LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1995, Page 161

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

LATE REPORTS AND OVERTURES

Bylaw 3.19, 2, b provides that reports and overtures
must be submitted not later than 18 weeks prior to the
opening day of the convention. March 11, 1995, was there-
fore the deadline date for this information.

The same Bylaw goes on to state: “No report or overture
received subsequent to that date shall be accepted for con-
vention consideration unless a committee consisting of the
President, the First Vice-President, and the Secretary ad-
judge it to be a matter of overriding importance and ur-
gency which is not adequately covered by documents al-
ready before the convention.”

After a careful evaluation of these documents the com-
mittee referred to in the Bylaw decided to approve the fol-
lowing for consideration by the convention (the text of each
of these is printed on these pages):

R7-04-A

Synodical Board of Directors Response
to the Recommendations of the
President’s Task Force on Finances

Adopted Dee. 2, 1993

President Barry at the August 1993 meeting of the syn-
odical Board of Directors shared the Report and Recom-
mendations of the President’s Task Force on Finances and
suggested in his transmittal letter the “Board of Directors
carefully study through the same in order that we might,
at some future date, discuss the various thoughts contained
in the report.” The Board has considered this report and
concurs with some recommendations, many of which were
implemented or in process before the Task Force report.
The Board, however, declines to implement other recom-
mendations, since in some cases the report’s narrative does
not support the recommendations and in other cases there
are valid business reasons for not implementing them.

The Board is pleased that the Task Force concluded
“proper accounting and audit policies, procedures, and con-
trols have been established and implemented by the Synod
and that they are adhered to by the various entities of the
Synod.” This is certainly consistent with and supports the
Pittsburgh Convention Res. 4-07, which by a vote of 95%
resolved “That the Synod in convention affirm the integrity
of our Synod’s accounting procedures and fiscal operations
and therefore encourage this church to move on in Christ-
ian fellowship and trust.” That same resolution stated
“That the Synod in convention recognize the possibility of
honest disagreement in our church with the decisions of
elected and appointed boards and committees.” Certain rec-
ommendations of the Task Force and the response of the
Board, as well as other boards, may be considered “honest
disagreement.” It is hoped these matters can be put to rest
and that divisive accusations and responses can be set
aside in the interest of getting on with the critical business
of the church. Following are the responses of the synodical
Board of Directors to the Task Force recommendations as
they appear on pages 13-16 of its report:

161

It is important in considering the finances and opera-
tions of the Synod to understand the nature of the Synod
and the role of the synodical Board of Directors. The Synod
is a federation of 6,000 congregations meeting triennially
through elected Circuit representatives in a delegate con-
vention. A committee of these delegates meets prior to the
convention to review the finances of the Synod and provide
appropriate reports and recommendations. A number of the
concerns referred to the Task Force were considered in re-
cent conventions. The Synod, primarily through the con-
ventions, has created about 60 separate corporations and a
number of other boards and commissions to provide ser-
vices in support of, and in behalf of, congregations. Each of
these units, including Districts, colleges, universities, sem-
inaries, the Lutheran Church Extension Fund, the Worker
Benefit Plans, the Foundation and Concordia Publishing
House has a governing board which is primarily responsi-
ble and accountable to the convention and each, under the
Synod’s Constitution and Bylaws, operates with a high de-
gree of autonomy. One of these entities is also known as
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, Inc. This synodi-
cal Board of Directors is primarily responsible for that en-
tity, but has little or no responsibility regarding the other
corporate entities, some of which are referred to in the Task
Force report. Thus the Board of Directors is not a “parent
company” Board in the secular corporate sense.

Task Force Recommendation 1

That appropriate conflict of interest and disclosure state-
ments be implemented, accompanied by a policy requiring
all employees, board members, and staff of all Synod’s enti-
ties to read and sign them on a regular basis (ETHICS, p. 3)

The Board concurs with the need for appropriate conflict
of interest and disclosure statements and in September
1990 updated its conflict of interest policy appearing in the
Employee Handbook. It asked alt members of boards, com-
missions and committees, unit executives, and key employ-
ees to sign a statement acknowledging that they under-
stand and endorse the conflict of interest policy and file it
with the Synod’s Director of Human Resources. In response
to objections from some members of certain boards, includ-
ing the Board of Directors who had initially supported the
policy, the Board in May of 1992 refined the policy (at-
tached Exhibit 1), limiting it to staff, and asked theSecre-
tary of the Synod to inform and advise persons elected or
appointed to boards, commissions, and.committees regard-
ing the Employee Conflict of Interest Policy and how it re-
lates to Bylaw 3.71 and Bylaw 4.131 of the Synodical
Handbook. This was done at the orientation meeting of
each board at the beginning of the triennium. The Boards
of the Foundation, Church Extension, Worker Benefit
Plans, and CPH have, however, asked their Board mem-
bers to sign a statement advising they understand and en-
dorse this conflict of interest policy or a similar policy re-
flecting their unique situations. The Board will amend its _
policy with respect to LCMS, Inc., to include board mem-