Credit Union Exam Solutions Presents With Flying Colors

Treichel: Hey everyone, this
is Mark TriCal with another

episode of With Flying Colors.

I'm excited today to be here
with two former NCUA colleagues

John Ney and Jeff Pacino.

Guys, how you doing today?

Bacino: Very well.

Good, mark.

Treichel: Glad to hear it.

It's the end of summer.

It's the end of the NFL preseason
season almost NCA and government

takes August off, but it,
it's in, doesn't seem like it.

There's a lot going on, A lot
going on in government, lot going

on in the land of credit unions.

I'm excited to to catch up with you guys.

It's been a couple months
since we've done this yeah.

With with, give me a one of you go
first let's start with Jeff for our

listeners who may not, or watchers who
may not have seen you on the podcast.

Give a little bit of your background
in credit unions, et cetera, and

then we'll be off and running.

Bacino: Okay, let's see.

You've been in credit unions
way too long, since 1985.

Worked at Kellyann Associates,
worked at Kuna was appointed by

Bill Clinton to the NCRA board.

Was appointed by George W.

Bush to the Federal Housing Finance Board.

Currently have my own company, succinctly
called Casino and Associates, and we,

we manage three trade associations
and do a handful of other client work.

Treichel: Very good.

Very good.

And John.

McKechnie: I came to the credit
union world shortly after Jeff did.

I, matter of fact, he and I had lunch
my first day on, on the job back in 87.

I left Capitol Hill, came to Kuna.

Thought I'd stay for a year or two.

But I really liked the hill.

I was enjoying myself.

But 18 and a half years later,
I left Kuna and accepted an

appointment with President.

President Bush, Joanne Johnson was
chairman at the time, and she named me

the head of Congressional Public Affairs,
which I enjoyed immensely, especially

during the, the meltdown of the mortgage
market, which was the most, really, the

most exhilarating thing I've to this day
I've ever been involved in professionally.

And that was a great experience.

And then in 2011, I left NCUA and decided
to try my hand at the consulting world.

And.

That's where we are.

And here we are, all three of us.

I will get a real job one of these days.

Yeah, but not anytime soon.

Treichel: Let's hope not.

Let's hope not.

So guys, I was a minute or two late to
start the recording because I had a quick

call I had to take with a client and
at the end of the call we started, we

had a short conversation about the NCA
Board and they said to me depending on

how this plays out, does Trump appoint
one, two, or three board members?

My answer was, I don't know.

I'll ask John Ney and Jeff
Bino when I start recording a

podcast here in a couple minutes.

So let's start with the NCA board.

We Trump fired Ska Trump fired Harper.

They're still in their legal battle
in the middle of their legal battle.

They came back for one board
meeting which interestingly

had briefings, three briefings.

So they didn't act on anything, which.

It was probably good and it was good
that it wasn't a rule that was on

the table that led to that because
we're in this crazy zombie limbo land.

But with that thoughts on where
we're at today as it relates to

the board and where we might be.

September, October, November, December.

Bacino: John, I got to give
background, so you should take that.

All right, I'll take this one.

I recently saw somebody refer to
the situation at NCA as chaotic.

Oh wait, that'd be you, mark.

Oh, was that me?

That was you?

In, in my, in my newsletter that
I sent out to a client list I

talked about the yo-yo situation.

And basically you're looking at the
fact that Todd, I think it was April

16th the Trump administration fired
Todd and Tanya then on July 23rd.

Were reinstated, as you said, mark, just
in time for that July 24th board meeting.

And lo and behold, another court
found on the 25th, the very

next day that they gotta go.

Right now we're stuck in limbo.

To answer your question, I think
that the administration's probably

gonna have to wait for a decision
on this Humphreys executor case.

I think we talked about it last time.

It's a Supreme Court case that
kind of handles all these things.

There's indication that this court might
be willing to overturn it, and if it

does, then Trump would've the ability
to fire pretty much whomever he wanted.

And I think what the administration
may look to do is to name somebody

to replace Chairman Hopman.

His term expired a couple weeks
ago, Sunday, August 2nd, and

and keep going from there.

I think there is a real danger if
they try to appoint three members.

A court later found that, Todd
and Tanya were illegally bounced.

Now all of a sudden you got five,
basically five constituted board members.

Maybe we can ex, maybe we can expand the
board the way Naus has always wanted,

just by legislator, by no lawsuit,

Treichel: right?

