Dr. Carlton Byrd Receives Nomination for Southwest Region Conference SDA President

Dr. Carlton Byrd has received the nomination for president of Southwest Region Conference of SDA. Dr. Byrd is a conference native currently serving as pastor of Berean SDA Church and speaker/director for Breath of Life Ministries in Atlanta, GA. He is the former pastor of Belfort SDA Church in Houston, TX and has received recognition for his leadership in the development of the fastest growing church in the North American Division. This nomination must be ratfied by the delegates at constituency meeting. It is important that we educate ourselves so that we can make an informed decision at this upcoming election. Click Here to review his resume.

You may also view the full Nominating Committee Report here. In summary, there is very little change administratively other than the presidential nominee.

I believe that Dr. Byrd is a phenomenal worker and pastor however, my question is will Dr. Byrd remain in our conference long enough for us to benefit from his expertise? I think this is a valid question being that he is a highly qualified and popular individual internationally.

Also how will he address some of the issues discussed in the blog?

Pastoral Development and Advocacy
Low Morale Amongst Workers
Our Deteriorating Campground
Youth Oriented Issues and Programs
Strategic Plan

The media below is Dr. Byrd’s sermon on “The Power of God’s Word.”


About The Forgotten Shepherdess

Follow me on Twitter @ForgttnSheprdss
This entry was posted in Church Organization, Constituency Meeting, Pastoral Advocacy and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

45 Responses to Dr. Carlton Byrd Receives Nomination for Southwest Region Conference SDA President

  1. snoopdoggy says:

    Are we confusing the summary with the actual strategcic plan?How can we vote the plan based soley on a summary?Too many loose ends and unanswered questions like:What?How?Why?What will it cost?Who will implement it?What will it cost?How will its effectiveness be measured?Just to mention a few.


  2. Me says:

    If you feel Dr. Byrd needs also new blood surrounding him, all you have to do is not election the other officers and force the commitee to come out with another nomination.. It’s simple people


    • Ain't too proud to beg says:

      ME: Thank you for your perceptive advice. Really, it may be all that anyone can do if someone wants new blood.


  3. Marian says:

    iI’m concerned with all the verbage about the nominating committee. Weren’t these people chosen as representatives from their areas – by the vote of the organizing committee???? If you picked someone from your church who did not have the ability to think and speak, step up, take responsibility for your choices.

    I have a concern about the “old way”. I have been to a number of constituency meetings where the president and other officers were voted in by “those who were left behind”. The only people who were still there before the benediction. I always felt this was imappropriate because I have wondered if there was a quorum to vote at that time. I haven’t heard anyone discuss that!

    Since I am confident most member of SWRC operate in the digital age (this blog could not be the force it is if not), let’s not hold on to what’s old just because we’ve always done it that way. Organizations who die are the ones who use that phrase.

    I think we should pray for Pentecost and stand back and see what the Lord can and will do! He’s still in charge.


    • dolomite9 says:

      I understand that once a quorum has been declared by the chair then you can begin voting and if people leave before the meeting is over the quorum has already been declared and is still in effect even whithout a majority still present.
      there is something fishy going on here with this nominating committee.


  4. dolomite9 says:

    If you are on the gc committee can you be voted to go on the ex committee?


  5. dolomite9 says:

    Right now I feel so left behind!


  6. Jonah_77 says:

    They won’t speak up because they know they were hypnotized by Frank, deceived by Dino’s chameleon tongue, and intimidated by Jerry. I have never seen people cower so much.

    And now the new Prez has already been anointed save the oil. This is why we have no strategy. Because the same people keep trying to be king makers. Furthermore, the ministers just roll over and get leftbehind. You will regret this moment if you don’t take a stand!

    What say you


    • Sister-girl says:

      Jonah- TFS, and others—– I just went back to the SWRC website, to review Dr. Byrd’s Resume and I did not see it, I could be mistaken, but if that is the case, is someone trying to send a message?


  7. Bystander says:

    I would like to request that someone from the Nominating Committee speak up. You do not have to identify yourself, you can just put in anonymous or make up some name. There are a lot of people reading this blog daily and since they are talking about how you all did your job – I would like to know if there is someone who will just say we did our job fairly, or to the best of our ability, given what we had to work with. If you feel that you were not just a select group for a select purpose then say so. I know some of the people and I am not impressed they would promote unfairness.


