LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — April 6–7, 2018, Page 11

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

•

Section I, Page 1, #3: The sentence, “Four laypersons shall be appointed by the Board of Regents
in a non-convention year,” seems to be a vestige of former bylaws; if not, its connection with the
remainder is unclear. Perhaps four here is meant to be a minimum, as on Page 2.

•

The list of members needs to be updated according to LCMS Bylaw 3.10.6.2.

•

Note the prohibition (if any additional board members are appointed in convention years) of Bylaw
3.2.4 [g], that no appointments may be made in the interim between the election of new regents and
their assumption of office, either in a Synod or a district convention year.

•

The board must meet at least quarterly or obtain approval from the President of the Synod (Bylaw
1.5.3).

•

Section I, Page 2: Note the requirement of Bylaw 3.10.6.2 [8], that appointees be approved as
qualified by the Secretary of the Synod and President of CUS.

•

Under D, “A written ballot…,” the commission does not understand the procedure for election of
“two candidates” or its relation to the broader process for election of four or more.

•

Section I, Page 5: Synod’s conflict of interest policies must be adhered to by every agency (Bylaw
1.5.2).

•

Section I, Page 7 and 9: The commission notes that the executive committee is granted expansive
powers that seem to exceed those typically assigned to an executive committee (see limits imposed
in LCMS Bylaw 1.5.3.2, which applies to CUSP as an agency of the Synod).

•

Section 1, Page 11: The commission notes that the president’s apparent authority to confirm
chairmen of board committees, who, in addition, together comprise a significant portion of the
executive committee, may present a substantial conflict, as the president serves under the
governance of, and is responsible to, the board of regents.

The commission has not reviewed the employee, faculty, and student handbooks referenced in toto, though
it has made a cursory review of selected policies dealing with student-faculty grievances, employment
grievances, and harassment, which did not include the appeal process required to be available to faculty
challenging a termination decision. The commission notes that the board of regents and institution are
required to develop policies exhaustive of the list required by the policies of the Concordia University
System, at least inclusive of those topics listed in Bylaw 3.6.6.7. The noted handbooks and other policies
of the university should be reviewed by the institution to ensure that all bylaw- and CUS-required policies
are in place.
153. Northwest District Bylaws Proposed (18-2882)
By a March 28 e-mail, the office of the Northwest District President sent the district’s bylaws, along with
an overture (amending Bylaws 3.3.1 and 3.3.3–5, removing Bylaw 3.3.13, inserting a new Bylaw 3.4.5, and
relocating Bylaws 3.3.11–12) intended to align the district’s bylaws with changes made at the 2016 LCMS
convention, for prior review and approval by the commission. The commission’s review noted the
following points requiring further attention:
•
•

The wording of Bylaw 2.3.2 is of rather uncertain meaning, and should be replaced with the
wording of LCMS Bylaw 4.1.1.2, that the “Bylaws of the Synod shall be primarily the bylaws of
the district.”
Bylaw section 2.4 does not adequately allow for the office of the district president, who is not
merely part of the “district staff” that is under the administration and direction of the district’s board
of directors. The district president is a constitutional officer of the district in his own right, with
ecclesiastical supervisory responsibilities beyond the board’s purview and with duties owed
directly to the convention, to the Synod as a whole, and to its President, in particular. The other
CCM Minutes – April 6–7, 2018 – Page 118