About That N.C. Supreme Court Decision On "Open Membership"...

   ... best for all to obey the law!

The N.C. Supreme Court ruled on the question of common bond and open membership at SECU in 1981. [read full opinion here]. Excerpts below:

✷ "The issue presented by this appeal is whether the field of membership of the Credit Union as set forth in the amended bylaw possesses a "common bond" as required by G.S. 54-109.26."

✷ G.S. 54-109.26: "Membership" defined. (a) The membership of a credit union shall be limited to... (b) [1] groups having a common bond of similar occupation, association or interest, [2] or groups who reside within an identifiable neighborhood, community, or rural district, [3] or employees of a common employer, and members of the immediate family of such persons." 

✷ "The language of G.S. 54-109.26 is the basic source for determining the meaning of and the legislative intent behind the requirement of a common bond.  Unless the membership requirements of a credit union fall within one of the three specified categories, the "common bond" requirement has not been met and the bylaw governing membership must fall. "

✷ "In light of our decision above, it is unnecessary for us to address petitioners' contention that the Commission's approval of the amendment was in violation of the equal protection clause of the United States and North Carolina Constitutions and in violation of the provision against unlawful discrimination in taxation contained in Article V, section 2 of the North Carolina Constitution."

  CEOs Brady and Schline claim taxation would cost SECU members - you and me - $40 million a year"! [see 4/3/2025 video here pleading for support on tax issue]. 

Is open membership at SECU worth that $40 million yearly cost to the existing member-owners of SECU?  

😎 Would you like to vote on it??

  Here's what the N.C. Supreme Court specifically said about open membership and taxation in the opinion: 

✷ "If the meaning of "common bond" were broadened to the extent allowed by that court, then the constitutional issue would have to be examined anew. There must be a discernible justification for the preferential treatment granted credit unions in the absence of a meaningful common bond limitation."**

** Weaseling will have consequences!

H.187: Open Membership -The Elephant In The Room ...

Had mentioned in a prior post [link] that CEO Dan Schline, of the Carolinas' Credit Union League (CCUL), was running a "widows and orphans" hustle within H.187 "Credit Union Update".  Some folks asked what's that?

😎 A "widows and orphans clause" is used in politics to distract attention from the unsavory parts of proposed legislation one is pushing.  In addition to phrases which purport to protect widows and orphans; you often also pack in clauses which support veterans and the flag, praise Motherhood and apple pie, salute God and Country, and promise to "level the playing field". If you're in North Carolina, you always try to throw in support of NASCAR and BBQ for good measure!

The idea is to try and "set up" your opponents as heartless, greedy, selfish folks. The type of people, who not only won't support your "fair and reasonable" bill; but, also the type of opponents who would put widows and orphans out on the street, " diss" God and Country, hate your Mother and apple pie, eat quiche and don't know who drove the "#3" car. Got it?

😎 Last year with the failed H.410 "CU Updates" bill, CCUL's widows and orphans hustle read as follows:

✱ Proposed language from failed H.410: "... any credit union organized under Articles 14A to 14L of this Chapter may also permit membership of the following located in this State: (1) Individuals and families that earn income at or below the federal poverty threshold. (2) Women-owned or minority-owned businesses. (3) Under-served areas, as defined by the Federal Credit Union Act."

There you go! with Dan Schline and the CCUL hoping to imply that opponents of H. 410 are against 1) poor folks, 2) women, 3) minorities, and of course  4) folks living in "under-served areas" - those famous "financial deserts" - which upon closer inspection are mainly national and state parks, bogs, swamps. and wildlife refuges.

✱ Proposed language in the "new" H.187 CU Update bill - that "widows and orphans" gambit - has changed to: "To facilitate the provision of financial services to under-served populations and communities, a credit union organized under Articles 14A to 14L of this Chapter may also permit membership of the following located in this State:
(1) Individuals and families that earn income at or below the federal poverty threshold.
(2) Persons residing in census tracts in North Carolina where the center of population, as defined by the United States Census Bureau, is more than 8 miles from a bank branch, as defined in G.S. 53C-1-4."

         .... so once again while our State Legislators are misled with another "widow and orphans" hustle ...

        

😎 Mr. Schline within the H.187 bill is still trying to pick North Carolina's pockets with language which also: 

1. Removes all limitations on individual membership in North Carolina credit unions, 
2. Adds unlimited membership and commercial lending for state, regional and national corporations.
   
3. Authorizes higher risk investment of member funds outside of North Carolina.
   
4. Encourages the export of jobs and capital outside of North Carolina. 
   
5. Further dismantles member-owner rights and controls over N.C. credit unions.
   

.... while laughing at us and the State Legislature... all the way to the "new/new" bank!