The resolution also supports allowing state leagues and their credit union members to decide on whether to keep the dual membership or to allow cooperatives affiliation choice to join either CUNA, the league or both.

The Michigan league's resolution is believed to be the first formal opposition to the preliminary ideas proposed by CUNA's task force.

Other state leagues have not publicly addressed the preliminary ideas. However, some league presidents have said they will comment once the task force finalizes its recommendations for CUNA's board of directors. Those final recommendations may be presented to the CUNA board at its meeting in Denver at America's Credit Union Conference and World Credit Union Conference July 12-15.

"We felt the timing of our resolution was right," Adams said. "It [the resolution] is offered respectfully and we wanted the task force to get our input before finalizing the recommendations and we certainly wanted the CUNA board to get our input before it acts on any final recommendation."

CUNA declined to comment on the Michigan league's resolution.

In its resolution, the Michigan league said the renaming and rebranding of state associations should be the decision of each league, not CUNA.  One of the task force's preliminary ideas was to rename CUNA America's Credit Unions. And to create a more unified structure, the task force also proposed that the leagues also change their names, for example, to America's Credit Unions in Florida and America's Credit Unions in Michigan.

The resolution also stated that the state association board and their members should determine the dues formula, the allocation of those dues and how they are allocated – not CUNA. In addition, the resolution also stated that credit unions should pay dues to their state leagues. And if credit unions operate in other states, they should be afforded access to services from those state leagues without additional dues or a reallocation of league dues.

Read more: The task force proposed a league choice concept …

One of the preliminary ideas of the task force is that credit unions might have a choice of which leagues they join, but that choice would be only for cooperatives with a significant proportion of their members in more than one state. There are several hundred credit unions that operate in more than one state.

For example, for credit unions with a majority of members in four states that would qualify to join four state leagues, those cooperatives would be given the choice to decide how their dues would be apportioned among the four leagues. Qualified credit unions, however, would not be allowed to send their dues to leagues A, B, and C and nothing to their home state league.

What's more, the task force is considering allowing credit unions the choice of allocating a percentage of their dues to the national advocacy fund or their league.

However, the Michigan league argued in its resolution that structure and dues collection practices (whether centralized or decentralized) and dues formulas will not improve advocacy effectiveness.

Instead, what is needed is a bold, national legislative and regulatory agency, and improved grassroots lobbying with coordination between CUNA and state associations and member credit unions, the Michigan league resolution stated.

Although the task force is not considering changing the controversial dual membership requirement, the Michigan league resolution said a "very large majority of member credit unions" (88%) favor having a choice in joining either CUNA, the Michigan league or both.

Based on this information and national polling data, the Michigan league believes CUNA should enable state leagues and their member credit unions to decide whether to allow cooperatives to choose state or national affiliation or keep the dual membership.

Although Adams said Michigan credit unions are not demanding affiliation choice, they are asking for it.

Stay tuned for more details from CU Times' interview with Adams in the July 15, 2015 print edition.