This commentary is by Rachel Levin, a resident of Chittenden and a member of the VSECU.
It’s time to vote no on VSECU acquisition and keep VSECU in Vermont and Vermont in VSECU.
I had hoped I would not be writing another commentary on this topic after my initial commentary last March, when the VSECU “merger” (that VSECU then edited various web pages and documents to add the word “proposed”) was announced.
My previous comments are relevant and I welcome anyone to search for my initial commentary, which was widely published in Vermont media.
I have spent the time since the announcement reading everything I can find, accessing VSECU information and information invites, as well as communicating with a VSECU executive member, asking questions, trying to gain answers, to ascertain more about the “deal” and understand the reason it benefits this member as well as other Vermonters and why it is nothing more than a “sales pitch.”
I have now received and carefully read VSECU voting materials. Nothing has changed. In fact, I am even surer now: I am voting no and I have cast my ballot.
Why vote no?
It has been asked, continually, what makes this a “merger” and not an “acquisition.” I still do not understand: Merger = union, meld, fusion, unification, mixture, amalgamation; Acquisition = gain, attainment, purchase, procurement, acquirement, possession.
Acquisition appears to fit. If VSECU directors and executives prevail, VSECU will no longer exist. There is no longer the Vermont membership, local control, and recirculating of dollars in-state; the mission and vision of VSECU is fundamentally changed in a myriad of ways.
In the flyer enclosed with the ballot, “Your vote determines the future,” notice that it does not say “determines the future of VSECU” because there will be no VSECU! It also says, “... and will directly impact the strength of our financial cooperative and the future of local banking in Vermont.” It sure will: We will have one fewer Vermont-chartered, Vermont member-owned, local financial cooperative dedicated to Vermont, Vermonters, and strengthening Vermont communities.
The VSECU pamphlet that says “Notice of special meeting” provides some details of the “deal” of the larger financial institution subsuming VSECU. Several disconcerting facts (finally) come to light, if the acquiring financial institution prevails with the VSECU membership vote.
• “The continuing credit union ‘Field of Membership (FOM)’ will not be based on geography or residency, but on multiple common bonds related to membership in certain ‘Select Employee Groups (SEGs)’ or certain associations described below.” All those words above are code words for yes, various organizations and businesses in Vermont, but also extends to many other states.
What’s wrong with this? Nothing if VSECU members were not giving away their credit union. But if VSECU members don’t vote no, they are. (There are plenty of similar financial institutions; VSECU is unique in Vermont.)
• “The five appointed directors from VSECU will serve until election of the board at the 2023 meeting.” VSECU has about 71,000 members; the acquiring financial institution has about 95,500 members. Another sign VSECU goes by the wayside. Bigger subsumes smaller. Bigger with this acquisition is not better.
The overall theme from VSECU is that merging will improve “our” impact on Vermonters. I do not buy it.
For the 70,000-plus Vermont VSECU members who care about VSECU remaining a local, Vermont-chartered, independent credit union, where membership is Vermonters whose money is reinvested in Vermont for the purpose of creating vibrant Vermont communities, I invite you to join me in sending a strong “no” vote by casting your ballot and preserving a Vermont gem that will continue to be our financial resource and a resource for Vermont communities for decades to come.
Read the story on VTDigger here: Rachel Levin: The VSECU deal is an acquisition, much more than a merger.