BGCT leaders maintain proposed changes won’t narrow participation_101804

Posted: 10/15/04

BGCT leaders maintain proposed
changes won't narrow participation

By Marv Knox

Editor

Reorganization of the Baptist General Convention of Texas would not “narrow the tent” of participation, BGCT leaders insisted.

The proposal is part of a yearlong process to chart the convention's course well into the 21st century. If approved, the BGCT would undergo its most significant change in about 50 years.

The BGCT Executive Board overwhelmingly approved a set of mission, vision, values and priority statements at its regularly scheduled fall meeting Sept. 28. But board members asked for more time to consider reorganizing the convention's structure. They will take up that issue in a called meeting Oct. 26 in Dallas.

The reorganization would decrease the size of the Executive Board from 234 members to less than 100.

Currently, each of the BGCT's 114 affiliated associations has at least one member on the Executive Board. The new system would divide the state into 30 geographical sectors of 50,000 resident church members. Each sector would get three board members.

The reorganization also would eliminate the convention's two coordinating boards, which act as liaisons to the BGCT's schools and human-welfare ministries; its two commissions, which give direction to Executive Board staff programs; and the Administrative Committee, which serves as the convention's finance, personnel and review committee.

Those functions would be assigned to new Executive Board committees, which would meet for two days three times a year.

During the September Executive Board meeting, members expressed several concerns with and questions about the proposed reorganization. Several convention leaders addressed those issues in a post-meeting conference call:

Would reorganization “narrow the tent” of participation among Texas Baptists?

No, responded Wesley Shotwell, vice chairman of the Executive Board, a member of the team that drafted the reorganization documents and pastor of Ash Creek Baptist Church in Azle.

“We need to change the paradigm of what it means to parti-cipate in the convention. Participation is not necessarily a function of governance,” he explained.

“Up to now, we've defined participation as serving on the Executive Board, a coordinating board, a commission or an institutional board. But participation should not be determined by how many people are involved in decision-making, but how many are involved in missions and ministry. We are broadening the tent by allowing Texas Baptists to be more involved in missions and ministry.”

Albert Reyes, the convention's first vice president and president of Baptist University of the Americas in San Antonio, agreed.

“By restructuring, we have an opportunity to create new possibilities for participation,” he said. “We will redefine what it means to participate.”

Another avenue to participation is involvement in BGCT institutions, Reyes added.

“There are plenty of opportunities to participate in leadership roles in the 23 institutions affiliated with the BGCT,” he said. “Plus, Texas Baptists will be able to serve on advisory councils and development councils,” which will provide specialized guidance but not governance oversight to convention work.

“Most institutional leaders would welcome folks who might not have access to governance. Institutions also are easier to plug into. They're spread throughout the state. People can participate with institutions close to where they live.”

Texas Baptists need to remember governance is merely a means to an end, stressed Bob Fowler, chairman of the BGCT Administrative Committee and a lay member of South Main Baptist Church in Houston.

“We're not restructuring the convention for the benefit of the governance, but we're restructuring the governance so the convention will work better,” Fowler said.

“The object of the convention is not to get people to participate in governance, but to involve them in missions and ministries. … The governance helps it happen.”

How will ethnic involvement be impacted by reorganization?

John Ogletree, the Executive Board's chairman and pastor of First Metropolitan Baptist Church in Houston, noted the new structure actually should ensure more representative involvement.

“Even though the Executive Board will be smaller, it will be more inclusive,” he said. For example, members of the convention's nominating committee will be able to set goals for including Hispanic, African-American and Asian-American representation that actually reflect those groups' proportion of the convention.

“Our representation from 30 sectors allows us to be more inclusive of ethnics than ever before,” Shotwell said. “One of the systemic problems we've had is the fact we have had representation from associations where it's impossible to get ethnic representation like we need. … We want to make it a policy that 30 percent of the Executive Board ought to be ethnic.”

Reorganization “gives us an opportunity to reflect the way our state is changing,” Reyes said. “It gives us an opportunity to witness that we are an inclusive group of Baptist Christians. We don't just talk about it; we do it. We will have a very bright future.”

Would rural areas of the state–such as West Texas–be under-represented in a reorganized Executive Board structure?

BGCT Executive Director Charles Wade said he is encouraged by the distribution of Executive Board membership revealed on an early draft of a map that divides the state into the 30 sectors.

“When you look at the way these sectors fall out, the percentages of people who will be coming from the more rural areas are similar to the percentages now,” he said. “It's not exactly the same, and there is some reduction, but it is not significant.

“Obviously, the sectors reflect the urban population centers, but we've always had high representation from those areas.”

Could reorganization make selection of Executive Board members political?

The process for selection will not change, Shotwell said, noting, “The Executive Board membership still will be nominated to the convention by a nominating committee, just like now.”

BGCT President Ken Hall urged cautious realism in use of the word “political.”

“We always have been a people who used process to elect our leaders, whether it's board members, committees or officers,” said Hall, president of Buckner Baptist Benevolences. “There have always been people talking to each other, making decisions. I don't see that changing from what historically has gone on in the convention.

