SEC reform group cries foul
Members of the Socorro Electric Cooperative reform group are circulating a petition protesting the ballot to be used at the Saturday, April 17, annual meeting of member owners.
Charlene West, chairman of the SEC Reform Committee, said she plans to have the petition presented to the co-op’s board of trustees at its regular meeting Wednesday, April 14.
West said the reform group is not trying to stop the voting process.
“It’s just our way of letting them know we’re paying attention,” she said, and added that the issue revolves around board-sponsored proposals that provide alternative options to resolutions passed by member-owners. “It’s the way they’re presenting it we’re protesting.”
About a dozen resolutions were passed by member-owners in Districts 3 (Socorro) and 5 (Magdalena west to the Arizona border) last October.
Many of them call for what would be significant changes to the bylaws and the manner in which the co-op board manages business.
The SEC board of trustees offered its own set of resolutions last month, many of which run contrary to those passed by the member-owners.
The petition states:
“The propositions passed by the members of District 3 & District 5 should be listed separately, labeled as Member Propositions and presented in their entirety without Trustee comment.
“The members’ propositions should be subject to a ‘Yes or No’ vote rather than being commingled and confused with a list of Trustee sponsored ‘Options.’”
The reason the board of trustees offered options, according to trustee Donald Wolberg, is to give member-owners a clear choice.
“It’s up to the members to choose what’s important. The decision is theirs,” Wolberg said in an interview last month.
But West said that providing alternatives only serves to cloud the issues.
“We don’t agree with them adding on to all the resolutions. They’re trying to confuse people and dilute the vote,” she said.
As an example, West cited the member-sponsored resolution that calls for reducing the number of trustees from 11 to five.
The board offered three options: keeping it at 11, reducing it to nine or reducing it to seven. In this way, it’s mathematically possible for maintaining the status quo of 11 to prevail with 26 percent of the vote.
“They’re trying to confuse people,” West claimed.
West said the group also objects to footnotes accompanying some of the member-sponsored proposals.
Asterisks are attached to resolutions that would allow for elections to be conducted by mail and administered by a third-party accounting firm, and allowing members access to SEC books, records and audits — with the exception of those that would violate the Privacy Act.
The asterisks indicate that if adopted, “These changes may result in disclosure of confidential member information.”
A resolution calling for the board to voluntarily abide by the Open Meetings Act and Inspection of Public Records Act is accompanied with a note that “The SEC would be in violation of the law, if approved.”
West suggested the board adding comments to the member-sponsored resolutions was a “scare tactic” in an effort to discourage members from voting for the measures.
At the March 27 informational meeting, Wolberg said the OMA and IPRA does not apply to rural electric cooperatives.
Regarding voting by mail, he said state law prohibits mail-in voting at the district level.
Wolberg insisted there was nothing devious behind the board’s additions.
“So far as I know, this will be the most transparent election any co-op has ever undertaken,” he said. “We’re trying to make it as transparent and as democratic as possible.”
Member-owners should receive notice of the annual meeting in the mail this week. The notice lists all of the proposed bylaw changes. It is also available for viewing on the SEC Web site, www.socorroelectric.com.
The reform group provides its own commentary on the resolutions on its Web site, www.secreform.org.
Contact T.S. Last