LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — March 21–22, 2025, Page 3

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

94. Nebraska District Bylaw Revision, Proposed (25-3055)
By a memorandum of Feb. 27, 2025, the Nebraska District Secretary forwarded for the commission’s
review proposed resolutions to amend the district’s bylaws, these pertaining to the review and verification
process for the Concordia University Nebraska regents elected by the district and to the adjustment of
election procedures. These are approved for presentation to the convention and for adoption. The district is
thanked for sending these for review and asked to send a clean copy of its bylaws as finally adopted.
In a broader review of the bylaws, the commission noted:
•

NEB Bylaw IV A 4 e: While this does not need to be explicit here, the committees need to be
regulated by Synod Bylaws 1.5.3.1–4.

•

Bylaw IV 5 a: The board shall meet not only “at least four (4) times a year” but at least quarterly
(Bylaw 1.5.3).

•

Bylaw IV C 1: Duties should note more clearly the program of official visitation required in Synod
Bylaw 4.4.4. The language of (e), in particular, should be harmonized with that of the Synod bylaw.

•

Bylaw IV C 2 (a–d): These responsibilities of the president may be suggestive of a Policy
Governance approach, in which more than an appropriate amount of the board’s duties may be
delegated to the president.

•

Bylaw IV C 3: With regard to subparagraph (a), Synod Bylaws do not describe the president as
representing the district to the Synod (cf. Bylaw 4.4.2). The president does take part in the Council
of Presidents, where advice and counsel takes place. Subparagraph (c) is of uncertain meaning; cf.
Bylaw 4.1.5’s treatment of “conduct of negotiations with other church bodies.”

•

Bylaw IV E 3: Compare Bylaw 3.3.1.3 (l). The actual publishing of the proceedings is the duty of
the secretary; the president must approve the draft.

•

Bylaw IV E 4: It should be made clear that these are nominating ballots.

•

Bylaws IV E 6 and III C 3 b 4: These provisions seem to conflict on the face as to whether the
secretary is a member of the Constitution Committee, although the purpose of III C 3 b 4 is to set
forth positions on the committee (other than the ex officio secretary) to be elected. It may be best
to restate the subparagraph “For the Constitution Committee (Bylaw IV E 6), two ordained …”

•

Bylaw IV F: It should be made explicit that the treasurer is to be a layperson (Bylaw 4.3.2).

•

Bylaw V B: approval would be more typical language than certification.

•

Bylaw V C: Do the laws of Nebraska, in fact, require approval by the board? This provision could
seem unduly to restrict the freedom of the convention to adjust its bylaws (cf. Bylaw 4.2.1).

•

Bylaw V D 1: The commission questions whether this provision effectively prohibits the
convention from amending bylaw proposals as contemplated in Bylaw 3.9.2.2.3 (b).

The district is thanked for sending its documents for review and encouraged to prepare to address the above
in a future revision of its bylaws.
95. South Wisconsin District Bylaws, Proposed Amendment (25-3052)
By an email of February 14, the South Wisconsin District Office forwarded for the commission’s review a
memorial to amend the district’s Bylaw 1.25 b. In its review, the commission finds the proposed amendment
to be in harmony with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod but suggests that the wording “with elected
representatives of the region, namely, the respective circuit visitors, and members of the district Board of
Directors” or “with the circuit visitors and members of the district Board of Directors representing the
region” may be clearer than that proposed as to the apparently intended definition of those to be consulted.
CCM Minutes – March 21–22, 2025 – Page 70