MacDonald as president. This stake still exists as the Mesa Arizona Maricopa Stake and is the "mother stake" of all of the stakes in and around Maricopa County.

Mike Johnson said...

The Arizona stakes up to 1960 follow. The number in parenthesis is the number assigned to the stake and represents the number of stakes at the time of the organization of the stake. If modified by "a", "b", etc., this means it is a subsequent stake with that number (because of stakes being discontinued).

(21) Little Colorado (Ariz., Colo.) Stake organized 27 Jan 1878 with Lot Smith as first stake president
(22) Eastern Arizona was organized 29 Jun 1879 with Jesse N. Smith as first stake president
(24) Maricopa Stake was organized 10 December 1882 with Alexander F. MacDonald as first stake president; renamed Mesa Arizona Maricopa Stake in 1974
(25) Saint Joseph Stake was organized 25 February 1883 with Christopher Layton as first stake president; renamed Thatcher Arizona Stake in 1974

In 1887, the two northeast Arizona stakes went through a reorganization leading to two new stakes:
(31) St. Johns (Arizona, N.M.) Stake was organized on 23 Jul 1887 with David K. Udall as first stake president; renamed St. Johns Arizona Stake in 1974
(21) Little Colorado Stake was discontinued on 18 Dec 1887 and absorbed into the Snowflake Stake (31a)
(22) Eastern Arizona Stake was discontinued on 18 Dec 1887 and absorbed into the St. Johns (31) and Snowflake (31a) stakes
(31a) Snowflake Stake was created 18 Dec 1887 with Jesse N. Smith as first stake president; renamed Snowflake Arizona Stake in 1974

The Arizona Temple (now Mesa Arizona Temple) was dedicated 23–26 October 1927 by President Heber J. Grant

(120) Mount Graham (Arizona, N.M.) Stake was created on 20 Feb 1938 with Spencer W. Kimball as first stake president; renamed Safford Arizona Stake in 1974
(121) Phoenix Stake was organized 27 February 1938 with James Robert Price as first stake president; renamed Phoenix Arizona Stake in 1974
(137) Southern Arizona Stake organized on 2 March 1941 with A.B. Ballantyne as first stake president; renamed Arizona South Stake on 29 Mary 1970 and then St. David Arizona Stake in 1974
(161) Mesa Stake was organized 8 December 1946 with L.M. Mecham Jr. as first stake president; renamed Mesa Arizona Stake in 1974
(212) East Phoenix Stake organized 28 February 1954 with Junius E. Driggs as first stake president; renamed Phoenix East Stake on 29 May 1970 and then Phoenix Arizona East Stake in 1974
(224) East Mesa Stake organized 20 November 1955 with Donald Ellsworth as first stake president; renamed Mesa East Stake on 29 May 1970 and then Mesa Arizona East Stake in 1974
(232) Flagstaff Stake organized 23 September 1956 with Burton R. Smith as first stake president; renamed Flagstaff Arizona Stake in 1974
(238) Tucson Stake organized 2 December 1956 with Leslie Odell Brewer as first stake president; renamed Tucson Arizona Stake in 1974
(253) Phoenix North Stake organized 19 Jan 1958 with Rudger G. Smith as first stake president; renamed Phoenix Arizona North Stake in 1974
(263) Yuma (Arizona, California) Stake was organized on 27 April 1958 with Marion Turley as first stake president; renamed Yuma Arizona Stake in 1974

John Pack Lambert said...

Ukraine only had one stake when it got a temple, and none when the temple was announced. Manitoba only has 1 stake, and I am not sure if any other stakes will be in the district. Also, I think Banglore may be close to getting a stake.

So they might announce a temple for India. I would be surprised, but it is possible.

John Pack Lambert said...

Actually, when the Mesa Temple was built there was the Maricopa Stake in Mesa. They would not have built a temple there if the church did not have a solid presence there.

John Pack Lambert said...

Mount Graham Stake, at least part of the time President Kimball was president, also included members in El Paso and Ciudad Juarez. The two cities I believe only made up one ward at the time. I may be remembering wrong about the ward stetching across the international boundary.

El Paso was the site of the first stake in Texas in 1952. Houston and Dallas get stakes in 1953, San Antonio in 1958 and the next stake is Corpus Christi in 1964. The last 60s see another Houston stake, and stakes with names like Texas East in Longview (but probably having the old Mormon colony near Gilmer as a key part of the stake), Texas West that later becomes Odessa and Texas North that becomes Lubbock, as well as Fort Worth Stake.

On the Arizona Temple, by the time it was built it also had the 2 Los Angeles stakes. My grandparents when they got sealed went from the Bay Area to the Arizona Temple, but that was partly because my grandfather's parents who went as well were living in Los Angeles.

