Principles Based Governance

Principles based governance helps our congregation fulfill our mission statement (Know Christ, Live Christ, and Make Christ Known) by working well together through appropriately delegated responsibility.  A set of clear principles (see below) structure the work of the governing board—a 7-member elected representation from the congregation. The governing board listens to and represents the congregation, guides the operations of the church through policies and limitations, and facilitates future planning.  The governing board delegates operational responsibility to the staff, held accountable through one (or more) operational authority (a pastor or executive director). This gives our pastors, staff, and volunteers freedom to carry out their work, supporting that work with regular checks and limitations that ensure responsibilities are being met.

Principles based governance will help our congregational membership focus more on mission and ministry.  It will also smooth out operational decisions and enhance our ability to do future planning.  Instead of having multiple groups competing for operational influence, this governance provides a clear structure of responsibility for the voters, the governing board, the pastor and staff, and the volunteer members of the ministry.  This will also protect the operational integrity and accountability of the church.

The pastor is responsible for making sure the church’s operations get done, not for doing every job himself. He leads a team of staff and volunteers who take responsibility for their areas and report back to him. He follows up and remains accountable to the board for the results.

Having a clear understanding of who he answers to can also save him time. For this work, he answers to one board with agreed, written expectations, rather than several groups giving separate instructions. He does not need to attend every team meeting or seek repeated approval for decisions already entrusted to him.

The board supports him by listening to and representing the congregation’s voice, guiding operations through policies and limitations, and facilitating future planning. Sharing the work with the staff and volunteers and simplifying decision-making help protect time for preaching, teaching, and caring for people.

The board serves the congregation, not the other way around. The board must listen to members and answer to the congregation for its work. The board would not run the church’s everyday ministries, but rather guides pastor through policies and limitations. Pastors and staff would make operational decisions that align with those policies and limitations, relying also on input from advisory committees and congregation members.

Absolutely. Listening to members is an essential part of the board’s job, not an optional extra. Conversations, small groups, townhalls, and surveys can help the board understand what our church family and neighbors need. In fact, this model of governance intentionally cultivates more of the congregation’s voice and ministry engagement.

Clear expectations, regular reports, and follow-through. The pastor regularly reports to the governing board on the operational work of the congregation, demonstrating how that work remains faithful to the policies and limitations set by the board. The board checks those reports and follows up when something needs correction. The board also has rules for its own conduct and answers to the congregation.

The voters would continue to approve the annual budget. Spending would follow clear written limits, and the board would receive regular reports showing money received and spent. Regular independent audits would provide an additional check of the financial records. The auditor would not be a board member or someone who manages the church’s money. The board would receive the findings and follow up on any problems. These checks help protect the congregation’s gifts and the people entrusted to handle them.

Our LCMS confessions and our mission remain at the center. The purpose is to support the people who teach, lead worship, visit members, care for families, and serve our neighbors. We want to strengthen that work and make room for new opportunities.

In this model, the Board of Elders would focus on caring for our church family alongside the pastor: praying with people, visiting members, helping with worship, and supporting the pastor and his family. The governing board would handle formal oversight of the pastor’s responsibilities. This gives Elders a clear role centered on relationships and spiritual care.

There would be more opportunities to serve through short-term projects that fit your gifts and schedule, without committing to a one- to three-year board term. Each project would have a clear goal, a set time frame, and a way to tell whether the goal was achieved. You would know from the start what you’re being asked to do and when your commitment ends.

The ten principles work together to clarify responsibility, support ministry, and maintain accountability.

1. The board serves the congregation. Its authority comes from the voters, and it remains accountable to them. Listening to the congregation is an essential part of its work.

2. The board is responsible for governance. It guides the church through policies and limitations, delegates operational responsibility, and remains accountable for the responsibilities it delegates.

3. The board speaks with one voice. Decisions belong to the board as a whole, not to individual members. Its agreed direction is expressed in writing rather than through separate instructions from different members.

4. The board identifies what the ministry should accomplish. Written “Ends” policies describe the intended benefits of our ministry, whom it serves, and the resources and priorities associated with those benefits.

5. The board puts its own responsibilities in writing. Policies explain how the board conducts its work, delegates authority, and holds itself and its operational leadership accountable.