Yeah.

Bacino: Yeah.

So anyways, that, that's my thought.

I think right now you may look for one
person to take Kyle's spot and then

everything stays on hold, and I guess
that you would consider that chaotic.

McKechnie: I have enjoyed not developing
strong opinions about this because

it is so unpredictable and it's, in
one sense it's interesting to watch.

I don't I generally don't like
drama at a regulatory agency.

You, Jeffrey counted the
situation well, you have.

Two vacant seats because the
board, those two board members were

removed and is legally contentious.

You've got Chairman Halman who is
serving in a holdover capacity.

His term expired August 2nd, as you said.

I suspect things are gonna stay in
place until the Supreme Court decides.

The Humphreys executor case, which is
really not just gonna deal with NCUA,

obviously it's gonna deal with the
larger issue of how much authority

the any president has in by executive
branch appointees, and even if those

appointees are confirmed by the Senate.

Some in the Trump administration
argue he still, the president still

should run the executive branch.

Others say, no, the Senate confirmed these
people Legally, the law says they stay.

I don't know what's gonna happen.

I do know the Supreme Court's
coming back to town in October and

hopefully we'll get some clarity.

I want, again, I want
clarity, I want stability.

I'm boring on this stuff, this particular
issue, because I just don't, I don't like.

A lot of high wire acts at a regulator.

I think regulators need to be
very staid and stable and right

now we're not in that situation.

Although, I will say based Mark on
talking to some of your you used, when

I first encountered you were regional
director, and I've talked to some

people at the regions and at the central
office, and it does sound like the

basic blocking and tackling of nnc a.

It's still going on pretty well.

It's not, these exam processes are
continuing the agencies keeping

the a good eye on the ball in
terms of safety and soundness.

So it's not an ideal situation
it on Duke Street, but at least

the agency still function.

Treichel: It still functions,
blocking and tackling.

I think with the with the,
pick a number, 18 to 22 to 25%

of staff who took the buyout.

And a lot that, that is impacting.

So it's jeff Chicago Bears when a
cornerback goes down and then the

other guy they drafted doesn't turn
out to be as good as you thought.

And you end up having the undrafted
free agent starting you got some people

playing roles at NCUA, but you know
what they're gonna rise to the occasion.

They do, they, they learn how to play,
they played cornerback and some undrafted

free agents end up in the Hall of Fame
and end up, making all pro there's

opportunities that this is creating.

They are still doing the blocking and
tackling and because of the hiring freeze,

people are doing some jobs on the go.

But you know that, I guess that's
a testament to all the high quality

people that are there, that even though.

I had a guy who worked for me
when I was in the Albany office

as a regional director, Mike
Sadowski, a insurance director.

He'd walk out the front door and say
to the secretary, you're in charge.

And it, don't worry about
it, it basically runs itself.

There are systems in place, right?

There's delegations.

The agency knows how.

To do what it has to do to
keep things safe and sound.

McKechnie: Do you think now we've got
under a thousand employees there for

the first time in, in forever, wow.

Yeah, it's 9 75 Now is that gonna
go much lower, do you think?

Treichel: I think it will
because of the freeze.

I also heard through the grapevine
so the freeze is on whenever Trump

says you can start hiring again.

You have to then get
the announcements out.

To get the announcements out.

You have to go to usa jobs.gov

is gonna have everybody
coming to 'em at one time.

The one thing that cons, one of the
things that concerns me at NCUA is

that I heard through the grapevine
that all of the human resource.

Executives have taken the buyout and
that all of the supervisors in human

resources have taken the buyout.

Just imagine the freeze comes
off pick, January, right?

Okay.

You can promote people, you
can promote people in HR into

those upper level PE positions.

You can start rating other agencies
to fill your executive positions.

It's gonna be very herky and jerky.

To get the announcements out, to get
the people in, to get interviewed.

And then the other side of it,
is who wants to go work for the

federal government right now
with all these challenges, right?

Yeah, I guess from that, from the
perspective of unemployment going

up, there's more people who might
wanna go work for NCUA, but it's

not, it's not the shining star that
it might've been for some people

who would consider government work.

So I believe they'll continue to
bottom out a little bit and I believe

there'll be people who will, so
some, I'm getting on a soap box now.

Some of the people that took the 20,
let's say it's 22% that go, some of

those left because they were like I
don't know who my boss is gonna be.

I don't know who my
teammates are gonna be.

