Monday, January 22, 2024

SECU: Consider This: Chapter 4 - John Sprunt Hill



 
 
 
 
 
  
 SECU is different!
                                     
Before we use a kleenex [link - Chapter 3] to dry our RBL "tiers" away and move on to "Esse Quam Videri", lets' pause for some unchallengeable, historical confirmation that North Carolina credit unions are not banks... and were never intended to develop into that four letter word.
 
✅ John Sprunt Hill (1869-1961, pictured above) was one of  North Carolina's most successful and distinguished bankers - and nobody's fool.  
 
Hill was a leader among the powerful Durham business families -  Duke, Watts, Carr, Hill - who controlled the American Tobacco Company, a worldwide fountain of wealth in early 1900's North Carolina. Mr. Hill was also a Columbia-trained lawyer, who helped form N. C. Blue Cross Blue Shield, Central Carolina Bank, Durham S&L, built The Carolina Inn in Chapel Hill and gave it (!) to UNC, funded the N.C. Historical Collection at the UNC-CH Library, owned numerous prosperous farms, was a State Senator... and that's just the short list. Nobody's fool ... North Carolina's top banker, an exceptional business entrepreneur, concerned philanthropist, and a remarkable human spirit.
 
✅ But did you know this about that distinguished North Carolina banker, John Sprunt Hill?:
 
"In 1913, Hill traveled to Europe in an effort to study rural credit systems that had sprung up there in response to widespread poverty. He returned to the United States intent on implementing a similar system at home. North Carolina of that time was more than 80% rural, and the economy farm-based, with a majority of residents living in poverty. He addressed farmers' organizations and congressional committees on the subject."
 
"Hill remarked that, "Credit union membership is a certificate of character and a badge of honor. Let a person stay in the credit union for ten years and it changes his whole philosophy of life—it is a modern miracle." Soon after passage of the North Carolina Credit Union Act on March 6, 1915 - which Hill personally wrote and shepherded through the Legislature, North Carolina's first credit union opened in 1916, in the southern Durham County community of Lowe's Grove. Hill was called the "Father of Rural Credit in North Carolina." [link entire NCpedia bio]
 
But here, listen to what that distinguished North Carolina banker, John Sprunt Hill, had to say about credit unions:
 
"Credit Unions are not banks. Banks are aggregations of money; Credit Unions are aggregations of men [and women!]."

"Credit Unions capitalize the character of the membership."

"A Credit Union organized within a group, the members of which have no credit problems, obviously fills no need and organizations of this type should not be encouraged."
 
"Credit Unions increase the general prosperity, and thereby improve the community and its other businesses, helping others to attain a better economic status." 

😎 And here is the clincher. Take a look (below) at what the Hill family thought was most important about the man, John Sprunt Hill, on his State Historical Marker. John Sprunt Hill was a shrewd banker first, without question - nobody's fool! - and a highly skilled attorney, who well understood the legal and business purpose distinctions between a bank and a credit union!

"John Sprunt Hill (1869-1961) Banker and attorney. Leader in credit union movement..."  

... and a distinguished citizen of North Carolina who understood: "There is a Difference"... and was proud to be the leading force in bringing that difference to North Carolina.  Nobody's fool!
https://www.hmdb.org/Photos2/259/Photo259687.jpg 


And, if you believe that John Sprunt Hill was attempting to set up credit unions in North Carolina to compete against his bank, then 1) you miss the clear evidence that he was nobody's fool... and it's pretty evident that 2) you may be somebody's fool.


16 comments:

  1. I heard about the Credit Union at Lowe’s Grove and Mr. Hill numerous times after I came to work at the Credit Union many years ago. Extraordinary person - a visionary. Clearly something we could use more of these days.

    Change of subject, just for a brief moment…

    Occasionally, I have noticed that a commenter, while making their case about what is happening at the credit union, will make their point with a derogatory comment about a political party. There are no doubt folks at both ends of the political spectrum that do not like what is currently happening at SECU. I don’t see a purpose in trying to alienate anyone supporting the grassroots movement to take back our credit union by trying to disparage their political views. It’s already going to be a near impossible task to elect 4 more Member Nominees next October. We certainly don’t need to alienate anyone by appearing to make this a battle about politics. Every single supporter will be desperately needed and that includes folks of every imaginable background.

