Updates & new information

Another appeal to the SRK’s chairman

CCLLC has not been the only one to write to Valde Palola, the chairman of the SRK, on these matters. In a letter dated June 29, 2023, Craig Kumpula, a pastor at the Minneapolis Laestadian Lutheran Church, wrote to Palola directly. It raised many of these same concerns. It, too, was ignored.

Read the letter →

The LLC calls off the October 1 vote — and plans to try again

On September 8, 2026, after being told again by CCLLC that the LLC was not following the law in its attempt to expel CCLLC (see CCLLC’s letter of September 3, 2026), the LLC’s executive director, Arvin Pirness, refused — and continues to refuse — to provide CCLLC the list and contact information for the congregations and their delegates, itself a violation of Minnesota law.

Instead, Mr. Pirness sent an email to the congregation members and delegates, enclosing CCLLC’s letter and stating: “Based on that review, we believe the LLC is satisfying the procedural requirements applicable to the process to date . . . .” (Arvin Pirness email, September 8, 2026.)

Three days later, Mr. Pirness conceded that his prior statement was not true — that the procedure the LLC had commenced was, again, in violation of the law. On September 11 he emailed the delegates once more (still having refused to disclose the contact information of members and delegates that Minnesota law requires), stating: “Upon advice from legal counsel, the special delegate meeting scheduled for October 1, 2026, is cancelled.” (Arvin Pirness email, September 11, 2026.)

Mr. Pirness and the LLC Board also continue to withhold the records CCLLC requested on July 2, 2026, in violation of Minnesota law — records the LLC’s own counsel said would be discussed only “in the event the Delegates do not vote to expel CCLLC.” And CCLLC still awaits any response to its repeated requests — most recently in its September 3, 2026 response — that the LLC state the grounds for the attempted expulsion under the Constitution and Bylaws.

Read CCLLC’s September 3 response →