I'm eligible to go if
I don't take the money.

Now, the one thing I do know is
my job's gonna be harder, right?

So was it three, four, 5%
of the people that left?

Because it's I don't wanna put up
with that challenge that creates,

other issues that I think is
gonna have them stuck in the mud.

But again, it goes back to.

Everybody there cares deeply about
credit unions, about, about the

industry, and about doing what's
right and they'll get through it.

But it's gonna be a couple
one, two or three years.

This I want hear.

Bacino: What's that?

This I wanna hear a couple of what?

Couple years?

A couple

Treichel: in you.

Decades.

I had a dangling participle there.

I was trying to figure out
where I was going with it.

It's gonna be, it's gonna be difficult.

I just did a podcast with my team
about, about, it Credit unions

communicating well with NCA is even
more important now than it ever was

because NCA is a little, is in chaos.

Like you said, Jeff, I've there it's
a challenge for those that are left,

there's a lot of dust in the air.

Who's the board?

Is it Todd, Tanya and Kyle,
or is it None of them.

And then who's leaving?

You and I'll have all heard
who we think is leaving from

NCA at executive levels, but.

They got a lot of positions to fill.

They got a lot of good people.

And they've got, they're losing
a lot of corporate knowledge.

They're gonna have a lot of people
step up, but it's a challenge.

And it's not just NCA, CFPB was
like a the goblet was thrown on the

floor and NC a's better positioned
than what's had gone on there.

Bacino: CF PB was a little like that,
that that red wedding episode, game

of Throne, everybody dies in the end.

That's good.

Yeah.

But I think the interesting thing is
gonna be, and you touched on it, is.

Who's the board gonna be?

Because all three of us know and anyone
who's ever worked their nose, and those of

us that were lucky enough to serve at the
board level, understand that relationship

between those three people can dictate
what the agency works like if they can

work well together, things move smoothly.

If you have things like, when you
had Norm Damour and Yolanda Wheat,

fighting and arguing about everything.

It makes it a little more difficult,
not only for the staff, but also

then therefore for credit unions.

So it's gonna be interesting
to see what they do.

And and I do agree with you.

We've had a lot of brain drain leave.

You've got people who are moving up
and in the end I know they'll do well.

The problem I see sometimes is some
of the things that you can't do

with a board, allegedly, you can't
do a field of membership expansion.

You can't do a new charter application.

A couple of these things that, you
know, yes, the blocking and tackling

is getting done, which is great.

The problem is there's
no flee flicker plate.

There's no deep bomb to,
to the wide receiver there.

McKechnie: There have been
a couple conservatorships.

Which also, in a way, they're never good
news, but at least again, that shows

that some of the functions are going on.

Treichel: Yeah, and I'm not, and on
that though, I, so they're saying

a conservatorship is essential.

Because the only things they can
do are what's essential under

their delegation and all that.

So I, yeah.

If I, yeah.

The fact that they conserved shows
that they believe a board of one

definitely can take action, but can,
will they take action on a budget?

Will they just use the old budget?

Will they have a budget briefing or
hearing, or whatever you wanna call it?

Are they required to have a budget hearing
or briefing if they don't do a budget?

I've actually more

McKechnie: focused I'm more focused on
the the interest rate ceiling next year.

If you wanna get down
to the specific issues.

Okay.

That's something that's critical and
I'm not sure, but I don't know what the

answer, whether a single member board
can enact that or can act on that or not.

I think if we go on a limb
you want a free discussion?

I'll make a prediction.

Treichel: Yes.

I think

McKechnie: we're gonna have, we're
gonna have three board members.

First quarter of next year.

I didn't say three new board members.

I just said we're gonna
have three board members.

Treichel: Jeff, what?

By the, by March.

What's your take?

Bacino: John's prediction is
little like saying that the Ravens

are gonna win a game this year.

They're that good.

They're gonna win a game.

So I think it's pretty safe
to say we're gonna have three.

Again, I just have a sneaking
suspicion, and again I'm not a

lawyer and I don't play one on tv,
but you know everything I'm reading

about this Humphrey's executor case.

On the Supreme Court level tells me they
may strike it down, and if they strike

it down, then that protection that every
board member has always felt once, once

you were confirmed to a six year term
or a four year term, you knew you were

there pretty much short of treason or
malfeasance, all of a sudden goes away

and all of a sudden the president of
the country, no matter who he or she is.