6. The board sets limitations without taking over operations. It identifies practices that are unacceptable, leaving the pastor and staff freedom to determine how best to carry out the work within those limitations.

7. Policies move from general to specific. The board begins with broad expectations and adds detail only as needed. The purpose is to provide clarity without unnecessarily restricting ministry.

8. Each responsibility has a clear point of accountability. Operational leadership is ordinarily delegated through the pastor. The board does not separately assign the same authority to other people or groups.

9. Those given responsibility may reasonably interpret the policies. The pastor applies the policies governing operations, while the board chair applies those governing the board’s work. Neither is limited to the personal preferences of individual board members.

10. Accountability is measured against the written expectations. Regular reports and other checks demonstrate whether the intended outcomes are being achieved within the limitations. These expectations provide the basis for evaluating the pastor’s operational responsibilities.

Yes. The governing board establishes the expected outcomes and limitations. The pastor and staff determine how to accomplish the work and demonstrate that those expectations are being met. The following are illustrations, not policies Faith has adopted.

Christian education: An Ends policy might state that children, youth, and adults grow in their understanding of Scripture and the Christian faith. The pastor, staff, and education volunteers would develop classes, select materials, and prepare teachers. The pastor’s report could include participation, examples of what participants are learning, and needs that remain to be addressed. The board would review progress toward the policy, rather than choose the curriculum or plan the classes. The congregation could also provide feedback through designed mechanisms such as conversation, small groups, townhalls, and surveys.

Budget and spending: A limitation might prohibit spending beyond the annual budget approved by the voters. The pastor and staff would manage ministry expenses within that budget and the written financial limitations. Reports would compare actual income and spending with the budget. If a limitation were exceeded, the pastor would explain what happened and present a plan for correction. The board would evaluate that response and follow up, rather than take over paying bills or approving routine purchases.

Hiring an office employee: A limitation might prohibit hiring without verifying qualifications and providing clear, written job responsibilities. The pastor and appropriate staff would conduct the search and select the employee within the approved budget. A monitoring report would demonstrate that the hiring followed the written requirements. The board would check that the requirements were met, rather than function as the hiring committee. The staff could form an advisory committee of qualified members of the congregation to sit in on the interviews.

Our current model involves many boards and committees with responsibilities for church operations. When those responsibilities overlap or are not clearly defined, important ministry decisions can take considerable time as questions move between groups. It can be difficult to know who makes a decision, who carries it out, and who is accountable for the result.

Faith has also struggled for many years to fill all its board chair positions, with many remaining vacant for extended periods. Long-term board commitments can make participation difficult for members who could otherwise serve through shorter, more specific projects that fit their gifts and availability.

Each board naturally gives particular attention to the ministry entrusted to it. While that focus is valuable, the structure can give more attention to the needs of individual ministries than to the priorities of the congregation as a whole. It also asks members who are well qualified to lead a particular ministry to take on church-wide governance, which requires different preparation and a broader scope of responsibility.

Principles-based governance distinguishes these responsibilities so that pastors, staff, and volunteers can focus on leading and carrying out ministry. The governing board listens to and represents the congregation, guides the operations of the church through policies and limitations, and facilitates future planning. The purpose is to build on the faithful service of our leaders and volunteers, make participation more accessible, and help ministry decisions move forward with clear responsibility and a shared focus on Faith’s mission.

The decision to adopt a governance model belongs to the congregation, with the guidance and participation of our pastors. Governance was discussed with the pastor we have called during his interview, and he expressed strong support for this approach. Continuing the work now gives our congregation time to consider the model and develop clear responsibilities and expectations for our pastors, staff, and volunteers. Our goal is to provide a structure that supports Faith’s mission and ministry, both during this pastoral transition and for the years ahead.

Yes, please do! Talk with a Governance Committee member: Elissa Grotefendt, Bill Fuller, Tom Geyer, Joe Miller, Rick Schmidt, or David Wright, about this approach. We welcome your questions, ideas, and honest concerns. We will discuss new questions together and publish our agreed answers here so everyone receives the same information. Writing down our answers keeps us clear and consistent without closing the door to conversation.