LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 2007, Page 80

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

80

REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT

10 and May 14. The committee submits the following report
to the Synod.
I. No evidence was found of collaboration between
the Office of the President of the Synod and the
presidents and boards of directors of the districts
regarding the seating of delegates to the 2007 convention.
• Cases identified by Frederic Baue in his “Update on
Circuit Exceptions for the 2007 LCMS Convention” as
problematic and requiring additional exceptions were
found to have reasonable explanations as a result of
data provided during the delegate certification
process.
• The official records provided by the President’s office
offered no indication of collaboration between the
President’s office and district officials. Because all
other related communication was oral in nature, no
additional records were available for review.
II. The 65 electoral circuit exceptions granted for
the 2007 convention of the Synod were granted
according to the provisions of Bylaw 3.1.2.
• Records in support of the exceptions granted were
found to be in good order, in every case including all
appropriate documentation of district board actions
requesting exceptions and the granting of exceptions
by the President.
• All electoral circuit exceptions were granted within
the parameters established by Bylaw 3.1.2, which provides no limitations on the number of exceptions that
may be granted.
• Limitations self-imposed by the President were announced repeatedly in his reports to the Council of
Presidents and were generally followed. The President provided reasonable explanations for three exceptions to those limitations upon request of the subcommittee.
III. The pertinent paragraph in the agreement that accompanied the settlement of the recent lawsuit
was honored in the process used to grant electoral
circuit exceptions for the 2007 convention.
• The requirements provided in Bylaw 3.1.2 for the
granting of exceptions were followed, and evidence
demonstrates that districts were repeatedly encouraged to realign circuits to avoid the need to request
electoral circuit exceptions.
• A written reminder was offered to the Council of Presidents on at least one occasion (and the President reported numerous oral reminders on other occasions)
calling attention to the provision in Bylaw 3.1.2 that
advocates the joining together of adjacent visitation
circuits to form an electoral circuit when electoral circuit requirements cannot be met by one or both visitation circuits.
IV. The Convention Delegate Review Committee did
not have time or opportunity to review the circumstances surrounding the extensive realigning of circuits that went on during the triennium to verify that all such alignments were
done properly.
2007 Convention Proceedings

Districts may only realign circuits by convention action
unless such authority has been specifically delegated to
their boards of directors (CCM Opinion 03-2368).
These realignments have often only minimally met (and
at times have even fallen short of) Bylaw 3.1.2 requirements, resulting in an increase in the number of delegates to the 2007 convention despite a reduction from
88 (2004) to 65 (2007) in the number of electoral circuit
exceptions requested and granted.
V. The Convention Delegate Review Committee recognizes that a comprehensive study of concerns associated with the Synod’s delegate representation
process is needed, such as is included in the overall study currently underway by the Blue Ribbon
Task Force on Synodical Structure and Governance. A number of general observations surfaced
during the committee’s research that beg further
attention by the task force in the interest of fair
representation at national conventions.
• Delegate exceptions are at times being used to alleviate other concerns, including “adequate representation” for ethnic and other interests at national conventions. Exceptions requested for such purposes
appear to elevate other concerns above the clear interest of Bylaw 3.1.2 in equitable representation
based solely upon numbers of congregations and confirmed members.
• The provision of Bylaw 3.1.2 advocating the combining
of adjacent visitation circuits to form electoral circuits
is not being given first attention as the to-be-preferred
remedy when one or both of the visitation circuits do
not meet requirements for an electoral circuit. This is
evidenced by the fact that 65 electoral circuit exceptions were requested and granted for the 2007 Synod
convention compared to only 16 times that adjacent visitation circuits were combined to form an appropriate
electoral circuit. The granting of exceptions over the
years has in reality become the rule, while the rule provided by the bylaw (to join adjacent visitation circuits)
has in reality become the exception.
• Statistics demonstrate that, in general, districts with
already greater-than-average per-communicant representation at Synod conventions are also the districts
that have been requesting and receiving the greatest
number of exceptions, thereby further increasing their
delegate representation advantage.
It is this committee’s hope and prayer that its efforts and
this report will help to assure the Synod in general and the
delegates to the 2007 convention in particular that the delegate body that will meet in Houston this summer has been
selected “in accordance with the covenants of love by which
we in the LCMS have agreed to work together.”
Dr. William Hoesman, President, Michigan District;
Chairman, Council of Presidents
Dr. Larry Stoterau, President, PSW District; Vice
Chairman, Council of Presidents
Dr. Robert Kuhn, LCMS President Emeritus;
Chairman, LCMS Board of Directors
Rev. James Fandrey, Luth. Heritage Foundation;
Vice Chairman, LCMS Board of Directors