LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — December 1–2, 2023, Page 4

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

•

Policy 4.5.3.1: note apparent repetition and bylaw references needing corrected (3.10.6.2.3 [c]) and
added (Bylaw 3.2.5).

•

Policy 4.5.3.5 should use the name “Standing Committee on Nominations.”

•

Policy 4.6.2.2 doesn’t distinguish between bylaw-required and perhaps implied or even voluntary
consultations.

•

Policy 4.6.3.3 does not seem to have a bylaw warrant.

•

Policy 4.9.1.2: reference should be to Bylaw 3.5.1.

•

Policy 4.12.1.1: the list should now include also Concordia University System.

•

Policy 4.14.1.1 is of uncertain meaning.

•

Policy 4.14.2.2 (h)(1): timing wording is confusing. Does the policy intend to bind a board to the
previous board’s selection of general counsel for a year? (see also Policy 4.18.2.3)

•

Policy 4.14.2.2 (h)(3): what is the effect or consequence of a non-ratification?

•

Policy 4.15.1.2: reference should be to Bylaw 3.3.4.5 as a whole.

•

Policy 4.15.5.1: the “support rate” language is not explained.

•

Policy 4.15.7.3: does the bylaw reference support the policy?

•

Policy 4.15.7.4: does management supervise management?

•

Policy 4.16.1.1 should account for the possibility of a designee.

•

Policy 4.17.1.10 (b)(2)’s reference to Section 5.3.3 should be repaired.

•

Policy 4.17.1.13 should be revised to reflect new CUS scope.

•

Policy 4.18.1.1 could be more clear, especially with reference to “interested parties.”

•

Policy 4.18.1.3 should reference Bylaw 1.2.1 (f) and Policy 4.18.1.4, Bylaw 1.2.1 (v); likewise in
Policies 7.5.1.3 and 4.

•

Policy 4.18.2.4 need not cite its enclosing policy.

•

Policy 4.18.2.7 should cite the procedure in the manual.

•

Policy 4.18.5.3 (c) should reference 4.18.2.

•

Policy 4.18.6.3 would seem to violate Bylaw 1.5.3.3, as the committee to which the power is
delegated is not limited to members of the board.

•

Policy 4.18.6.7 might better read “Corporate Synod”

•

Policy 5.1 (f, g, h) should read “guaranteed by Corporate Synod”

•

Policy 5.2 (a)(2) should likely read “designed” instead of “designated.”

•

Policy 5.3.4.2 is unclear as to whether limits are per transaction or aggregate.

•

Policies 5.3.5.2–3 refer to a signature policy, which is of unclear application.

•

Policy 5.6.1.5 would seem to be limited to records of Corporate Synod; otherwise this may conflict
with Bylaw 3.3.4.10. (See also Policies 6.5.2.1, 3; 6.5.3.7)

CCM Minutes – December 1–2, 2023 – Page 8