Can determine what the board is.

And this is, this has a potential
to have a huge whipsaw effect.

Obviously if a Democrat wins in 2028
on January 20th, 2029, what's to stop?

I don't know, let's say President Newsom
or President John Stewart from saying,

you know what, every Republican, you
might as well gimme your letter 'cause

I'm gonna fire you next week anyways.

And we throw in a bunch
of Democrats, and again.

The die will have been cast by,
by, as I said, if the Supreme Court

does do away with that Humphrey's
executor case, the dies cast.

Now all of a sudden, who
wants to be a board member?

It used to be pretty much of an honor now.

It's an honor.

As long as your person is still
in the White House, once he

or she leaves, you're toast.

And I agree.

I agree with both of you.

There's gonna be three.

My prediction though.

I'll get a little more.

I get a little more sexy here.

I think it's gonna be
three new board members.

We're gonna have three different
board members by the end of the

year, and if not, there's gonna be
two new board members and Tanya.

Treichel: Ah, yeah.

And I had predicted on a previous
podcast, so I'll stick with that, that

there's an 80% chance that, that neither
Harper or Ska will be coming back, but

you're differentiating between Harper
and Ska, and I think I know why, but why

don't you explain to the listener why
you think perhaps Tanya will come back.

Tanya Ska board member,
ska I'll be more formal.

Ver versus board member
Harper walk through that.

Bacino: You're doing this intentionally
'cause you want the cover page on

the National Enquirer tomorrow.

I have been very upfront with this and I
felt that the Biden administration, legal

opinion that said that Todd Harper could,
in essence succeed himself was flawed.

Okay.

I've written about it.

I've talked to Todd's old
chief of staff about it.

And again, I always preface it
by saying this is not personal.

I've known Todd a long time.

Okay.

But it's a policy.

Argument on my part, and frankly, I
would have this same argument if it

were you, mark, if it were John, if
it my daughter, who works at Navy.

If it was any of those people, I
would still be arguing the same thing

because I think it's bad policy if
we break that precedent and allow.

People that succeed themselves.

Okay.

It's just not in the
act as far as I read it.

And so once that happened, I felt
that the Trump administration could

have come in and said, you know what?

We read this Biden
administration legal opinion.

Here's our legal opinion.

You're not allowed to
stay, so you have to leave.

Now.

That, of course, would've up
to the avenue for Todd to sue.

But from the White House's
perspective, it might have been a

little cleaner to do it that way.

Right now what they've done is they've
put both of them in a box together,

which means the issue's muddied.

So that's why my prediction would
be, I think that Tanya comes back.

Two other new board members are appointed
and the White House moves on from there.

Treichel: Great points.

John, anything you wanna add on that?

McKechnie: I think Jeff covered it well.

Treichel: Okay.

I'm gonna, I'm gonna, I, one last top
topic on blocking and tackling, and the

bears aren't involved Jeff so that's good.

The recently so NCA has a national
supervision policy manual, which

is a mostly public document
that they update on the fly.

And one of my guys.

In doing research for something
we were working on, noticed that

they changed their requirement to
have 120 day follow-up contacts

on code four credit unions.

So that policy is a policy that's been in
place since I started at N two A in 1986.

Essentially, you the worst, your camel
code, the more time NCA is supposed

to send spend with you so that you
can resolve the challenges that.

That institution may cause
for the insurance fund.

And they've publicly made changes to
their exam cycle so they could get

their exams done on time before they
lost 22% of their staff or whatever

the number ultimately is gonna be.

And then they, I don't wanna say they
snuck this into the NSPM but they snuck

this into the NSPM, giving them some
flexibilities to do less follow up.

And I know what they're doing.

They're doing triage because.

They're gonna, they're gonna use
their business sense of blocking and

tackling to decide where they're going.

They're creating some flexibilities for
themselves to go where a code four that

they really need to go do as opposed
to a code four that's getting better.

And that makes sense, but it just,
and this, you can comment on this if

you want or not, but because they're.

They're, they've been forced
into that because of the resource

drain that they're having.

And that can, that can work.

That's like running
three marathons in a row.

It works for a while.

But they're, the blocking and tackling
is going to fail at some juncture.

If they can't start hiring,
if they can't start filling

vacancies is, and that assumes.

That the economy stays like it is.

'cause the economy, could get worse.

It could not get worse.

But if it gets worse and they
can't hire the blocking and

tackling is gonna get challenged.