  8. Jonah_77 says:

    Lets assume that FALCON is all but in. The questions on this blog are related to transition and to change. If the people don’t believe that change is going to come they should reject it entirely or vote the people who are incumbent out. You may have a younger President surrounded by self interested politicians, who are also Pastors looking to retire. One thing I may point out is that while I don’t agree with the tactics I do believe in civility. When it is your time to talk, speak up and be Christian.

    However, the people who will be the most vocal are those listed in the blog stories who stacked the committee with “sure” votes. They will be walking around trying to affect change, demanding a recount when things may not go their way. Folks, this is not Florida! We have a duty to help this conference and to reject the wages of sin. To me, it is sinful for leaders to misrepresent, conceal, and strong arm constituents in efforts to secure their location or be elevated to a position of power. Sinful.

    The Strategic Plan was poorly handled, poorly disseminated, and improperly vetted. If you know anything about building and leading an organization you will properly vet anyone who is offering their ideas for your organization. Don’t be get hoodwinked again and bamboozled and ran a muck by people who are seeking their own interest. I remember when this blog started and now it is a real voice. Let your voices be heard at the meeting and don’t allow yourselves to be drowned out. Also, what are the other options. Sounds like “none of the above” might be the choice. I hope not.

    What Say You



    I am one of the members thrown off the Executive Committee and I want you to know that I can’t believe that person Left Behind was telling the turth. HE TOLD THE WHOLE TRUTH!

    The person you might consider to go back on the commitee is the one person who stood up for ministers and members, whom I watched that made great statements regarding ministers and members. He really cared.


    • Welcom Please Think: I am not asking for names but can you be a little more specific there may be several ministers on the executive committee. And also, having been removed do you feel like this was more of a political move because of your philosophies or do you think reps from your area wanted to give someone else the opportunity?


  10. Sister-girl says:

    You know what, I am just stunned! I am going back to read those stories left behind wrote. Those events are beginning to have a familiar ring. Like I said before, I have been around a long time and every election I have witnessed- get the President and he does the getting of everyone else and very rarely does he not get his request and it usually works that way in the real world. Left behind and Jonah appreciate yall clearing this up and thank you Dynamite(dolomite) for showing us what seems so far to be a plan that is unfolding! What was the point of not having the small committee not meet while the constituency is meeting? It seems in the long run, this may be more time-consuming! The Resume seems very Impressive, and I am assuming we have an agreement. But would not it have been a system of fairness to post a top 3-5 Resumes and this is who we chose, because people might be understanding of that, since there are few who could stack up with this one? Im just saying looks like a plan was in place to me and I am a skeptic! If this constituency can’t see it some strange stuff going on. I think these ministers know what they are talking about and it is beginning to look like a few are making decisions for the many and that is what I object to. I have no problem with the nomination, in fact, I support it. I just don’t like unfairness. That’s like you working on your job 20 years and someone from the outside comes in without giving you even a chance to be considered. That’s what we have been talking about. You don’t know what other degrees your own workers have and what other experience they have because you (small committee) don’t have their Resumes and you didn’t ask because according to what we know your first meeting was Sunday May 1 and you could have posted an announcement on the SWRC FOR 1 week deadline, and meet again Sunday May 8, since we are doing things differently. I am nobody’s fan, I just like FAIR. How yall select would be an outrage on my job. I know this is religious and suppose to be influenced by praying folks, however I still have a little concern. I am a believer in God’s will and I do believe he will have a way to take care of things in the end.






        DR BYRD: If you come up here under the same office staff, administrators and Executive Committee that the Union President has allowed, YOUR MINISTRY HERE IN THE SWRC WILL BE A UP HILL ROAD FOR 4 YEARS!


  11. dolomite9 says:

    My other concern is that the current prez stated that he and the other officers think alike so how is changing president but not secretary and treasurer going to bring about any significant change?The attitude of one of the officers has beenso negative most of the time that it is amazing that they were returned to office!Perhaps aas workers,we shouldn’t ask for an easier load because “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”But for crying out loud let’s give peace a chance and put all the houseworkers back into the field and give the fieldhands a chance to work in the house!Why not come up with a whole new executive committee for a new president with new ideas?What are we afraid of?That we might succeed?A little success would not be fatal to our territory.To be candid,it looks like this committe spent an entire day trying to see how many things and people that they could keep and how to get rid of the prez,ministerial secretary,and the associate treasurer or whatever he does!How can you do that and keep a pokerface about it?I feel like I am in the land of Oz!


