In my years of experience with non-profit organizations, especially membership organizations, the challenge is lack of resources. As with every democratic structure, the balance between using members' resources vs. serving members is difficult if not impossible. Members want the maximum service for the least cost. I would suggest that lack of resources leading to ineffective services is the more likely cause of what is frustrating you.
I am more inclined to this that lack of resources - as is typical in membership associations - is the culprit. Also, as is common amongst Membership associations, the online management of the organization tends to...shall we say...lag behind what we would see from a well run for-profit corporation, despite the fact that this particular membership org is all about information technology I have seen fairly severe technology weaknesses. For example, when the new CPEs app was rolled out it was a disaster in my experience. It took about 6 months before it worked at all for me. However, i have seen it improve significantly. The latest version is functioning well.
So my theory of the case leans towards...ineffectiveness rather than secretiveness.
Nevertheless, I became curious about the legal and ethical aspects of the problem you pose. We are, after all, information security management experts - aren't we? 😉 We are focused on the regulatory environment - right? So I read the By-Laws and I read the Mass Chapter 180 under which (ISC)2 is incorporated. I find section 6c relevant:
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXXII/Chapter180/Section6C
I do not find anything specific to the publication of voting details, policies, etc. but I didn't spend much time looking.
I can't spend more time on this right now but I will check back to see if anyone else finds something relevant.
My perspective is more about helping (ISC)2 to be more effective rather than assuming nefarious behavior 🙂
