Op-ed: Should public utility commissions regulate cooperatives?

Dan Nemes of MN350 (an organization addressing the global climate crisis), offers this op-ed in the 6 February issue of  Rochester, Minnesota’s Post-Bulletin, opposing the Minnesota Legislature’s recently proposed legislation that he believes will negatively impact the state’s renewable energy …

Renewable Portfolio Standards gaining steam across the U.S. but what does that mean for a federal program?

A Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is a regulation that requires the increased production of energy from renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal. RPS-type mechanisms have been adopted in several countries, including Britain, Italy, Poland, Sweden, Belgium, …

USDA Magazine Article Discusses Management of Capital Credits and Patronage Dividends

USDA Magazine Article Discusses Management of Capital Credits and Patronage Dividends

The USDA publishes a bi-monthly magazine, Rural Cooperatives, which covers various issues encountered by cooperatives of all types.  Recently the magazine published an article written by attorney David Cook

AHC Attorney Discusses Cooperative Governance and Transparency Issues

AHC attorney Roland Hall was recently interviewed for an article on the trend toward more transparency and openness in cooperative governance.  The article appeared in the July/August issue of the National Cooperative Business Association’s Cooperative Business Journal.  The full …

Cooperative Litigation Update: N.C. Court Rules on Coop’s Discounting Program

In another lawsuit concerning cooperatives’ capital credit practices, a North Carolina trial court ruled in favor of a cooperative that we previously wrote about in another blog post.

The court ruled, based on the facts at issue, that the …

Cooperative Litigation Update: Texas Cooperative Lawsuit Considered on Appeal

Earlier this past July, the Texas Court of Appeals ruled on important aspects of the cooperative lawsuit concerning Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc., d/b/a CoServ Electric (“CoServ”).  The court ruled, among other things, that (i) the cooperative was not subject