We've been taking a look at how SECU has been converting the SECU Annual Meeting from a legal business requirement into a ritual [link], evidently with the full support of North Carolina credit union regulators [link].
Perhaps that's the "new/new" standard in the world of credit unions. But if so, it is a cataclysmic change which shouldn't pass unremarked. As an SECU member, you have a lot to lose.
As noted the SECU Board pulled a sleight of hand by obtaining approval for bylaw amendments in 6/23. The open-ended bylaw language was then used to change the "Order of Business" at the Annual Meeting [link]. As an SECU member losing your right to speak and present comments, suggestions and resolutions at the Annual Meeting should be of great concern.
What's next? SECU's chief "legal" counsel is actively inventing new rules to "kick you to the curb" as a member-shareholder [link]. Best example?:
😎 SECU member-shareholders now may no longer present resolutions in advance of the Annual Meeting. That democratic right to address the Board is universal among credit unions
✅ In fact, all major American shareholder-owned businesses are required by law to permit shareholders to address boards at the annual business meeting - except SECU member-owners! Can't make this stuff up, unless you're a chief "legaler"!
If our Administrator of Credit Unions continues to sit on her hands, an illegal "precedent" has been set that all North Carolina credit unions may block member-shareholders rights at the annual business meeting. If our laws are meaningless, the State of North Carolina and three million credit union members have a lot to lose.
✅ Our Governor Josh Stein and/or our State Legislature should not permit this abridgement of basic business law to occur.
"Why does the SECU Board fear the members?"
nobody is ever held accountable... when those entrusted to uphold the law and refuse or look the other way then everybody loses...
ReplyDeleteNot sure about the legalities but the head lawyer's response certainly reeks of elitism and condescension. And has no resemblance to the SECU that I knew before 2021. Sad times for SECU...
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't sleight of hand. The bylaws can be changed without member vote. Sleight of hand means deception. Members being unaware and deceived are not the same thing.
ReplyDelete12:08 The deception was that the ELT and the Board used a seemingly innocent bylaw amendment to then deceptively change the annual meeting rules, eliminating the speaking and participation rights of members at the business meeting.
DeleteBut you rightfully expose the risk that SECU members now face - an ELT and Board who can change the bylaws to eliminate member shareholder rights without accountability.
Thank you for reemphasizing that unacceptable business risk.
The governor? That's hilarious. He couldn't care less about this.
ReplyDelete12:10pm Think you might be surprised that the Governor as a lawyer - and as a credit union member - would find this "hilarious".
DeleteAre you suggesting we ask him? I'm willing if you say it's OK.
12:25. Re-read the comment. Didn't say the governor would think it was hilarious. I said it's hilarious that you think the governor would care about this or act
Delete3:00 pm Re-read, as you suggested, and accept your clarification on "hilarious".
DeleteAre you standing by the statement: "He couldn't care less about this?"
What would be the legal procedure for membership to change to by-laws? Also, did membership vote for the changes?
ReplyDelete1:42pm The members did not vote for the bylaw changes. The Board may make any changes to the bylaws without permission from the membership.
DeleteThe Board has not adopted any provisions for the membership to suggest changes or oppose changes to the bylaws.
Why would the Board waste time on establishing those procedures?
8:23. Exactly. Seems like you’re finally getting it. Members don’t run the credit union. They elect directors that are charged with hiring people that do. Director elections and resolutions are the only true rights a member has. All else are privileges.
Delete10:04 members don't run the CU they OWN it!!!
DeleteWithout our money you don't exist ...
How is the business at risk if members don't speak?
ReplyDelete2:44pm The risk arises not when members "don't speak"; it arises when the members aren't allowed to speak. See the difference?
DeleteIt wasn't sleight of hand. The bylaws can be changed without member vote. Sleight of hand means deception. Members being unaware and deceived are not the same thing
ReplyDelete2:59 pm Not sure I agree with your thought that if you deceive 'em and they are unaware of it that's ok. But to each their own....
DeleteNawh…making sure they are unaware ain’t deceitful. You can’t tell us you wanted members to know…thus you’d have to explain why. Bend the rules to your advantage.
DeleteWell. That’s not my thought. It wasn’t transparent. Members weren’t aware it was occurring, including what was being done and why, That’s a fact and quite open to fair criticism.
DeleteThe corruptocrats eager to use that power for their own purposes...
ReplyDeleteWhat are their own purposes?
Deleteto shut up the "member/owners" of the credit union so they can just do whatever they want without any pushback ... after that's achieved Katy-bar-the-door ...
DeleteBut that is where we are today, protect the lies, distort and destroy the truth..
ReplyDelete