McKechnie: I I think that the
industry right now, there's a

natural antagonism between the.

The regulated and the regulators.

So I think that a lot of credit
union people, I've been to

three, three league events in
A-D-C-U-C event in the last month.

People aren't shedding a lot of
tears about what you're saying, and

I'm sure that doesn't surprise you.

I actually and I'm, I,
infinitely more about the

details of that manual than I do.

I would say that I've heard
explicit comments from credit

union people about CFPB.

How happy they are about what's happening
there because they feel like that agency

was a real rogue, SUA got called a rogue
agency years ago by a judge and, but I

think CFPB was the embodiment of a rogue
agency for much of the last decade.

Just in terms of the way they tried to.

Go far and beyond any kind of reasonable
definition of consumer protection and

try to become basically market dictators
to the financial services world.

So crediting people are happy.

I think that the way that bureau
has been truncated, if not.

If not damaged.

They're not sad about that at all.

And if there's a change administration,
that's the pendulum just gonna swing back.

Let's not forget about that.

But for right now, I think there's a
general feeling that that Les is more.

Treichel: And I've ev I've said
that to some of my clients.

I think what I said about the came.

In the short term individually,
that's gonna help someone who's ran

into an issue that they're dealing
with and they know how to deal with.

Instead of having NCUA asking every
five minutes, how do we deal with this?

The good code fours that had something
happen that are going in the right

direction, or code threes, they're
gonna get a bit of, little bit of

a pre reprieve in the short term.

And I think that's good and
I, I understand why they.

Be happy about that if it's an
elongated situation where they

can't go to places they need to.

That's where it theoretically
can create, a challenge to the

insurance fund of, of some level.

I'm not saying anything catastrophic
but that's where it gets to be

a little bit more calculated.

And on the CFPB I agree with you on that.

I was I thought they have been rogue.

I listened to a podcast
FinTech podcast recently.

Where someone really intelligent
was speaking changed my

thought on a little bit.

Basically saying if you don't lose
sight of that pendulum, right?

Because the states will
fill in the blanks.

The states will sue the states will
pursue it, there will be lawsuits,

and when the pendulum swings,
it'll swing with a vengeance.

So fix your consumer compliance
roof when it's not raining, because

when it swings, it'll swing quick.

Jeff?

Yeah I wanna

McKechnie: be clear, I like the
idea of having a strong, credible,

consumer protection entity.

I, I just think that in some ways
there was a little bit too much

of an a little too zealous of a.

Maybe of an anti-business, anti-free sure.

Private sector ethos that was on display
over there, and I hope I, I'd just like to

see a government agency that's a strong,
credible government agency that protects

consumers when bad stuff happens to 'em.

How about that?

Bacino: I like that.

And again, that's, that
would be the ideal.

But as we've seen from this
agency, from the get go, remember

it was Elizabeth Warren's baby.

She was supposed to be the
first head of CFPB, and this

is before she was a senator.

Okay.

And the Senate kind of sent signals
that they would not approve her.

She then ran for the Senate won
but then they put in Richard

Corddry, who was somebody that was
very, I think very close to her.

And it did swing on that upward pendulum.

Trump wins the election, Mick Mulvaney
is there for a couple of months, in

addition to doing three other jobs.

I think, he was Marco Rubio
of that administration and.

I think he, I know he changed the name.

I can't ever remember what it was.

It was,

McKechnie: it became the consumer,
it became the Bureau of Consumer

Protect Financial Protection, because
that's what the statutes called it.

Okay.

And I think that was a kind of an optics
thing that Mulvaney was trying to say,

you guys don't wanna change a comma
in this statue when we try to do it.

But you guys changed
the name unilaterally.

So it was.

It was a bit of a slight of
hand, but it didn't really stick.

Bacino: Anyways, so he changed it.

He stays there and then
Kathy Inger comes in.

She leaves when.

Biden comes in, comes over there, it
starts to go back up the other way again.

We talk about the pendulum
swinging all the time.

The reality is this would
be an ideal situation.

As John said, if the pendulum stopped
in the middle, that's probably where,

it does the most good for the most
people with the least amount of harm.

In a way you'd like it to be the
Hippocratic Oath, first rule is cause

no harm and we're just not there.

And again.

The more that we get divided, the more
that things are, my side or your side,

the less chance you ever have of getting
back there, and again, with fewer and

fewer moderates in this town it just
it begs the question that, how do we

ever get back to what we would like?

