
To: The North Carolina Credit Union Commission
Caleb Malcolm
Chairman
Members: Jammison A. Applequist, Roger Montes, Lafayette G. Jones, Christopher D. Dillon, Debbie H. Trotter, Michael Conlon.
October 8, 2025
Re: 2025 SECU Proposed Bylaw Amendments
Dear Chairman Malcolm,
Hate to bother you again, but not really.
Since 1915, the North
Carolina Legislature has adopted laws to define the purpose,
organization, and operation of credit unions [here's an easy outline of those State laws]. The citizens of North Carolina have determined by State law what a credit union may and may not do.
Those laws are there for a reason - to protect the individual members and to assure the integrity of the institutions. An individual North Carolina credit union should not be allowed to "make up"
its own laws and rules. Our laws and rules have no meaning if ignored or unenforced.
Our Legislature - the people of North Carolina - has delegated to you, the Commission, and the Credit Union Division the responsibility to:
§ 54-109.12. [All credit unions] "... shall be subject to the management, control and
supervision of the Administrator of Credit Unions as to their conduct,
organization, management, business practices and their financial and
fiscal matters.
As this Commission, you may believe that the financial soundness of our credit unions is your chief responsibility, but it is not. North Carolina law requires the Commission, to equally control and supervise "... their conduct, organization, management, business practices...".
The fair administration of bylaws by a North Carolina credit union is crucial to their "conduct,
organization, management, business practices and their financial and
fiscal matters".
In 2023 objections were first raised with this Commission concerning bylaw amendments approved by the Credit Union Division on behalf of SECU. Those open-ended amendments were subsequently used by the SECU Board to eliminate the ability of SECU members to participate in the business functions of the Annual Membership Meeting, to block the introduction of member resolutions, and to officially ban SECU members from actually speaking at all.
These prohibitions were the result of the failure of you, the Credit Union Commission, to act to uphold North Carolina law.
In 2023/2024 this Commission claimed lack of authority to act under G.S.
§ 143B‑439 (c), finding shelter in a catch phrase stating what the Commission "may" or may not do [link], while overlooking what our law actually states the Commission shall do :
"§ 143B‑439. Credit Union Commission. (c) The Credit Union Commission is hereby
vested with full power and authority to review, approve, or modify any
action taken by the Administrator of Credit Unions in the exercise of
all powers, duties, and functions vested by law in or exercised by the
Administrator of Credit Unions under the credit union laws of this
State.
"Vested with full authority" could not be clearer. Despite that duck in 2024, other reasonable alternatives for SECU members to be formally and publicly heard on governance issues were sought.
In response to a request for a discussion of alternatives, SECU responded with a bizarre legal theory [link] that member resolutions could only be presented to the Board via a call for a "Special Membership Meeting", requiring a petition from @ 300,000 members. Of course, no rules nor procedures for calling such a meeting existed, no discussion of any such requirement had ever occurred in the past at SECU, nor will you find any such precedence within North Carolina credit union law.
To impose such a new "Special Meeting" restriction will once again require bylaw amendments at SECU and approval from the Credit Union Division. So, "here we go again"! You can be assured that these proposed governance amendments are not the result of an up-swelling of requests from the SECU membership. In fact, the SECU membership is totally unaware of pending bylaw changes.
Hope it strains your credulity to believe that SECU members were so pleased to have lost their governance, participation, and free-speaking rights, that they are back begging you to reduce them further! Believe you're much wiser than that.
Further "inaction" by the Commission is equivalent to endorsement of these undemocratic practices. This is not good for the rule of law in North Carolina, nor the rights of SECU members. The purpose of North Carolina law was not to disenfranchise credit union members!
Would you please require that the upcoming SECU bylaw amendments be publicly disclosed to the members, reviewed, and discussed prior to approval? Thank you.
Sincerely,
Jean and Jim Blaine
SECU members
...or duck, duck, goose?
"2:47 pm I trust our CEO Leigh Brady to tell the truth. Don't you think that would be the most reliable source?"