# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2010_S204
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

204

Seminary and University Education

5-31

To Revise Bylaw 3.8.3.7.2 re Election of College
and University Presidents
Rationale
The Bylaws assign supervision of an institution’s president to
the board of regents. The regents are responsible for establishing
the institution’s priorities, setting its policies, and holding the president accountable for meeting the institution’s objectives. The current
Bylaws prescribe a presidential election process that is dominated by
a search committee structure that is predominantly faculty members,
and do not give the board of regents an appropriate level of leadership in the selection process. Therefore, the following revisions
make the board of regents responsible for leading the presidential
election process.
The current Bylaws prescribe in great detail how the selection
process is to be conducted. Such details are more appropriately established by the board of regents rather than at the Synod level. The
proposed changes simplify the process prescribed by the Synod while
maintaining a legitimate level of participation by the Synod.
Therefore, be it
Resolved, That Bylaw 3.8.3.7.2 be amended by replacing the current bylaw with the following:
3.8.3.7.2 The following process shall govern the selection of a college/university president.
(a)	The board of regents shall inform the Board of University Education
(BUE) that the office of the president is or soon will be vacant and
notify the BUE of the board’s intent, in collaboration with the BUE,
to set the timetable for publication of a request for nominations for
the position of president.
(1) The board of regents shall request that the Board for
University Education authorize the institution to publish
a request for nominations for the position of president.
(2) The board of regents shall request that the Board for
University Education schedule a transition review of the
campus. The review is to provide a report on the state of
the campus for use by the search committee, the board
of regents, and the candidates.
(b) The board of regents shall oversee the process of defining the institution’s needs, describing the desired characteristics of the new
president, and issuing a request for nominations.
(1) A search committee shall be formed that represents the
board of regents, the faculty, and the staff.
(2) The search committee shall prepare a description of the
needs of the institution based on listening forums, the
findings of the Board for University Education’s transition review, and other relevant information.
(3) The search committee shall develop written criteria
that will be utilized by the committee to screen the candidates and will be utilized by the board of regents to
guide the presidential election.
(4) A person designated by the board of regents shall act
as its agent to issue a request for the nomination of
candidates for the presidency of the institution. The
request for nominations shall be submitted to the parties who are authorized to nominate. Candidates may be
nominated by congregations of the Synod, the Board for
University Education, the board of regents, and the faculty of the institution. The request for nominations shall
state when the nominating period closes.
(5) After the nomination period has closed, the agent of
the board of regents shall distribute an announcement
to the congregations of the Synod that lists the names

of nominees who have consented to nomination. The
announcement shall contain contact information to
submit correspondence regarding the nominees, and
provide a reasonable deadline for submitting correspondence. The board of regents shall establish a procedure
for processing correspondence regarding a nominee.
(c) The board of regents shall utilize the work of the search committee
to establish a short list of candidates.
(1) The search committee will provide a report to the board
of regents regarding the qualifications of the candidates
with its observations and recommendations.
(2) The board of regents shall prepare a list of no less than
five candidates and submit that short list to the Executive Director of the Board for University Education.
(d) The short list of candidates shall receive prior approval before the
election.
(1) The executive director of the Board of University Education shall convene a prior approval panel consisting
of the President of the Synod, the district president
serving on the institution’s board of regents, the chair of
the Board for University Education and the chair [or a
representative] of the board of regents of the institution
submitting the list.
(2) The prior review panel shall meet to consider the short
list submitted by the Board of Regents. The panel may
choose to remove names from the list, but only with at
least a three-fourth majority vote.
(3) After the prior approval panel has completed its work,
the Executive Director of the Board for University Education shall transmit the finalized list back to the agent
of the board of regents. If the amended list contains less
than two names, the election process is terminated. The
board of regents shall determine whether it will utilize
the original list of nominees or generate additional
nominations as it resumes the election process.
(e) The reasons for the deletion of a name must be shared in written
form with both the candidate whose name is deleted and the board
of regents’ search committee. The candidate and the board of regents
search committee individually or together have fifteen days to reply
if either or both wish to contest the data or rationale of the decision
of the approval panel. The search committee has thirty days to determine whether or not to re-submit a name.
(f) The board of regents shall elect the president of the college or university using the slate that received prior approval as described
above. The board of regents may require the president-elect to accept or decline within fifteen days.
(g) If the president-elect declines the position, the board of regents is
responsible for resuming the effort to fill the vacancy.

Board of Regents
Concordia University St. Paul, MN
5-32

To Revise Bylaw 3.8.3.7 re College/University
President Responsibilities
Rationale
The LCMS bylaw outlining the responsibilities of presidents at our
LCMS colleges and universities needs to be brought into conformity
with current best practices and also into conformity with our Synod’s
position regarding who is eligible to serve as president.
The current bylaw reflects an era when an LCMS college president
administered a small number of programs for a few hundred students,
with a budget of a few hundred thousand dollars. Today several of
our universities have thousands of students with dozens of programs
and large faculties, and most of the institutions have budgets larger

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 204

4/15/10 2:39 PM