Two highly qualified, long-time SECU members, Julian Hawes and Barry Browning, are on the 2026 ballot having been member-nominated by petition. Both were qualified as candidates by the SECU nominating committee, but were not selected. Incumbents as usual were preferred.
Hawes and Browning are
seeking election because the SECU Board has repeatedly over the last 3 years acted to suppress SECU member participation in their credit union.
SECU members are losing their democratic rights in their credit union.
✔ Look at how participation in your Annual SECU Membership Meeting has changed:
What have you got to lose... well, perhaps everything!
Why would they fight so hard to maintain their position on the Board? Apparently there is good money in destroying a worldclass Credit Union.
ReplyDeleteIDK. Have you ever volunteered and worked for free for something you care about? The constant refrain on this blog that our Board are losers, are corrupt and somehow gain financially is as irrational as it is petty.
Delete2:12pm Think that is a fair comment in many respects.
DeleteBut you miss the main point: What is being questioned at SECU at least is the judgment of the Board. The record over the last few years does give rise to doubts.
The WakeMed posts give a similar local example of how good people can recommend very poor decisions as board members - that greatly hurt our communitities. When our Governor and State Treasurer question the WakeMed "subterfuge" - shouldn't we at least listen?
As to SAFE/BECU, there are folks who do see corruption in the merger with large financial gains for both execs and board members.
You should give some consideration to the fact that what you see occurring at SAFE is not a one-off, isolated incident. This form of "giveaway" is happening nationwide. The money-grab is in the multiple millions $$$.
SECU is not immune in the future. The suppression of member involvement at SECU by the Board increasing renders the membership defenseless when the problem arrives in North Carolina.
And yes it will arrive...
2:59. Not missing any point. Simply challenging 2:12’s ridiculous comment
Deleteit's already here ...
Delete6:29pm Missed again!
DeleteThis by-law conspiracy is your allegation and you have the burden of proof. So prove it or shut up.
ReplyDelete2:08pm Thought I did what was appropriate by submitting the question on the amendments in advance to Ms. Brady at the last annual meeting.
ReplyDeleteDid you agree with her answer?
https://www.secujustasking.com/2025/10/secu-question-of-trust.html
I'll be sure to ask again - for a straight answer - at the upcoming annual meeting, ok?
She answered your question
Delete3:01pm Refresh my memory: "She answered your question".
DeleteWhat was the answer?
(To the question of what was the content and purpose of the Board approved bylaw amendments in September, 2025?)
Here's the link again if you need:to recheck:
https://www.secujustasking.com/2025/10/secu-question-of-trust.html
Who is Brady hiding from, the members?
DeleteShe'll look even more foolish if she doesn't own up this time.
DeleteShe is probably being advised not to answer since the amendment has not been sent to the credit union administrator for approval. It’s an amendment “in waiting “ so she can continue to say absolutely nothing! For all trolls , read the writing on the wall! Suppression has occurred elsewhere and it is right here on our doorstep!!
DeleteAs Marvin use to croon, “;I heard it through the Grapevine not much longer…….” Worth listening to?
DeleteWhy do they recommend all the others except for Hawes and Browning? Why not just show everyone's credentials and leave it at that...without the recommendation
ReplyDeleteIn a REAL election, we get to hear what the candidates’ have to say! What are their views, what are their visions? But not with SECU! What are they so afraid of ?
Delete