The Guiding Light ...

  ... a CU soap opera in action?

An extended discussion broke out in the "Comments" section of yesterday's post [link to post], concerning the board nomination process at SECU. Thought most folks had grown tired of the faux drama over at the N.C. Credit Union Division, but one more episode won't hurt.

✅ All credit unions use a nominating committee to select members to run for vacant board seats. The nominating committee is generally selected by the board chair. The nominating committee can establish rules, procedures, policies to govern its selection of a slate of candidates to run. So, lets simplify it; the SECU Nominating Committee has the full right to create applications, interviews or any other hurdles it chooses to make its selections. Got it? Full right. 

Okay then, why is the SECU Nominating Committee operating illegally with the support of the N.C. Credit Union Division? Because there is a second, separate, parallel process for credit union members to put forth their names as board candidates. That second, separate, parallel process is called "self-nomination". All credit unions have this second, separate self-nomination process to permit members to run independently, if supported by the membership. You saw this independence in action at the 2023 Annual Meeting as the SECU membership gave the incumbent Nominating Committee candidates the boot!

At SECU last year, the SECU Nominating Committee denied a qualified member, Ms. Susie Ford, the opportunity to self-nominate - nobody questions that Ms. Ford, as a member, was personally eligible and qualified. Under the law and bylaws, denying her the opportunity to self-nominate was, again illegal. SECU has falsely claimed that the Nominating Committee had the right to do that, with an SECU attorney on a WebEx even quoting federal legal opinions in support!

What's interesting about those legal opinions [here's where you can look at those multitude of legal opinion for yourself] is the SECU attorney was right as far as he went. He was able to find the parts which give a nominating committee full rights in choosing its slate (see ✅ paragraph above), but his legal impartiality seemed blind to this part:.

"There are, however, no restrictions on the eligibility requirements that a nominating committee can use in selection candidates for office. We have previously stated that the nominating committee is free to set reasonable standards as to whom it will nominate. Failure to be nominated by the committee, though, does not preclude a member from running for office."

😎 This "selective vision" by the SECU Board - this use of "half truths"- when "talking down" to the members and staff is really what this soap opera is about - at heart.

 

... "the soap" first hit the fan with that infamous, weaselly: "No formal proposal proposal" from the "We Are" chair. 

A slippery slide since... stay tuned, more drama ahead!

"Government Of The People, By The People, For The People...?"

   

                ... our democracy in action.

✅ Question of the day: "Which is more fun: 1) Reading more about the tortured antics over at the N.C. Credit Union Division or 2) doing your taxes?" I agree, but before you rush off...

Here's a brief article which gives you a summary of the plot so far [link to CUToday story] to help you keep up. Don't despair, more to follow.  As they say, there are only three certainties in life: death, taxes, and the search for a straight answer from the NCCUD.

Would like to make one side note. Last election cycle at SECU, almost a dozen members submitted their application to the SECU Board Nominating Committee for consideration. The "application" runs @ 20 pages and is well designed to discourage. The Nominating Committee offered interviews for each applicant also. As it worked out, the Nominating Committee selected the 3 incumbent board members as its slate as "most qualified".  At the Annual Meeting the SECU membership said "uh-uh" and sent those 3 packing. 

The principal concern with the NCCUD centers on the request to the Nominating Committee by SECU member Ms. Susie Ford to seek election, after she saw that the incumbents were the preferred slate. Ms. Ford was denied the opportunity to run [see that denial here] although she was a well-qualified member.  

The question the Administrator and the Credit Union Commission keep trying to purple duck is whether any N.C. state-chartered credit union can deny an eligible, qualified member the right to seek a board seat?

As simple as that... no complaint, no intrigue, no twisted legal zig or zag, no bob or weave. The NCCUD will end up answering that question to the citizens of North Carolina and our 3 million+ credit union members. You can count on that, but evidently more embarrassment and erosion of credibility is required.

Seems like 2024 may be the year folks decide whether our credit unions, our regulators, our democracy are working as designed - for the people... or for some other purpose?

... as of last week the North Carolina Credit Union Division doesn't appear to know the answer!