SECU amended its bylaws as they are allowed to do. Not subject to any approval by the Admin of NC CUs as you claim. Thanks for providing proof that SECU did the right thing.
8:19 pm You haven't got it exactly right. The SECU Board can amend the bylaws but the Board must receive approval from the State Administrator of all proposed amendments.before being implemented.
So 8:19 must know the rules and regulations for changing credit union bylaws and what the board elected to change. I would like to also know what bylaw options they chose to change that only required BOD approval. If one doesn't care that our freedom to speak was stripped, it is likely because it does not affect him/her personally today.
It’s not at risk in anyway whatsoever. That was just another hyperbolic, unsupported statement that lobbed out there. This repeated question would be answered if it weren’t.
Members have opinions, but rarely, if ever all the fact, data, and analysis that go into decisions. If folks think they are going to stand up and say something the board hasn’t thought of that would change their decisions, they are sorely mistaken.
Why don't they provide some documentation for these policy changes so members can understand? You believe you are much smarter and don't need to provide any insights for us on how you arrived at your decisions! We, of course, would not understand due to our much inferior reasoning ability.
So is that a good process and outcome? Perhaps, as members could hear two sides of an issue, but it wouldn’t lead to a different outcome of any kind.
Think about it logically and practically. And if you can’t do that, just accept the fact that will never, ever be a meeting again like 2022 and 2023. Democratic processes are designed to prevent small, vocal minorities of having too much influence or control on outcomes.
Those of you who cannot tolerate or oppose freedom of speech because you don't agree, think about the consequences of being complacent.
Democracies are generally characterized by free and open public discourse and the right to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom of speech.
Authoritarianism is a political system where power is concentrated in the hands of a single leader or a small elite, with limited political pluralism and restricted civil liberties like freedom of speech and the press.
Would the prior administration have allowed repeated comments at the annual meeting in support of risk based pricing, a mobile app, rewards card, or mobile check deposit? I’m happy to be wrong, but I can’t imagine that would have happened
Understand the point you are trying to make, but it loses a little fuel knowing that the Mobile App and Mobile Check Deposit were done under the previous leadership. We completed these and many other initiatives such as migrating to new data centers just before the board made the perilous mistake of throwing everything away us all for the Hayes/Bomba fiasco.
Now we can only watch the train wreck since most of us who understood the the technology have been pushed out.
... Wilson Pickett [link].
"Why does the SECU Board fear the members?" 
as Pogo would say ...“WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US.”
ReplyDeleteSo valuable is the precious virtue 'TRUST' that there can be no price put upon it; and once betrayed and lost, it is almost impossible to restore...
ReplyDeleteSECU amended its bylaws as they are allowed to do. Not subject to any approval by the Admin of NC CUs as you claim. Thanks for providing proof that SECU did the right thing.
ReplyDelete8:19 pm You haven't got it exactly right. The SECU Board can amend the bylaws but the Board must receive approval from the State Administrator of all proposed amendments.before being implemented.
DeleteRegulatory approval is required, not optional.
So 8:19 must know the rules and regulations for changing credit union bylaws and what the board elected to change. I would like to also know what bylaw options they chose to change that only required BOD approval. If one doesn't care that our freedom to speak was stripped, it is likely because it does not affect him/her personally today.
Deletelet's not mistake what is legal as to what is right,
Deletethere is no right way to do the wrong thing ...
legal or otherwise ...
So how is the business at risk when members aren’t allowed to speak at the annual meeting?
ReplyDeleteIt’s not at risk in anyway whatsoever. That was just another hyperbolic, unsupported statement that lobbed out there. This repeated question would be answered if it weren’t.
DeleteMembers have opinions, but rarely, if ever all the fact, data, and analysis that go into decisions. If folks think they are going to stand up and say something the board hasn’t thought of that would change their decisions, they are sorely mistaken.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't they provide some documentation for these policy changes so members can understand? You believe you are much smarter and don't need to provide any insights for us on how you arrived at your decisions! We, of course, would not understand due to our much inferior reasoning ability.
DeleteSo is that a good process and outcome? Perhaps, as members could hear two sides of an issue, but it wouldn’t lead to a different outcome of any kind.
ReplyDeleteThink about it logically and practically. And if you can’t do that, just accept the fact that will never, ever be a meeting again like 2022 and 2023. Democratic processes are designed to prevent small, vocal minorities of having too much influence or control on outcomes.
Those of you who cannot tolerate or oppose freedom of speech because you don't agree, think about the consequences of being complacent.
ReplyDeleteDemocracies are generally characterized by free and open public discourse and the right to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom of speech.
Authoritarianism is a political system where power is concentrated in the hands of a single leader or a small elite, with limited political pluralism and restricted civil liberties like freedom of speech and the press.
Wow. Sounds impressive. But what does it have to do with SECU?
Delete2:35 governance
DeleteWould the prior administration have allowed repeated comments at the annual meeting in support of risk based pricing, a mobile app, rewards card, or mobile check deposit? I’m happy to be wrong, but I can’t imagine that would have happened
ReplyDeleteUnderstand the point you are trying to make, but it loses a little fuel knowing that the Mobile App and Mobile Check Deposit were done under the previous leadership. We completed these and many other initiatives such as migrating to new data centers just before the board made the perilous mistake of throwing everything away us all for the Hayes/Bomba fiasco.
DeleteNow we can only watch the train wreck since most of us who understood the the technology have been pushed out.
2:34 Yes! No one would have ever imagined prohibiting a member-owner of SECU from speaking, that opportunity is a core purpose of the meeting.
ReplyDeleteDon't mean to make you happy when you're wrong, but your imagination has failed you in this instance.