    And while i would love to see the 8 legacy Board members replaced as well as the CEO, there have been instances of demeaning name calling of current leaders at SECU (being called incompetent is descriptive, being called an idiot serves no real purpose). To be taken seriously let’s raise the level of discourse and not allow those currently in power to discount us as a “raging minority” by pointing to a few extreme comments (including in rare instances veiled threats of violence). Incivility undermines credibility.

    I would respectfully ask Mr. Blaine to consider restricting comments that include threats (even those made in jest), crude name calling or political opinions. We should attempt to raise the level of discussion in order to be taken seriously.

    And please don’t give me the whole “woke” thing. This is stuff your Mom taught you.

    Ok, now back to your regularly scheduled program…

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Amen to 3:37 pm comment! Thank you!

      Delete
  2. None of it matters if we don't stop the takeover ...
    and 3 years in, this long black train doesn't seem to be slowing down ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes it is way too long! Members' only recourse is the election in October. The legacy board is determined on its mission of becoming a bank. These four are up for reelection this year-McKinley Wooten, Stelfanie Williams, Mark Fleming, and Bob Brinson. Each one participated in the hiring of Hayes, and each voiced support for him. Absolutely no dissent from any one of them on all the bylaw or election rule changes at SECU. No dissent from a single one on any of the destructive policies-- for members and for the employees in the branches wanting to serve the members. These four can not even run a wanna-be-bank well offering mediocre products and services. Failing on all the metrics! Good Golly! Even borrowing money to try and improve the metrics! Kick 'em off the board in October! #4 in 24

      Delete
  3. This fight (please don't take this as a threat) for the soul of SECU, is a microcosm of the world in which we currently reside ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It’s always been that way but it has just gotten worse overtime. It’s always been a war against the working class. Whether it’s through shipping jobs overseas, being replaced by technology, laid off to make the numbers look better, underpaid while producing what makes money for the company, or simply sent overseas to fight a war the working class citizens have nothing to do with. Working class always does the dirty work and gets the end of the stick. This credit union is special to the working class. Don’t let them take away this. They’ve taken enough from us.

      Delete
  4. BTW I agree on the politics but for the reason that they are 2 sides of the same coin ...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr. Blaine, you hit the nail on the head with,

    "And, if you believe that John Sprunt Hill was attempting to set up credit unions in North Carolina to compete against his bank, then 1) you miss the clear evidence that he was nobody's fool... and it's pretty evident that 2) you may be somebody's fool."

    Amen to that!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Seems Mr Hill was in favor of providing financial assistance for people of modest means; he did not believe a BANK was the best way to accomplish that. It is just as true today as it was in 1916. Stop the banking practices at SECU.

    ReplyDelete
  7. As an employee in my 4th decade of service I have been extremely fortunate to have spent 90% of my career enjoying the many benefits of working under such gifted and principled leaders as Jim Blaine and Mike Lord. I also know that the chaos that has developed over the last 2-3 years can be dealt with and overcome in relatively short order with proper leadership and with the right people in charge. We made a very profound impact on the BOD last year by doing the impossible/improbable of going 3 for 3. Because of that, it is very probable that we will go 4 for 4 this year as I know of some very fine candidates that will be coming forth to help right the ship and word of mouth has another year to spread. We will return to the SECU of old as 2024 will be the pivotal year that puts us over the top on our journey back !! So stay positive and be encouraged that the tide is definitely turning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is encouraging

      Delete
    2. @11:39 we are all hoping & wanting to believe this is true-but easier to lose hope the more that gets revealed, that is for sure!

      Delete
    3. Let us know how we can help and somehow get the names out for the 4 in mind. 4 more in '24 is critical!!! Thanks for a ray of hope!

      Delete
  8. Those folks will step forward at the appropriate time… for now, just know they are there and are ready, willing and able.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't even know who they are but they got my vote! Does that tell you anything?

      Delete