# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_May 3 4 1985_S4
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Furthermore, in response to a question relative to 2.68, b, the Commission would note that it is
mandatory upon the board to make its appointments within a six-month period. Failure to do so
would constitute a waiver of that privilege and would put into play 2.103, c, and the President of
the Synod would be authorized to make such appointments in default, should be choose to act.
To the latter part of the first and s econd questions, the Commission responds that under 2.55 a
standing committee is created for the assistance of the board, and therefore the board has the
authority to call and hold a meeting of such a committee provided there is a quorum. As to the
unit executive, 2.807, a, requires him to implement the decisions of his board.
131. North Dakota District Bylaws (Ag. 1262): Since the required changes had been made in North
Dakota District Bylaws, these Bylaws were approved as not being in conflict with the Constitution and
Bylaws of the Synod.
132. Minnesota South District Bylaws (Ag. 1263): The Minnesota South District had indicated that they
were intending to make additional changes in their Bylaws beyond those which had been forwarded to the
Commission on Constitutional Matters. The Secretary was directed to write the district president,
indicating that it should be clearly stated at the district convention that the Bylaws of the district are being
adopted subject to approval by the Commission on Constitutional Matters. Reference should be made to
Bylaw 2.533, f, of the Handbook. If the Commission on Constitutional Matters cannot approve of the
district Bylaws, the district will have to revert to its previous Bylaws for governance.
133. Wyoming District Bylaws (Ag. 1264): Judge Schnelz had reviewed the Wyoming District Bylaws,
and it was suggested that specific times be stated for the approval of a district work program. This matter
is to be retained in the agenda, with the idea that the Bylaws will be reviewed when they are received in
their final form.
134. South Wisconsin District Bylaws (Ag. 1265): In reviewing the South Wisconsin District Bylaws, it
was noted that 3.91, g, 3 and 4, involve a conflict. The conflict is between #3 and the last sentence of #4.
It was also noted in 3.97, 2, c, that the committee dealing with constitutions should rather be termed a
Constitution Committee than a Commission on Constitutional Matters. Furthermore, it was pointed out
that either in an introductory paragraph it should be noted that references to the Handbook are to the 1981
Handbook of the Synod, or else any references included in the Bylaws should be changed to conform to
the 1983 Handbook of the Synod. The Bylaws of the South Wisconsin District were approved with these
changes.
135. Election of President by Board of Regents, Seward (Ag. 1741): Some members of a Board of
Regents at a synodical college are now elected by a district convention. the 1985 Nebraska District
convention will be held during the time when a new president is to be selected for Concordia College,
Seward. The question which has arisen is whether a regent who is presently serving on the board or the
newly elected regent would participate in the election of the president. The Commission expressed its
opinion that the Board of Regents of a synodical college is a synodical board, and that therefore a district
elected regent takes office on the fourth Sunday of September following his election. Consequently, the
Board of Regents member presently serving on the Board prior to the election at the district convention
will be involved in the selection of a president until the fourth Sunday of September.
136. District Executive on Synodical Board (Ag. 1743): Rev. Willard Krueger, who is serving in an
administrative position with the South Wisconsin District, had requested a ruling regarding his eligibility
to serve on a Board of Regents. In his opinion, 2.67, h, did not apply to such a situation. The Commission
reviewed its previous decisions on this matter and found no reason to change them. It did recognize,