Readers Sound Off on Matz Comments
Published July 31, 2015 11:00 AM
|
Updated June 1, 2021 1:22 PM
1 Min Read
NCUA Chairman Debbie Matz caused quite a stir when she testified before a congressional panel that credit unions who question the agency's budget are not acting in their members' best interests. Though Matz later apologized for implying that credit unions aren't serving their members' best interests, she stood by the importance of recruiting and retaining talented examiners and other personnel dedicated to preserving the safety and soundness of the credit union movement. Credit Union Journal readers were quick to react. Read on to see what they had to say.
True Feelings? Or Impaired Judgment?
Listening to Matz testify to congress [July 23] was painful. Did she really mean to say that "credit unions don't represent their members"? Did she have a couple at lunch preceding the hearing, or is that just what she truly believes? She also said that credit unions really don't care about the NCUA budget-absolutely wrong. Here's why! As the corporate failures began to mount it was pretty evident that the only solution to the disaster would come from the backs of the natural person credit unions. We knew it would not be a cheap price and would severely impact the way we do business. Something else we knew was that we would be operating in a highly artificial and controlled environment and our ability to improve revenues would be tested. As a traditional credit union (promote thrift and make cheap loans), we accepted the fact that we would need to fashion operational efficiencies (cut expenses) rather than dump additional fees on members, most of which seem to fall to those who can least afford it. So we did. At year end 2009 our operational expenses were $1,336,486. By the end of 2014 we had cut, sliced and negotiated pricing until they were down to $1,017,834. Further we have not increased fees to members. Resisting the "courtesy (hardly) pay" solutions as well as "risk-based lending" siren song. It has not been easy, as we struggle to keep the non-profit cooperative ideal alive for members of Unity Credit Union and their kids. At the same time we have observed the actions of a federal regulator who is willing to spend our members' money like a drunken sailor on shore leave after two months at sea. (I spent 4 years and 5 months in the service of my country USN 1960-1965) so my characterization takes a little earned license. Apologies to my fellow sailors!) Chief economist - really? Fat raises and bonuses for doing "your job"? Disneyland "training" with the costs being paid for by the governed? How many millions, Mrs. Matz? Travel expenditures that demand explanation... etc, etc. Saying that "credit unions that question NCUA's budget really don't care about their members is sheer idiocy. CREDIT UNIONS THAT CARE ABOUT THEIR MEMBERS SHOULD QUESTION EVERY EXPENDITURE OF THIS REGULATOR because of your track record. Just for the record Mrs. Matz we care a great deal about how our member money is spent because every dollar that is funneled to the fund is some members that, as near as I can tell, might be better used by those of us who care how it is spent and for what purpose. Not the silly, aggrandized idea's of a Chairperson gone "Washington" on us.
Posted by dgmunity July 24 2015 at 5:36PM ET
Posted by dgmunity July 24 2015 at 5:36PM ET
Keeping the Wolves at Bay
Credit Unions asking for NCUA's budget hearing for transparency are not doing it in the best interest of their members??? Everything credit unions do is in the best interest of their members. I am doing everything I can do that is in the best interest of our members. One more dollar we can lend, and one more dollar we can save our members [prevents] our members from using predatory sources and some banks with too many fees and charges to their customers for the benefit of their shareholders. We all do this because we are passionate about helping our members save money and about providing financial education for our members. NCUA may not have our members' best interest in what they do. Credit unions do.
Posted by Paul Y July 24 2015 at 7:08PM ET
Posted by Paul Y July 24 2015 at 7:08PM ET
Misplaced Priorities
I find it ridiculous that Rep Williams would target the measly $1.2m budget for bonuses. That number is a fraction of what a handful of execs from a single medium size bank would get. I'm not necessarily an NCUA advocate, however these folks are paid peanuts to take on an unforgiving job of long hours, travel to off-the-grid towns and undying criticism from CU execs and Board members. Get the right people and pay them, period.
Posted by Frank W July 23 2015 at 9:11 PM ET
Posted by Frank W July 23 2015 at 9:11 PM ET
Royal Pain
Imperial Matz. How arrogant. How sad. Can't be gone soon enough.
Posted by daveccul July 23 2015 at 11:48PM ET
Posted by daveccul July 23 2015 at 11:48PM ET
Ms. Matz: Tear Down This Wall!
Chairman Matz fails to understand the need for transparency and the benefits of public hearings. I agree completely that the regulated should not determine the budget of NCUA. In the end after all public comments, NCUA is still the regulator and subject to only Congressional and Judicial oversight. Chairman Matz's statement that holding budget hearings would undermine NCUA's ability to have adequate resources to assure a safe and sound credit union system is wrong on so many counts. Allowing public comment and input and providing transparency into a budget that is reasonable and justified does not diminish NCUA's ability to regulate. But if the budget is bloated and unjustified, it gives credit unions a chance to raise questions that hopefully Congress will further investigate as part of their oversight duties. Former Senator Patrick Moynihan wrote a book titled "Secrecy" in which he describes the dangers of hiding information from the public. NCUA is a public agency and should be open to public scrutiny. NCUA must be transparent about its spending and must justify how it spends public funds. Chairman Matz takes the position that credit union hearings may reduce NCUA's budget or otherwise limit its effectiveness as a regulator. I think any seasoned observer of NCUA would expect the oppositethat public hearings would make NCUA's oversight and regulation more effective. Recent history offers evidence of much upside potential in increasing NCUA's effectiveness. Chairman Matztear down the walls of secrecy and open your budget to public hearings. Transparency will make NCUA better not worse.
Posted by henryw, July 27, 2015 at 4:33PM ET
Posted by henryw, July 27, 2015 at 4:33PM ET
