Official Workbook PDF page source text

LCMS 2026 Convention Workbook: Reports and Overtures, PDF page 188

2026 Convention Workbook
153
OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS13
would bring circuit formation into line with representation of congregations as parishes in circuit forums, 1 
district conventions, and the vote for President. The latter would have a similar effect, but also impact 2 
circuits that have for other reasons a low ratio of installed pastors to congregations. These results can be 3 
detailed for the task force at some point if there is interest.4 
7. Codependent Bounds for Electoral Circuit Formation (“Relieved Model” )5 
At least one overture has proposed codependent bounds on electoral circuit size, allowing a circuit with a 6 
surplus of confirmed members to exist with a deficit of congregations. The inverse, to allow a circuit with a 7 
surplus of congregations to exist with a deficit of confirmed members, has more potential to address the bulk 8 
of current exceptions. Suppose one such model (of many possible) is defined as follows:9 
A valid electoral circuit shall consist of no fewer than: 10
and
1,500
confirmed 
members
if it has
≤ 7
congregations
1,450 8
1,400 9
1,350 10
1,300 11
4 congregations
if it has
≥ 6000 confirmed 
members
1,250 12
5 ≥ 4500 1,200 13
6 ≥ 3000 1,150 14
7 congregations otherwise 1,100 15
1,050 16
1,000 17
950 18
900 19
850 ≥ 20
While far more complicated than the “rectangular” rule we have today, this “relieved rule” has the benefit of 11
allowing regular “rel ieving” of the membership relieving for circuits well in excess of the number of 12
congregations and, conversely, in the congregation parameter for circuits well in excess of the required 13
number of confirmed members. Figure 8 shows graphically the range of circuits (here, formed using Max-P), 14
targeting 2029 compliance, as described above. This is a mathematically more detailed version of an 15
eminently reasonable specification of electoral circuits of ages past, that “Large congregations shall form 16
small circuits, and small congregations shall form large circuits” (1960 Bylaw 1.51) , allowing the relatively 17
larger circuits, in terms of either congregations or confirmed members, to be relatively smaller in the other 18
Figure 8: 2023 electoral circuits compared to (left ), and Max-P electoral circuits formed using (right), “relieved” model, 
targeting 2029 compliance, by region.
14
dimension. Recall Figure 4, which shows how many of the 2023 exceptions (and potential 2026 and 2029 1 
exceptions, if nothing is done) fall within the “relieved wings” opened by the relaxed model. This approach 2 
has the benefit of not moving the “lower left” corner of the “acceptable domain” (which remains at 7 3 
congregations and 1,500 confirmed members).Note that different regions use the “space” differently.4 
Only 78 % of 2023 circuits are likely to meet present confirmed membership requirements for the 2026 5 
convention, and 69% for 2029 and 59% for 2032(see Table 2). Were current requirements to be replaced with 6 
the “relieved” model (applying the same model of annual change used in Table 2), 88% of 2023 circuits7 
would meet requirements in 2026,21 80% in 2029 (64% non-geographic, 71% ESE, 74% WSW, 83% CEN and 8 
GL, 87% GP), and 71% in 2032  ( 57% WSW, 64% non -geographic, 64% ESE, 72% CEN , 77% GL, 85% GP) . 9 
Considering Max-P formed circuits optimized to deliver maximum representation but targeting compliance 10
in 2029 (compare Table 4) , the relieved model could be used to form an approximate maximum of 593 11
electoral circuits, an increase of 7% relative to those formed “ideally” using current metrics and of 11% 12
relative to actual 2023 circuits. Of these circuits, 90% would likely remain compliant for 2032 (78% of non-13
geographic, 82% ESE, 87% WSW, 88% CEN, 94% GP, 96% GL). 14
The “relieved” model thus has a lower potential for convention growth than any of the alternative models 15
considered in Table 4 except for the not very useful 6 congregation/1500 confirmed member model and a 16
much more stable “ideal,” with a much greater proportion of circuits remaining compliant for the next 17
convention. By offering to accommodate the (numerically) most “reasonable” of the current exceptions for 18
at least the next few conventions, while avoiding the potential for explosive representation growth, this 19
model—complicated though it may be to explain, relative to what we have today—may show some promise.20
A concise statement of the “relieved” rule using a piecewise function would be as follows ( m being the 21
number of confirmed members and c being the number of congregations: 22
𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐4 and 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑐 �
15
00 + 1500(7 −𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) if 4 ≤𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐<7
1500 − 50(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐− 7) if 7 ≤𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐≤ 2 0
850 if 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐> 20
23
8. Basic Contextual Data on the Member Congregations and Pastors in the Circuits of the Synod24
Geographic factors are significant when considering the reasonability of circuit formation. Figure 9 shows, 25
for 2023 visitation and electoral circuits, the distribution, by district, of electoral circuit radii, expressed in 26
21 It is not possible, of course, to apply the relaxed model rule as early as for the 2026 convention, though it could be used a s a guide 
in judging the “reasonableness” of exceptions in bulk.
Figure 9: Minimum radius (miles) of 2023 visitation (left) and electoral circuits (right), by district and region.