    • New Vision 11 says:

      The anonymous writer and dolomite9 are asking the correct questions.If we want to transform this conference into a winning team then this is the time to act. There must be a procedure to refer the list back to the committee prior to the May 22 meeting.
      Does anybody know when the nominating committee meets again? How should these issue be brought to there attention?



        NEW VISION 11: The best way would not be through the nominating committee. Why? They are only going to allow you 2-3 minutes to make a statement. However, if 50-100 delegates asked to speak to the nominating committee, maybe the Union President might see that this is really serious and might encourage the NC to make some changes.

        The best political move would be through the GC rules of order through a motion to send the entire report on the departments, the two administrators and EX Committee back to the NC to be re-worked. Also, go to the microphones and be heard. There is one member of the so called “political party” reponsible for a “stacked” NC, you might know him from the stories as a Chameleon. (Sorry, I ID’d you)

        They need to call people by name such as Pastors who have served for two or three terms as well as lay people. Get rid of the dominant talkers on the EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE who claim they represent you. THEY DON’T. They represent and receive their “orders” from you know who. One person most certainly I am told was disrepectful to the current President. We don’t need that either. If the nominee stands, which I am hearing conflicting information concerning his coming, doesn’t need the same two-faced people that in the end did the current President in (whom I don’t support, but deserved a fair process as one blogger pointed out). The same power hungry people if they remain will do the same thing to the nominee if he comes.

        No offense…just want to call it straight!


      • @Please think about this: Thanks and Welcome to the discussion. You were quick to the point I have nothing to add.


    • Wow dolomite that’s good stuff. Interesting information.


  12. My question is…Where is Jonah_77?


  13. Anonymous says:

    I reviewed the nominating committee report and I have a couple of questions. I wonder why they are nominating the incumbent Secretary and Treasurer? If SWR really wants the quality of change that Dr Byrd has the potential to create why saddle him with the same minds as the previous administration? The ex-committee seems to be a heavy carry over too!
    New wine in old wine skins!!


  14. Bystander says:

    I Have been standing by following this blog and a longtime member of this conference. My question is, Is this a good change or a questionable change and why? Valid points have been raised regarding committment to this conference. Is this the real deal or is this the hook-up? if you are a member of this conference say yes or no. If yes why? if no why?


    • Great question Bystander!


    • ANNONYMOUS says:

      Bystander: You have asked a valid series of questions that all of us need to answer.

      We need to look at these questions like this:

      If you are a supporter of the current President than change would be bad, If you are not for change…than it is good.

      From my view, the current President, who has had the longest tenure of any President thus far has been in long enough. He reached the point that he couldn’t take sound advice from the senior men. So, if all goes through he got his just “deserves.” He hurt many good senior men who he could have helped in their last days as ministers before they are faced with retirement. He should have broken up the “Pack.”

      On the other hand, I am skeptical about the emergence of the Frat Brothers. This would include the nominee. An alliance was formed by some ministers and lay people to bring the nominee here. In big “D” an alliance was formed to stack the nominating committee as seen in the composition of the Ex Com. What you need to know about this is that it was all planned by the “Pack.”

      WHO WILL BE THE LOSERS? The good members who love God but hate this kind of “bad politics.” Some members of the STRAT COM were also apart of this alliance.

      Now, I do not have any problem with the change or the new nominee, but I have much to say if their exsts political payoffs. I hope the nominee is smarter than this!

      The only thing that I can see that would stop all of this is for the constituents to wipe out the current officers and the departments and allow the new president to bring in fresh and clean blood. Maybe he’ll give some guys who havn’t had the chance to serve a go.

      One last thing…look at the ex com…the guys and girls that did some real good but did not go along with their political agenda the Pack Affect wiped them out. This means some of the people who don’t like their politics won’t be heard. DID THE UNION PRESIDENT ALLOW SUCH AN IMBALANCE? WAS HE THAT BLIND?


