# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_March 21 22 2025_S7
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

•

Bylaw IV B 1: In the paragraph “The District President shall be responsible…“to the Board of
Directors in other matters,” the latter should read “to the Board of Directors in matters it has
delegated to him while retaining supervision.” The commission notes that the board can only
delegate to the president and hold him accountable within limits. His primary responsibility is
ecclesiastical and he is accountable to the district convention and Synod President. The board may
delegate some duties, subject to the president accepting them, so long as it retains supervision and
does not impinge on his primary, ecclesiastical duties. See Bylaw 4.4. Likewise, the Secretary and
Treasurer “shall be responsible to…convention, respectively, depending on which has assigned to
him a particular duty.” Vice-presidents are also responsible to the district convention.

•

Bylaw IV G 6: The board should organize at its first meeting of the district triennium, not
necessarily its first regular, quarterly meeting (Bylaw 1.5.3.1).

•

Bylaw Section V: The heading contains an extraneous number “7.”

•

Bylaw V A 3 stipulates that nominations for president must be signed by the president and secretary
of the congregation. Because not every congregation might have these officers, the district may
wish to follow what Synod has done in its Bylaws (except in Bylaw 2.3.1 [b]) and require signature
by “two officers.”

•

Bylaw V A 10: As ties can be included (see 9, above), “five” should be dropped here.

•

Bylaw VI A requires the same change as Art. of Inc. Article V.

•

Bylaw VII: The advance notice and advance approval (absent the provision of Bylaw 3.9.2.2.3 [b])
requirements limit the convention’s ability to adjust the districts bylaws and even to amend a bylaw
proposal brought to it, even with notice. Synod’s Bylaws, on the other hand, have attempted to
accommodate such changes (Bylaw 3.9.2.2.3 [b]).

The above suggestions are commended to the district for development of a future bylaw revision. The
district is thanked for submission of its documents for review.
98. Southern Illinois District Bylaws, Amendment Adopted Contingent upon Approval, and
Questions regarding Synod Employment of District Official (25-3054)
By an email of February 21, the Southern Illinois (SI) District Secretary forwarded for the district’s review,
under Bylaw 3.9.2.2.3 (b), an amendment of the district’s bylaws already adopted (Res. 1-07) without the
commission’s prior review and approval. The commission finds this amendment to be in harmony with the
Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod and approves it, rendering it in force and effect. The district is
thanked for sending this for review and reminded to send, for the commission’s records, a clean copy of the
bylaws as adopted by the convention.
The district secretary’s email also included two opinion questions, as follow:
Question 1:

May an elected official of a District work for the Synod, or does that violate Bylaw 1.5.1[.1]
or another bylaw?

Opinion:
This depends. If the elected official is a member (including in an ex officio capacity) of the
board of the district (which is an agency of the Synod), and if the “work for the Synod” falls under the
definition of “executive or staff” in Bylaw 1.5.1.1, its prohibition would apply and the official may not
work for the Synod. If the work does not fall under the definition or the elected official is not a board
member, the official may work for the Synod. (The commission assumes that “work[ing] for the Synod”
entails employment and not service in an elective or appointive office, which would fall under Bylaw
1.5.1.2.)
Question 2:

Similarly, would serving both positions be in conflict with the Synod conflict of interest
policy or any employee policies of the Synod?
CCM Minutes – March 21–22, 2025 – Page 74