The Chatelain's said...

Regarding the Rome stake splitting today, don't be surprised if by year's end, a few of those branches have matured into wards. When Milan split both of those new stakes had five wards, now they both have six. The same with Lleída in Spain; started with four wards and then one of the Zaragoza branches matured. But way to go with Rome 6th ward being created I'm conjunction with event. I predict Roma 5th and Napoli branches respectively maturing in each of the new stakes.

James Crowther said...

If We're talking about places with only one stake, you could add Fairbanks to the list. Fairbanks is the 8 hours away from Anchorage as is Winnipeg from Regina. The Fairbanks Stake is also slightly larger than Winnipeg.
My Temple Predictions are almost the same as Gnesileah, so I will justify my guesses:
Managua Nicaragua (Country with the most members without a temple)
Richmond Virginia (State with the most members without a temple)
Auckland New Zealand (Metropolitan area with the most stakes without a temple)
Pocatello Idaho (Metropolitan area in the US without a temple)
2nd Mexico City Area (either Puebla or on the new MTC site, maybe the field and grove of trees on the east side of the campus)

Gnesileah said...

I have egg on my face about the Maricopa Stake. Thanks for correcting me, Mike. I keep a database of all church units, and I had the creation date totally wrong for that stake. I got my almanac out, and sure enough, you were right. I am very envious of your access to CDOL, lol.

John said...

My longshot pick: Pittsburgh. I have this feeling that once Philadelphia, Richmond/Williamsburg, and Pittsburgh are up and running, the Washington DC temple will be remodeled.

Interesting what they did, dividing the Rome stake. Pescara and Terni wards both reach way north, though. In fact, Ancona Branch's (Rimini district in Milan mission) president actually lives in Pescara Ward.

Mike Johnson said...

No egg on the face. I have seen that same claim several times over the years that Arizona only had 3 stakes and none in Maricopa County when the temple was built. I am not sure where it came from.

I did not answer it from CDOL, but rather from my own database of stakes built up over the years from the almanacs.

Mike Johnson said...

I think the Philadelphia Temple will take 10 stakes from the Washington DC Temple, leaving the latter with 33, including the Chambersburg and stakes to the west in Pennsylvania.

If a temple is announced in Richmond, it would likely take 11 stakes (12 if Fredericksburg goes--I know a lot of people that would prefer to go to Richmond and I probably would as well to avoid getting through the massive parking lot known as the DC metro area) from the Washington DC Temple. This would leave 22 or possibly 21 for the DC Temple.

If a temple were to be announced in Pittsburgh, it would likely take 4 more stakes from Washington DC (3 in Pennsylvania, 1 in West Virginia), plus 2 from the Ohio Columbus Temple (Pittsburgh North and Youngstown) and possibly the Kirtland Stake. This would drop Washington DC to 17-18 stakes.

Bryan Dorman said...

I have it on fairly good authority that if a second temple is to be constructed in Mexico City, it will NOT be in Benemerito, at least not immediately, but in the southern district of Tlalpan to better serve the stakes in Morelos, Guerrero, and southern Distrito Federal.

Honestly though, if a temple is announced for Mexico, it would probably be Puebla, if not Puebla, then Torreón or Culiacán (which are far away from any exising Mexican temple with a healthy number of stakes in both areas). Another possible site could be Querétaro, with only three stakes but easy access to Pachuca, Puebla to the south via the North Arc Expressway, and San Luis Potosi, Aguascalientes, and Zacatecas, to the north.

John said...

Ten stakes for Philadelphia? Let's see - eight stakes had their presidents at the groundbreaking: Cherry Hill NJ, Harrisburg PA, Philadelphia PA, Reading PA, Scranton PA, Valley Forge PA, Williamsport PA, and Wilmington DE.

Since then York PA (with some help from neighboring stakes) has split into Chambersburg PA and Lancaster PA. I could see Lancaster going to Philadelphia but not Chambersburg. Dover DE has been split off from Wilmington DE, but I really don't know that Dover stake would go to Philadelphia. Yes it's a shorter distance but Washington would generally be easier to get to.

John said...

I meant York and Harrisburg stakes (with help) became Harrisburg, Chambersburg, and Lancaster stakes.

Mike Johnson said...

I was considering Lancaster and Harrisonburg for the Philadelphia Temple district. The stake centers would be about equal distance to the Philadelphia and Washington DC temples. I think they could go either way.

Stuart S said...

The Christ Church Barbados District does not come under the Puerto Rico San Juan East Mission any more. That mission was closed in 2010. That district is under the West Indies Mission now.