LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — September 15–16, 2017, Page 11

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

•
•
•
•

•

Bylaw 9.7.3: The allowance of this paragraph should include the possibility that a circuit
failed to select a circuit visitor in the first place (cf. LCMS Bylaw 5.2.2 [f]).
Bylaw 10.1.4: “Expected” should read “required.”
Bylaw 10.1.5: Attendance is obligatory for all ministers.
Bylaws 11.1.2 and 11.1.4: As formation of electoral circuits from geographically adjacent
visitation circuits is to be determined according to stated criteria by the district board of
directors (LCMS Bylaw 3.1.2 [a]), the designation of specific electoral circuits should be
removed from the Bylaws.
Bylaw 13.7.1: Floor amendments to bylaw proposals should be subject to the same
affirmative majority as other amendments. “All other matters shall be decided by a majority
vote.” (Const. Art. VII C and Const. Art. XIV)

The commission thanks the Iowa West District for its cooperation with the bylaw review process
and looks forward to reviewing a subsequent draft of the bylaws, in which these points have
received the required attention.
83. Montana District Bylaws (17-2847)
By an August 16, 2017, e-mail, the President of the Montana District forwarded his district’s
proposed bylaw revisions for review. The commission notes that the district Articles of
Incorporation on file with the commission satisfy Bylaw 1.5.3.6 and 2016 Res. 9-02A as to both
relationship and asset disposition language. With regard to the bylaw proposal, four points may
require further attention:
•
•

•
•

Bylaw 1.3.2 [n] and elsewhere: “circuit counselor” should be “circuit visitor.”
Bylaw 2.2.1.1: The commission notes the specific designation of the district president’s
duties in the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod (e.g., Const. Art. XII 7–9 and Bylaws
4.4.1–4.4.8), and not only in proportion to those of the President of the Synod (presumably
as expressed in Const. XII 6). Elaboration of this twofold description of the office (as
proportional but also specifically defined) would be desirable.
Bylaw 3.1: The district may wish to reflect changes to LCMS Bylaw 3.9.2.2.3 [b], to
provide a procedure for amendment of proposed changes.
In the change to Bylaw 2.2.6.7 [c], the commission suggests ending the first sentence
“…shall not exceed the expected income of the district combined with cash reserves on
hand at the end of the previous fiscal year.” and striking the next sentence (“The expected
income…”). While the proposed language is not contrary to the bylaws, the suggested
change would preserve the proper sense of “income.”

The bylaw proposal is approved, contingent on the first two points being addressed, and with or
without appropriate changes addressing the latter two points, for presentation to the convention.
The commission thanks Montana District for its cooperation in the bylaw review process and
reminds it to file the adopted version of its bylaws with the commission following its convention.
84. North Dakota District Bylaws (17-2853)
By a September 6, 2017, e-mail, the chairman of the North Dakota District bylaw revision
committee forwarded proposed bylaw revisions for review. The commission notes the following
items requiring further attention:

CCM Minutes – September 15–16, 2017 – Page 69