When to do winds up ticking
off one side or the other?

No.

Do away with the internet.

How about that?

Treichel: Say that again?

A little.

Like the internet

McKechnie: do away with the
internet if you want to get

more centrist and moderate, but
then the three of us would've

Bacino: to be in the
same place the same time.

Treichel: Good point.

Good points On both.

On both counts.

So let's pivot to.

Another interesting topic,
America's credit unions.

So we've had the merger and recently
there were some changes at the

top of America's credit unions.

That, that let's chat about
what's happened there and what

it means for credit unions.

McKechnie: The new CEO is certainly
a, has been a successful and tested.

Especially on the advocacy
side that I pay attention to.

He was, Scott Simpson was in Utah during
some of the most pitched battles between

us and the banking industry that I've
ever seen back in the early two thousands.

And then he became CEO of the Utah.

He was the governor affairs person.

Then he became the CEO, and now he's
been at the head of of the three

leagues, California, Utah, Nevada.

Like I said, you can't argue with
success and you can't argue that

he has not been through a lot of
battles and seen a lot of things.

So I think there's a lot of reason to
believe that he will be able to hit the

ground running and moves, move a CU into
the future, whatever that future is.

Bacino: I think what John
said was important in that he

can hit the ground running.

This is meant as no disrespect
to Dan Micah or Jim Nussle,

but they were both politicians.

Okay.

Micah was a moderate Democrat
from Florida and Nussle a fairly

moderate Republican from Iowa.

The problem is they
didn't know credit unions.

Okay.

And I think that America's credit
unions is at a point right now.

Where it was crucial for them
to take someone who understood

the system, understood the
history, and Scott does that.

Scott.

Scott can handle all three of those things
that you know he's gonna need to do.

In terms of the advocacy side, the
business side, and then what I would

call the personal side, there is
a personal side of being the head

of the biggest spread and trade.

Treichel: Sure.

That's a great point.

And I didn't realize, John, when
you walk through, him being involved

in the challenges in Utah, which
when I hear that, I'm thinking

of the a BA suing on the field of
memberships that were granted there.

That no doubt created some car
scar tissue that'll serve him well

in all the things he has to do.

McKechnie: Very experienced, very
steady, every I, I don't I don't know

him well, but I, every time I've seen
him and interacted with him, I've found

him to be a very, very solid, smart guy.

He's got he is got some opportunities
now he's gonna be at the helm in November

3rd, I believe is his start date.

And he'll have some business
to attend to on his plate.

I think even though I was talking
earlier to a accrediting group today.

We all should be happy about winning the
tax battle that was waged early this year.

Problem is there, there could
be, and I don't wanna emphasize

the word, could, there could be
another tax fight around the corner.

Bankers never gonna let that issue
go, obviously, but it looks like

Congress may attempt another budget
reconciliation bill and we just

have to, we have to be on our toes.

It's not I don't see a def con one.

Situation at the moment.

But theoretically Scott Simpson could
come in the door where there's a at

least some degree of a challenge again
to credit unions on the tax issue.

And frankly, that'll be the case
all the time 'cause it's perpetual.

Treichel: You can't rest on the laurels
of winning the Super Bowl last year.

No.

To keep the taxation at bay.

'cause it always comes up.

McKechnie: But he's got a good, he's
got a good background to to deal with

whatever comes down the pike, I think.

Treichel: Excellent.

That's good.

That's good to hear.

So guys, what el what else is
going on out there in the news?

Here we are end of August.

NCA is generally get, takes August
off and then has monthly board

meetings with only one board member.

They've curtailed that a little
bit, but they did announce that

they're having a a session where
they're gonna be asking about NCA

strategic plan coming up in September.

Any comments on that or any other
thoughts of things coming down the pike?

Credit union wise?

Bacino: Can I do this before we
leave America's Credit Union?

Treichel: Yeah.

Yes.

I'm sorry.

Absolutely.

I think it's

Bacino: important.

There's a couple things
that think are important.

I think what John was saying was important
that, that there's most likely, I'm not

gonna say most likely John said, could
be a tax, but I think there could be.

Scott comes in the door understanding
what it's like, but he also, I will say

to their credit DCUC, the defense counsel.

Has stepped up and made themselves
the, the kind of next in line.

