Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Co-op reform resolutions nixed

Annual meeting agenda will not include measures passed at District V meeting

Gerald Garner Jr. El Defensor Chieftain Editor

Member-owners of the Socorro Electric Cooperative who hoped to vote on a trio of reform related resolutions at the upcoming annual general meeting will not get their wish.

The resolutions sought to: open regular board meetings to the public and the press; reduce the number of monthly board meetings from two to one and reduce the number of trustees from 11 to seven.

Despite being overwhelmingly approved at the Oct. 25 District 5 meeting in Datil, the resolutions were not filed according to proper protocol, said co-op attorney Joanna Aguilar on Monday, March 16.

Aguilar said the procedural anomaly prompted the board to leave the measures off the Co-op's Saturday, April 25, agenda.

Aguilar cited Article III, Section 11 of the SEC Bylaws — which states that any resolution submitted and adopted by members at a district meeting for consideration at the next succeeding annual meeting must clearly state that intention — when asked what protocol the members should have followed.

According to Aguilar, none of the resolutions approved that night were "up to snuff."

"The resolutions did not state that the measures would be presented for consideration at the annual meeting," Aguilar said. "As a result, the directors aren't required to submit those items (for inclusion on the agenda)."

Aguilar went on to say that had the resolutions clearly stated the members' intent to place the items on the April 25 agenda, the board would have no choice but to put the proposed measures to a vote.

On Wednesday, March 11, the board voted to exclude the resolutions. SEC Trustees Charlie Wagner and Jack Bruton — both of whom represent District 5 — voted to include the items on the agenda.

Wagner said the sole reason the resolutions were introduced at the district meetings was so the general membership could weigh in on the measures during the annual meeting.

"Nine of the 11 trustees were present and witnessed the proceedings in Datil. There is no doubt that they were aware of the members' enunciated intention to present the resolutions for the vote of the general membership," Wagner wrote to El Defensor Chieftain on March 12 (see Guest Column, Page 4). "That intention was clearly stated in the resolutions presented to the members present and voting for their adoption."

Wagner said the board's decision is "contrary to the bylaws and opposed to the interest of the cooperative."

Bruton said he views the board's decision as a self protective measure.

"To me it seems like this is a deal for the board to protect themselves and not the consumers," Bruton said in a Tuesday, March 17, telephone interview.

Resolution Rigamarole

A handful of members — riled by the board's perceived lack of accountability, among other things — organized last summer in an effort to reform the local cooperative. Among the first orders of business was drafting the aforementioned resolutions and starting a petition drive to further their cause.

Spearheaded by Charlene West, the group attended regularly scheduled board meetings and hoped to have their concerns heard.

Board policy, however, requires members who wish to speak about specific co-op related issues to request permission to place an item on the board's meeting agenda. As West and her supporters soon learned, the board has the final say on what appears on the agenda.

With each attempt to have their concerns heard, tensions between the board and the reform proponents escalated.

"We realized that we would not be able to get anything accomplished in the board meetings so we decided to concentrate on having the resolutions addressed at the district meetings," West said during a March 17 telephone interview.

To that end, reform proponents hustled to introduce the resolutions at four of the five district meetings only to have the measures systematically shot down.

All that appeared to change in late October, when the majority of assembled District 5 members overwhelmingly approved the measures.

"There was a real sense of optimism among the members," Wagner said of the Datil vote.

That optimism, however, would be short-lived.

The board's Dec. 10 minutes indicate Wagner acknowledged that the resolutions weren't submitted in accordance with co-op bylaws.

According to the minutes, Wagner attempted to remedy the situation by asking board president Paul Bustamante to call a special meeting of the District 5 members so the resolutions could be brought up to speed.

"I requested that meeting to perfect the motions (resolutions) that had been approved at the District 5 meeting," Wagner said during a March 17 telephone interview. "I was never given a copy of the District 5 meeting minutes as I requested and I wanted to make sure that the members' wishes were not being ignored."

Bustamante, however, denied Wagner's request, the minutes reveal.

Last week, Wagner and Bruton implored their colleagues to heed the District 5 members' wishes and place the reform resolutions on next month's agenda.

Co-op attorney Joanna Aguilar said the board's Bylaw Committee discussed the resolution issues and made its recommendations to the board before last week's 9-to-2 vote.

The Co-op's membership needs to have ample time to be prepared to vote on an issue "whether they're opposed to it or not," Aguilar further stated.

Aguilar suggested that placing the resolutions on next month's meeting agenda would not give members ample time to study up on the issue. Her assessment doesn't hold water with West.

"They (resolutions) were printed in the paper and we tried to get them passed at each of the district meetings," West quipped. "There's no way the members would be caught unaware — more than 200 people spoke loud and clear in Datil."

Wagner, who has tangled with Aguilar and the board on several issues, said he feels the situation is "bogus."

"The attorney who was hired to protect the co-op and its members is doing exactly the opposite," Wagner concluded.

Aguilar said the board's decision was made in the members' best interest.

"The board is trying to look out for the best interest of the entire membership," Aguilar said.

Bruton said he's frustrated that efforts to aid the member owners have met with such resistance from the board.

"We're trying to make it better and easier for members to have their voices heard. It's a shame that roadblocks are being put in front of the consumers unnecessarily," Bruton said. "I think the consumers should have their own meeting that they can present any resolutions they see fit."

ggarner@dchieftain.com

E-mail this story Printer-friendly version