      • dolomite9 says:

        in fairness to the union prez,his office is up for election next week so he cannot afford to alienate any votes so he wouldn’t dare rock the boat until after his reelection!Perhaps someone else should have chaired this meeting!


  15. ANNONYMOUS says:

    Right you are…Marian.

    I am glad that someone is seeing the point. I feel that there is something that the compilers wish to hide OR not reveal for the sake of limiting discussion just to get it voted WITH LITTEL RESISTENCE. (Probably political betrayal on both ends…consequently PAYBACK…how shameful)

    At one of the EX Comm. reliable sources have revealed that it was approved by that Committee BUT the Secretary of the Union recommended to the President that it should be voted at the constituency meeting before it would be sent out as a doable STRAT PLAN. I APPLAUD THE SECRETARY FOR SUGGESTING THIS.

    REMEMBER WHAT SOMEONE ON THIS BLOG SAID SOME TIME AGO…Look at the people who are involved, ask, what is their interest? And what do they want?

    Now go and look at the present composition of the EX COM. IT IS QUITE REVEALING!

    In fairness, they did take the plan around to the Lay Advisory meetings and the short version was read and open for discussion I am told. I know the chair was at these meetings. (Don’t quote me)



  16. dolomite9 says:

    We got our packets finally on 5/2/11 but still no sign of the strategic plan time is running out so how valid is it if we don’t get time enough to review it?I see trouble in the air!


  17. Craig says:

    The question that Dr. Byrd must ask himself as he considers this field is: Can these dry bones live again? Yes. they can preach the Word!


    • ANNONYMOUS says:

      I think Dr. Byrd has the potential of doing a great job here in our field. However, he still must solve some of the main issues that are some what a riddle, like…marginalizing workers that produce dead men. The dry bones story was a short story of Israel’s condition of bad leadership.

      Yes, preach the word my good friend Craig as you do so eloqently, BUT produce good, sound and righteous policies. AND as you commented so graciously Craig, don’t follow the paths of past REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATIONS!



    • dolomite9 says:

      Craig come on back to swrc!


    • Craig please email me a blog topic with that title I would love to hear what you have to say I think you get a lot of readers with this topic! forgottenshepherdess@gmail.com


  18. Marian says:

    I’m concerned with the discussion about the strategic plan. It was sent out and PASTORS were supposed to disseminate and allow for discussion with ALL members. It appears this has not happened throughout the conference. If this hasn’t occurred, then check with your pastor. He does have a responsibility to his members to make them fully aware and allow for discussion PRIOR to the constituency.


    • ANNONYMOUS says:

      Yes Marian you are right and welcome back. I look for your insightful comments when I turn to this blog.

      However consider that the fifty page report has yet to be made available on the web at the swrc website. What you have been given is really a summary. We have not seen how it will be implemented. Some ministers might be confused and are waiting further instructions.

      If one of your goals is to take your pet to the Vet. what methods and time periods have you set? What means will you take to get your pet to the Vet? The answers to such question are suppose to be in any STRAT PLAN.


    • dolomite9 says:

      Marian i am one of the pastor buts i didn’t get a copy of the startegic plan to explain to my churches.So I will call the conference secretary in a few hours and see what is going on!BTW your remarks are so insightful!We need all the help we can get!


    • @Marian you should have received a glossy brochure highlighting the elements of the plan. As soon as that document is available I am going to post it for everyone’s review. I am thinking SWRC is a little tight with this. We are running into the first weekend in May. How can members review this 50 page document in 20 days and really disect it? I am concerned. I thought it would be posted by now.


      • Marian says:

        My understanding was the document was sent to pastors, and YES it is a summary. Since the plan has not been ratified, it was an overview for discussion at the session. I also understand the administration was unwilling to have the committee travel and share in a venue which would allow for more discussion. One of the questions that should be asked at session is what is the implementation plan? What are short term goals, and which ones are long term? What things can be implemented w/o budgetary constraints – therefore with immediacy?

        If the conference votes the strategic plan, then we should all take ownership, not allow whoever is president to make the determination of where the conference goes. Each church makes up the conference, and unless churches develop their own strategic plan which collaborates with the conference plan – we have nothing!


      • @Marian I have noticed some changes on the admin website so they may be making moves to post it soon.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s