I hate to say the new nafcu I don't
wanna bother upset anybody, but they're

basically setting themselves up as
another avenue for credit unions and help.

I know they did a lot of work on the
on the last tax bill that we worked on.

And Scott's gonna have at
least a little more ammunition.

I don't know, sometimes if anybody
likes competition or likes somebody

else out there, but the reality
is I think DCU did a good job.

I also wonder.

You know what other, when Scott comes in,
everybody likes to bring their own team.

Are there any changes that he could make?

Are there any changes that,
coming down the pike that, some

make sense and some look easy.

I don't know if you guys have heard of
anything, but I just think in the end

he's gonna want kind of his players there.

He's gonna be kinda like, like Ben
Johnson, the new head coach of the soon

to be central division winning Chicago
Bears in that he wants his players, sure.

Think Scott might want his players.

McKechnie: On the day this podcast
is being recorded, there was a big

personnel announced that out of a CU
their chief advocacy officer, Carrie

Hunt, announced she was departing.

To your point, Jeff, it'll give, this
is another opportunity for Scott Simpson

to, to put his imprint on the place.

And that's a big, that's a big job.

That's the role I had when I was there.

I can't believe saying this
20 years ago when I left.

But it's a, it's an important role
and obviously advocacy remains at the

pinnacle of what trade associations do.

A CU, no exception.

Treichel: It sure does.

Yeah.

That's gonna be an important
role for him to fill.

And like you said, filling it
with someone someone that it is an

opportunity for him to build his
team for lack of a better term.

Bacino: I think that didn't
even, again, that's what happens.

That's what, that's life.

Three of us have gone through it.

You get a new NCA board chairman,
he or she wants their people there.

It makes perfect sense.

As a guy I worked with once said,
why am I gonna hire my enemies?

I'm gonna hire my friends.

But now we can go on to the strategic
planning webinar that is coming up.

Treichel: Yes.

Bacino: You did mention earlier
about the budget briefing.

Treichel: I did.

Bacino: And, I'm gonna, I'm gonna take
at least a little credit for this.

The first ever budget briefing budget
forum was during my time on the board.

Dennis Dollar, came in and said,
I think this is a good idea.

I agreed.

And we had it on I think
we had it on November 1st.

The first one was held on
the day after Halloween.

And I remember one.

One credit union, CEO from the
northwest came and complained that,

he was missing trick or treating
because he had to come in and testify.

But and those things
were always interesting.

Obviously some people tend to say the
same things, some groups on saying same

things when they get the chance to, but
I think it gave credit unions a chance.

To, to at least make their opinions known.

And it'll be interesting to
do, see what happens with this

strategic planning webinar.

Because again, I don't know if the
format is gonna be where people can.

Ask questions where people can,

McKechnie: And they say it's a town hall.

They, but that's the way
it was billed into police.

Okay.

And I like that, but I don't wanna to
trespass on your time here, but that,

I like that idea of a, it's a good
signal for Chairman Halman to send

that he wants to sit there and have a
dialogue and have a listening session.

And that's important.

I don't know what the substance
of the session's gonna be yet.

But it's gonna be an
important one, I think.

I hope people attend either
virtually or in person.

Bacino: I agree with you and Chairman
Hopman has been very accessible.

He'll go out, he'll talk to groups.

He'll let people come in.

So I agree.

I think it's gonna be good.

I hope it Freddy will, I hope
they will take the chance.

The opportunity.

To use it when they are given it.

Because, what was sometimes
frustrating to me when I was on the

board was people would complain,
oh, we don't get to do anything.

We don't get, you don't
listen to us, whatever.

We give 'em a chance to
talk and nobody would talk.

Wanted to go back and say, it's
hard for me to listen to you if you

don't tell me what you're thinking.

Treichel: And as you say that, I'm
thinking of my time as executive director

and I won't name the board member but he.

He or she saw how little feedback he, he
or she thought he was gonna get a lot of

feedback on the budget and thought it was
a little less robust than appropriate.

So they looked at some other rules
and said let's give them opportunity

to give us feedback here, because
then at least we listen to 'em.

We know that they won't participate
to the level that they can.

So to that point.

Halman is going out here saying, we want
to hear what you have to say, and it's

important to seize that opportunity.

And if not, just listen and see
what your peers have to say.

Sign up, listen to it, but
submit questions relative to the

challenges that you're having,
whether it's administrative burden.

Whether it's an exam issue, whether
it's a field of membership or a

RegFlex thing, that you've got an idea.

