... 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!
what's the point here? Language in section 109.26 is basically unchanged in this bill, except for making the family member eligibility more explicit.
ReplyDeleteWhat matters is section 109.28 which creates specially designated common bonds for deserts and the those below the poverty line. Simple, easy to understand change (at least for most).
Supreme court decision simply affirmed the need for a common bond, which is being defined in the legislation here, and these 2 designations clearly fit in 1 and 2 above. No one is trying to hid the langauge or deceive anyone. It's all there for people to read. In fact, explicitly defining a common bond is better legislation.
Much to do about nothing. This bill simply allows some more counties and a subset of the population.
9:05am Ah the basic "look over there" misleading snake oil which the CCUL has been trafficking over at the Legislature with H.187.
Delete"Section 109.26 is basically unchanged in this bill," ... absolutely not true, a willful deception!
The Supreme Court said a credit union must chose one of the 3 common bond choices... "or, or, or!" Read the Supreme Court opinion - its opinion matters, your mis-opinion doesn't.
H.187 drops the "or, or, or" and would enable CUs to use all three common bond options at once which = OPEN Membership!
Not a "minor change" and a rewrite of the CU law which has been in place since 1915, upheld by the NC Supreme Court in 1981 and rejected by the Legislature as recently as last year with the failure of H410.
Again if open membership is needed, be honest and simply ask the Legislature for it! Let them do their job ... stop the slithering.
It does not enhance the "white hat" image of credit unions
But the CEO says SECU is not pursuing open membership--well maybe just for corporations?
ReplyDelete10:03 pm From the H.187 bill analysis by the UNC School of Government:
Delete"Amend GS 54-109.27 to allow societies and partnerships composed of or controlled primarily by individuals eligible for membership, corporations owned or controlled primarily by eligible individual, and other business entities owned or controlled primarily by eligible individuals may be admitted to membership in the same manner and under the same conditions as individuals."
So read this sl-o-o-wly... with open membership if everyone on the planet is "eligible" to join the credit union, then the stockholders or private owners of every business in America are "eligible"
to join, which means every business and corporation is "eligible" to join... Got it?
Here's the link to the UNC SOG analysis:
https://lrs.sog.unc.edu/bill-summaries-lookup/H/187/2025-2026%20Session/H187
Who ya gonna believe?