# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1929_S175
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

and Other States, 1929. 179

Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio,

Mindful of these distressing circumstances, your Committee

ed it its task to develop ways and means whereby future large
2. Your Committee gave much thought to the am H idee Synod’s various funds at the end of the respective fiscal
the budget should be fixed for the next three Years. O Unt at Which sfcits ight be avoided. Our recommendations are predicated on this
we have the experience of the last ty, years duri, he han years mR esolutions A-3, A-4.)

a ? " i remise.

request for theme ' von & aan m the other wel vue c. Colleges and Seminaries,

riennium averaging ab 4 lave . ;
e feel that Synod should not appropri i the fr Per annum, 1. For synodical buildings your Committee recommends a budget

ut that, by more consecrated, intelligent intensiy oft eSteq $1 000,000 for the triennium, although the aggregate of all requests
should be Increased Hence, your Committee rec ne ort eceipt f voximates $2,600,000. (Resolution B.) At first glance it would
annual budget of approximately $9759 000. ( men Verage appear as though your Committee had acted rather arbitrarily and

in utter disregard of the requests before you. Yet, your Committee
selieves that it has acted in the Spirit of its instructions and in the
best interests of Synod in making its recommendations. It must be
borne in mind that we encourage Separate and distinct methods lead-
ing to the disposal of the items of professors’ residences, minor
repairs, and minor improvements, calling for a total of approximately

Committee that $2,000 000 $630,000, and leaving requests for new buildings and other items

Group “4.” (Resolution B.)
4. Group “B» has been relieved of “Minor Re

Improvements” because these items sh
the state of the treasury

+. 33 _
Pairs” and “Minor

, hich in all robability wil] accrue to the credit of
ould not be conti more or less, which in p y

buildings during the year 1999. Hence Synod might be justified in
appropriating building items aggregating $1,250,000.

5. We also call attention to the term “All Mission Buildings» aggregating $2,000,000? To begin with, we have already pointed out
i our reasons for the maximum synodical budget previously suggested.
The acceptance of that budget makes necessary the limiting of ex-
penditures for buildings. We believe that Synod can well remain
within this limit of building appropriations if it will be guided by
the following principles : —

b. Indebtednegg,
1. During the years 1922-1997 Synod

Operating accounts aggregating $750,000. This debt w.
because the receipts did n,

First. We believe that major repairs necessary to keep Synod’s
present properties in q serviceable state should have first considera-
tion. Our present buildings wil] best serve their Purpose for the
longest possible period of time if repairs are made Promptly, thor-
oughly, and substantially. The proposed budget can take care of all
necessary major repairs,

Secondly. We hold that, although the reasons for making an
appropriation for a new building were apparent and convincing in
1926, these Same reasons may not be so apparent or convincing to-day.
Hence, if an appropriation was made for a definite project in 1926,