'cause the wisdom of good ideas come
from the crowd, not necessarily from

the regulators, that's for sure.

McKechnie: I love the saying that
the way to have a lot of good ideas

is to have a lot of ideas, right?

You want to get a lot of ideas
on the table and our industry.

It's not always talkative, but
when it talks, a lot of times they

have some real wisdom to offer.

Absolutely.

And I like the idea of a this,
again, I talked about the format

30 seconds ago or a minute ago.

I wanna reiterate, I just
think it's a very smart idea.

Yes.

To have this kind of interchange.

Treichel: Agreed.

Agreed.

Any more credit union topics before
we predict our team, our NF favorite

NFL team's success coming up here in
the season that's about to kick off.

McKechnie: No more credit union stuff.

I got plenty of football, but,

Treichel: okay.

Let's pivot.

Pivot the foot.

Put and John, your team's the best.

At least it was last year.

What's gonna happen to
the Ravens coming up?

McKechnie: I'm still mad at them from
the last couple of playoff appearances.

I, you've been mad at them for years.

I've mad, I'm mad at, I'm still mad
the Colts lost the Super Bowl, the Jets

in 1969, so I'm not getting over much.

But I, I suspect the Ravens will
have a fun, exciting, successful,

regular season and then something
will happen to us in the playoffs.

I'm not I need to be persuaded otherwise.

Treichel: I'll take that.

Jeff.

The Bears the

Bacino: John is one of my
longtime friends, as he mentioned.

We were hired about a week apart at Kuna.

And and the nice thing
is he never changes.

He doesn't he will hold a grudge.

He will remember things and damn it,
if you didn't you didn't produce.

I'm gonna remember, i'm
excited about the Bears.

For the first time ever, they went out
and they got a coach that frankly matters.

Historically, the McCaskey and the
Halas have been cheap to the point where

Mike Ditka famously said they throw
nickels around like manhole covers.

And they finally went out and
they paid for a coach and they

paid for some free agent talent.

Again, this is the best time
of year for any football fan.

'cause your team's zero and zero.

There's hope.

We all have hope.

Everybody's undefeated right now.

But I'm excited about it and it's,
it's funny, there was a point last

year where the bears were four and two
and they were leading the commanders

in the last couple seconds about to go
five and two and next thing hail Mary,

or you can call it something different
if you're a Bears fan like I am.

And they go four and three,
they lose 10 in a row and

basically the bottom falls out.

The one thing I do like about their
new coach is, when when Matt and

Aggie was their coach and they had a
downfall in a preseason game, he came

and talked to the press conference,
said we're gonna, we're gonna look

at it and we'll watch some film.

And when Matt Eber flus was there
last year, they had a, another

bad outing, and he said we lost,
but we learned something from it.

And there was a story I was reading
about Johnson during the game the

other day where they were leading
the bills 28 to nothing and, he was

overheard yelling at the defense.

If you allow a point, you are walking
back from Soldier Field barefoot.

So he's the type of guy I
can, so it holds out some hope

for me to have a good season.

Treichel: I had a couple supervisors
in early on at NCA that work.

I like that.

And I'm a Viking fan.

You guys didn't pick records.

I'm gonna say we'll go nine
and eight, 10 and seven.

The JJ McCarthy era is gonna get off
to a good start, although I think

not quite as good as a lot of the
glass half full Viking fans believe.

But I'm excited to potentially
have a quarterback that can

compete with both of yours.

Bacino: I'll go 10 and seven as well.

Treichel: Very good.

John

McKechnie: 11 and 11 and six.

And just January is our problem.

Treichel: I'm just pleased that us
three old guys are smart, are able

to do the math of 17 versus 16.

And remember it's not 16.

It's not 14 and it's not 12 anymore.

Bacino: Yeah.

Wait, waited till you went first.

I just copied you.

Treichel: Yeah.

There we go.

That assumes I was right though.

Thank you guys.

As always it's a pleasure
catching up with you.

We'll, a as things break here we
might need to do some impromptu,

Hey, we have a new board.

What does it mean?

Et cetera, et cetera.

So thanks guys.

Bacino: You know how to reach me.

I take both your phone calls.

Treichel: Very good.

Thank you.

Bacino: Thanks

Treichel: guys.

Yeah, and listeners, I want to thank
you for listening and watching.

As always, mark Trike signing
off with flying colors.