The purchaser of my model Board Governance Policy Manual for credit unions asked about the legality of the provision that requires a credit union member to be a member two or more years before being eligible to run for the board.
Of course, any user can remove a membership requirement to qualify for nomination or appointment. I put the requirement in there to prevent people from becoming a CU member just to become a committee member or director; what is their purpose and intention?
As a part of the Board's efforts to make the CU successful, it needs to attract the best talent and the most dedicated people it can to lead the CU. If the Bylaws contain sufficient processes and protections, then Governance Policies do not need to address it.
What about the legality? It is not illegal, best I can tell, to introduce reasonable processes to assure the Board is the best it can be. Members can follow the Bylaws to the letter and circumvent Governance Policies that are more restrictive. Therefore, the Board is not mitigating or taking away any membership power. People who have the best motives will not want to circumvent the criteria for doing so may place a cloud over their intentions.
When the Board or the Recruiting/Nominating Committee finds a non-member it desperately wants on the board, the board can adopt a resolution allowing for a one-time waiving of the length-of-membership criteria. The resolution will outline the compelling reasons for its actions, and preserve the integrity of the written policies.
Posts