“Granted, at times we probably have gone to extremes. … But the way we will arrive at who will be our leaders will be the way we've always done it–through our people. Accountability increases confidence the process is working.”

Wade added: “The thing that has always protected us still will be in place. The president will act alongside the two vice presidents in all appointments, and the Executive Board chair will work in concert with the vice chair. So, what you have is input from a board that's elected by the convention and from officers who are elected every year.

“You get current reflection of where the convention is by its officers and a more time-tested view from the Executive Board, whose members may serve two three-year terms. This creates balance.

“It's important that we honor the messengers (to the annual sessions) and the right of the convention to make its decisions. The voice of the people can be heard.”

Hall pointed out the reorganization process itself illustrates a desire not to politicize. “We worked with the system currently in place,” he said. “We used our people–staff, volunteers, board members and officers. The Executive Board will have heard and considered three separate reports. From the beginning, we have reported to the people through the Baptist Standard. And the messengers to the convention will consider the proposals.”

What about the possibility of concentrating power in the Executive Board, since its committees will do the work currently managed by the coordinating boards, commissions and Administrative Committee?

“Under our current system, entities–such as the coordinating boards and commissions–that make decisions don't really have the responsibility for those decisions, and the Executive Board has the responsibility but does not have the opportunity to make informed decisions,” Shotwell said. “These changes will give the people with the responsibility the opportunity to make informed decisions.”

Ogletree agreed. “In the new structure, we'll have a more informed and involved Executive Board,” he said. “The accountability will sweep through the state.”

While the Executive Board will not “control” the BGCT's 20-plus institutions, Hall predicted, the proposed system would improve governance functions at all levels.

“Our current system is cumbersome. It allows for confusion that doesn't need to exist,” he said, noting it has functioned as well as it has because of the quality of leaders through the years. “To act quickly and appropriately, we need a system that is fine-tuned and efficient.”

Fowler affirmed that assessment, illustrating with the way the Administrative Committee and Executive Board currently interact.

“Although we're technically a committee of the Executive Board, we operate essentially independently in two ways–hiring and salary administration of the Executive Board staff and allocating discretionary spending outside the convention budget. …

“The Administrative Committee has taken on governance outside the Executive Board and has succeeded because we've had lots of good people working on this through the years. But in terms of the Executive Board's responsibility according to our governance documents, it has abdicated control to the Administrative Committee, which does not have legal responsibility.”

Shotwell noted the proposed reorganization will divide financial and personnel oversight. Separate finance and audit committees will deal with those issues, and a new executive committee will be responsible for personnel.

How can the Executive Board offer the level of oversight now provided by the two coordinating boards and the two commissions?

The current system is inconsistent, Hall noted, pointing out the Christian Education Coordinating Board provides some budget-setting guidance, while the Human Welfare Coordinating Board has “zero budgetary responsibility for the institutions.”

The organizational structure–which provides institutional oversight through an Executive Board committee, will bring consistency to the process, he predicted.

And a new two-day format for Executive Board meetings will provide the board's committees with more time for focus on the BGCT's institutions than the coordinating boards' meetings now offer, Shotwell and Wade said.

The expanded format also would strengthen the Executive Board, Wade added.

“We currently meet from 9:30 a.m. to 1 or 2 p.m. without lunch and only one break, and the members do not have an opportunity to get to know one another, to really understand the issues and to discuss them,” he described.

“Executive Board members are wonderful people. It is a testimony to their quality that they are willing to serve. But the opportunity they have to interact is very limited. These changes would correct that and create a better dynamic for governing and creative thinking as they have time to pray and talk with one another and plan for the future.”

The overall reduction in number of meetings also will benefit Executive Board staff, Shotwell said. “Instead of preparing for and going to meetings, they will be able to be in the field.”

What is the importance of reorganization to the convention's new mission, vision, values and priority statements?

“The better we can develop our governance model, the more effective we are going to be in fulfilling all we described in the statements,” Wade said. “To have the Executive Board organized to assist us will be invaluable.

“I don't want to suggest nothing will be done if we don't adopt this model. We will continue to work. But it does matter what we do.

“In the past, as we made statements and priorities, no one has been specifically charged with holding all of us accountable to get these things done.”

Hall noted accountability would be widespread. “It is extremely critical to note that this affords more accountability–not just to (Executive Board) staff, but to our institutions and all our constituencies. We're all more effective if we're accountable.”

Will the BGCT staff be reorganized and deployed, whatever the outcome of the governance vote?

“Yes,” Wade said.

How would the transition from one structure to the next occur?

“If the convention votes this, we will use the next year as a transition time,” Wade explained.

“All the coordinating boards and commissions will remain in place, but we will be working in the nominating process to prepare new recommendations. So, if the convention gives final approval in 2005, we will have prepared a list of the 90 members to be on our (reorganized) Executive Board, and we will conclude the work of the commissions and coordinating boards.

“We will institute, beginning in 2006, a new Executive Board and committee structure.

“While we cannot require anyone to resign from the Executive Board, if current members wish not to resign and have terms to complete, we will honor that. But we will institute the new constitution upon its adoption,” at the conclusion of the 2005 BGCT annual session.