LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — February 2–3, 2018, Page 11

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

The commission requests that the district forward a revised version of its bylaw proposal, addressing the
above concerns, for further review and approval by the commission before submission to the district
convention.
Reviewing the endowment bylaws (in the first review of said document by the commission), the endowment
fund being an agency of the Synod under Bylaw 1.2.1 [a], the commission noted the following:
•

Noting the apparent establishment of the endowment in 2003, the commission calls to the district’s
attention LCMS Bylaw 3.6.5.1.2, (1981 Bylaw 2.647), which states, “Since the Lutheran Church—
Missouri Synod Foundation serves the entire Synod, no new foundations shall be established by its
agencies without prior approval of the Board of Directors of The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod.” The commission has no information on whether this authorization was sought or granted
(if, in fact, the formation of the endowment fund was subsequent to 1981). Likewise, agencies of
the Synod establishing subsidiary incorporated agencies are to seek and receive the approval of the
Board of Directors of the Synod (1981 Res. 5-07).

•

Article II, Section 3: The procedure for removal of trustees must be as specified in LCMS Bylaws
1.5.7–1.5.7.1.

•

Article II, Section 4: It would seem that as the district convention elects trustees, the district board
of directors (not the board of the endowment fund) should be the body to fill vacancies on the
endowment board (cf. LCMS Bylaw 3.2.5).

•

Article II, Section 5: The board must meet quarterly unless given an annual exception by the
President of the Synod (LCMS Bylaw 1.5.3).

•

Article II, Section 8: In (a) and (c), the commission assumes that the boldfaced language is intended
to be struck out.

•

Article VI, Section 8: The asset disposition language required by LCMS Bylaw 1.5.3.6 (which is
to be included in the most fundamental governing document of the endowment fund) should
indicate that, in the case of the non-existence of the district, the proceeds should devolve to The
Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod. Donor restrictions would at that time be dealt with under
applicable regulations.

•

Article VII: The synodwide conflict-of-interest policy, more extensive than the one specified, must
be implemented (LCMS Bylaw 1.5.2).

•

Article VIII: Such amendments need to be reviewed and approved in advance by the LCMS
Commission on Constitutional Matters (LCMS Bylaw 3.9.2.2.3 [a]).

•

The relationship language required in LCMS Bylaw 1.5.3.6 needs to be included in the most
fundamental governing document of the endowment fund.

•

The articles of incorporation of the endowment fund (if such exist separate from these bylaws) have
not been examined by the commission for compliance with the relationship and asset disposition
language requirements of LCMS Bylaw 1.5.3.6 and 2016 Res. 9-02A.

The district is thanked for sending its documents for review.
125. Bylaw 2.13.2 (Restricted Status) Questions (18-2871)
By a December 20, 2017, letter, a member of the Synod asked several questions of the commission related
to restricted status (Bylaws 2.13.2–2.13.3.1). Before addressing the questions asked, the Commission notes
the purpose of restricted status: Restricted status is intended to be a temporary step taken by the district
president while he conducts an investigation to determine if the alleged conduct rises to the level of
expulsion from the Synod under Article XIII, or until the matter is resolved, at which point the restricted
CCM Minutes – February 2, 2018 – Page 99