A reasonable request.
✅ Credit unions confront a surge of questions over accountability, transparency, and credibility - and not just in North Carolina!
Let's try a slightly different take on H.187 today. Here is the key talking point - those "financial deserts" - being used by the CCUL to sway legislators opinion:
😎 Source: BNC [link] - " The Carolinas Credit Union League (CCUL) is pitching the legislation [H.187] as a way to restore financial services to economically distressed communities vacated by traditional banks. It’s seeking looser requirements for people to join nonprofit credit unions, creating opportunities for expansion into under-served “banking deserts” and serving people living at or below the poverty line, according to Dan Schline, the league’s president."
😎 “Credit unions have been serving North Carolinians for more than 100 years," added CCUL President and CEO Dan Schline. "This bill reflects our continued advocacy for expanding financial access where it’s needed most."
Here's the rub: Every citizen of North Carolina, in every North Carolina county and community, whether living above or below the federal poverty line is already eligible to join multiple credit unions - and has been able to join for years!
😎 Why do these "financial deserts" continue to exist in North Carolina? Why haven't credit unions stepped up to solve the problem?
Here's how credit union critics challenge our credibility: "Although credit unions are supposed to focus on people who are “under-served” and of “modest means,” they are not required to collect data or report on their progress in meeting this mission. Studies show that credit unions increasingly serve upper-income ." - The Tax Foundation (2024).
✅ Would the Carolinas' Credit Union League have any problem with adding a requirement within H.187 for credit unions to open and maintain branches to serve these " financial deserts"? It would be useful for credit unions to also report annually on the progress made to resolve the "financial desert" problem! Okay?
Why duck? Anything at risk from a little "put up or shut up"... other than our credibility?
Really? If credit unions don't have or report the data, how does The Tax Foundation? You that gullible? You know what the Tax Foundation's motive is, right?
ReplyDelete12:58pm Seems to be gibberish! Can you repeat your message?
DeleteIf only there were a credit union that had a branch in every county in North Carolina that could help resolve those financial deserts. Could easily report on membership in those counties and the financial benefits being provided to those communities. Great idea. I did not care about or support this bill before but you have won me over. People helping people.
ReplyDelete2:27pm And of course, it wouldn't be any burden to track and report since every credit union will have to determine that member is tier 1, low wealth, lives 8 miles from a bank, etc before allowing the person to join. CUs can prove their merit.
DeleteAssume CCUL will publicly endorse addition next week.
All unnecessary bureaucracy. why burden the industry with extra costs and hoops to jump through? CU's don't have the prove their merit. I guess we are only supposed to help those of modest means. Why don't we have to "prove" that we do then?
DeleteIn the name of people helping people, we should take on that burden don’t you think? Sounds like a common bond of people and those of modest means.
Delete4:31pm Know some credit union folks feel like they don't have to answer to anyone anymore, but you might be wise to prove that tax exemption is well-earned. If you mess up at least one CU in NC says it will cost the members $40 million.
DeleteGot to qualify these folks for membership beforehand anyway. Why not promote the success in eliminating the deserts. Would be more powerful PR than a Super Bowl commercial or a "We Are" ad campaign!
Not about answering to anyone. It's about advocating for the industry, not being about trying to make them less competitive in the market place by having extra, unnecessary regulatory burden. Naive to believe the banks will back off if we provide we put a branch in a financial desert. CU's don't need the PR either, and there was no Super Bowl ad. Just making stuff up, as always.
Delete4:37.. no we shouldn't take on that burden. For what? For who? We have a duty to serve our members, not generate PR headlines. Seems like an odd idea to be all about PR when we didn't even market the CU or its products. Folks just can't get out of the past and realize we need to be modern and progressive to compete with banks.
Delete4:31pm Because you claim to the Legislature you need membership expansion to solve the desert problem.
DeleteTruth or just more bullishness?
And yes the Super Bowl ad was real...ask the CEO... on the record.
Delete7:333pm Where in the original philosophy or purpose do you find a mission/ision "to compete with banks".
DeleteNot there, neer has been.
7;30pm Your remark well- represents the current problem with credit unions. When did we start advocating for "the industry" rather than for the members?
DeleteSorry state of affairs and p-poor leadership in a non-profit coop.
Rot at the top...and hollowness at the core, in the soul!
10:27.. ok then, how does going to financial deserts hurt the members? How is it against the purpose and mission? It's not an either / or - we advocate for members and the industry.
Delete8:32 am You conveniently overlook the fact that all North Carolinians have been able to join multiple credit unions for many years.
DeleteAgain, most folks will acknowledge that this is a cynical sleight of hand by CCUL to push for open membership. The question remains why not be honest and just ask the Legislature to permit "anyone can join."
If it's a good thing, what's the problem? Why slink around?
4:07pm . Most likely, the individual would just have to attest that they live more than a certain number of miles from a Financial Institution branch and that they make less than a certain amount of money. The reporting piece would also be very easy as we could leverage the new eligibility fields to generate automatic reports.
Delete8:48am So no checking or verification. Think that's sound acceptable?
Delete8:32am When reminded you do correct yourself and remember to mention advocating for the member-owners... rather than just the "new/new industry".
Delete"Me, me, me" is always a bit unseemly in co-op leadership...don't you agree?
10:24.. not in the original purpose...
Delete9:03am We all agree on that, including the law, the Supreme Court, the Legislature to date, the original principles and purpose.
DeleteTime to discard original princfiples and purposes for open membership? Again then stop the slither and simply ask the Legislature honestly!
11:22am You like to forget that SECU was embarrassed enough to withdraw the ad.
DeleteEasy solution, ask the leadership to confirm or deny...in public.
Be happy to apologize "in good faith" if this is not true.
SECU is lost in the wilderness ...
ReplyDeleteis it possible we're going the wrong way?
ReplyDeletedid 'they' take the wrong road when they came to the fork?
SECU has a branch in every county in North Carolina. What is the advantage to SECU in this bill? Open membership. Everyone, including corporations can join. Corporations will also have voting rights. There are also banks in each of these deserts. Looks like a way to slip in open membership. Then open is open to folks in Virginia and South Carolina. And that leads to assets from North Carolina flowing out of state!! Slippery slope. Wake up legislators. You are being misled.
ReplyDelete"Studies show that credit unions increasingly serve upper-income."That quote from the tax foundation appears to have been written as a description of current lending practice at SECU! LOL! They certainly are catering to wealthy members and ignoring the economic distress of their struggling, lower paid state employees and teachers.
ReplyDelete