Return to Nicholas Johnson's Iowa Rain Forest ("Earthpark") Web Site

Return to Nicholas Johnson's Blog, FromDC2Iowa
 
 

Story on Press-Citizen Web site: http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070301/NEWS01/703010332
(and also available: http://www.nicholasjohnson.org/BlogStuf/regents/kfpc0301.html)

Reader Comments Regarding Story on Press-Citizen Web site:
http://storychat.press-citizen.com/viewtopic.php?t=615&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=627d0c35a0c73f8177909925daa37d88

[Note: This material is copyright by the Press-Citizen, and is reproduced here as a matter of "fair use" for non-commercial, educational purposes only. Any other use may require the prior approval of the Iowa City Press-Citizen.]

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:12 am    Post subject: Members have spoken: UICCU it is
Reader comments and feedback for the Members have spoken: UICCU it is article.
Back to top
View user's profile
iowajeff
 
 

Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 15
Location: Iowa City
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:06 pm    Post subject: Need for Changes in Operation of UICCU
To avoid this sort of waste of money in the future, it is clear that the management of the UICCU must return to being under the watchful eyes of the membership as a whole.

To help accomplish this we need, first, multi-candidate elections for the Board of Directors positions, with each candidate having a published platform of how they will represent the members’ wishes. This will be helped by making available on the UICCU web site such pertinent information as the by-laws of the UICCU, and procedures for nominating candidates. I ask the management of UICCU to post such information as soon as possible.

Second, we need to have satellite/proxy voting for the Directors positions. We have members distributed widely (how are members in Grinnell supposed to vote with the present arrangement?), members with young children (6pm is a really inconvenient time), and members with limited mobility or transport (the hotel selected for the AGM in March is not on a bus route). I ask the Board of Directors to urgently institute satellite/proxy voting for the Directors positions.
Back to top
View user's profile
honest-abe
 
 

Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 4

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:02 pm    Post subject:
Let us all be clear here, Mr. Cox. It was not the Board's recommendation, but the membership's decision from October 4 that resulted in those monies being spent. With that membership decision last October the credit union had no other choice but to move forward with implementation. To state that greater oversight is needed of the Board is an injustice to the integrity of the process and to the Board itself, let alone a poor understanding of the laws in the state of Iowa.

From my perspective, the Board has taken great strides in transparency and integrity in this process. They convened a meeting in accordance with the petition, when they had every right to wait until March 8. They went to great lengths to ensure a democratic and open meeting last night. They took proactive steps to clear up some misinformation that unfortunately was intentionally being shared in the community. And most importantly, they oversee the highest performing credit union in Iowa, let alone one of the top 12 in the nation. Somewhere along the way we seem to have lost sight their past accomplishments if only because this one event. I understand the sensitivity, but would encourage all of us to take a more long term view of the accomplishments of the credit union, and not dwell entirely on one event you may not agree with.

I would encourage you, and the community as a whole to gracefully move forward with the process of reconciliation. This Board deserves far better treatment than they have received to date for their sincere and genuine attempts to keep the cooperative moving forward.
Back to top
View user's profile
iowajeff
 
 

Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 15
Location: Iowa City
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:12 pm    Post subject: Mr Cox?
I am not Mr. Cox.

Once again you get your facts wrong!
Back to top
View user's profile
alan1983
 
 

Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 10

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 3:37 pm    Post subject: Support the board/CEO
We have learned three things from this process.

1) It pays to lie. As Mr Tim Taffe did when he was soliciting signatures on the petition.

2) It pays to point fingers at people's backs. As iowajeff is doing now to the management/board of our proud membership.

3) It pays to not follow your own rules. The petition stated that the meeting should be clear of any propoganda... and yet I saw those opposed to the name change handing out I (heart) UICCU stickers.

I still find it funny that iowajeff refuses to say who he really is, all the while chastising others. We don't need these quacks on our board of directors. Or will will very quickly go from #1 to non-existant.
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 3:46 pm    Post subject:
Honest Abe:

Really? Don't you think that if the board knew anything at all about the community it serves, they would have seen this controversy coming? But instead they spent $400,000+ to promote a doomed, alienating name change. You don't think that was a miscalculation? Bad judgment? In any other organization, that kind of major screw-up would get you fired.

What is their excuse for being so unfamiliar with the values of their own membership?

Which raises the question: are we done? Can the management possibly justify pouring another $400,000 or more into trying to change the name again? If that's the plan, it's not just time to vote the name change down, it's time to vote the management out.
Back to top
View user's profile
melt1971
 
 

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 6

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 4:34 pm    Post subject: Taffe & Co
After the second vote, I am saddened by the fact people continue to spread lies about the board of directors and the great CEO of our organization. I was also appalled that a postcard was placed on my vehicle's windshield at the meeting last night trying to suggest that our 3 board members up for re-election need to be replaced. I have never worked with such devoted people in all of my life and they do it voluntarily. The thought of someone such as Tim Taffe thinking he could do a better job is laughable and scary. I know that I do not want someone who is willing to spread lies and solicit people outside of our branches to get what they want representing this fabulous credit union...what kind of reputation would that give us in the 14 communities we currently serve? Let's really stop and think what's important and do the right thing on March 21st-vote to re-elect those who have been working hard for you for years. Their top priority is the membership and communities around us.

Thank you.
Back to top
View user's profile
thoreau80
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 4:44 pm    Post subject: alan1983 and propaganda
So what if some people were wearing stickers? At the time, that was the name of their credit union. Regardless, it pales in comparison to the propaganda I got while standing in line to get a ballot. The woman who was checking ID and membership lists was soliciting everyone dealing with her. She was spouting off reasons why the name needed to be changed and arguing with any who disagreed with her. In addition, there was a pile of pro-Optiva info sheets beside her on the table.

The pro-Optiva folk were certainly engaging in more propaganda than simple stickers.
Back to top
View user's profile
tellthetruth
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 7

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 5:02 pm    Post subject: Taffe and Cox agenda of deceit and misinformation marks loss
Cox/Taffe,

Tell the truth, the petition you circulated was fallacious and the signatures you obtained were collected under fraudulent means, having disseminated outright lies to the members you accosted. The petition was not legal in any sense of the word, but it was honored none the less in good faith by a principled and volunteer Board of Directors. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been wasted at the hands of but two people; money that would otherwise have been spent wisely, eliminating the confusion of potential members and courageously redefining our credit union. With less than one-third of our membership base having any relationship to our original sponsorship group (the University) we have grown far beyond the exclusive border our name would imply.

A name change is imminent, but it will not happen today. Democracy at it's best? Doubtful.
_________________
The Truth is Out There
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 5:10 pm    Post subject:
My question has been greeted by deafening silence, so I ask it again:

How can the management be so out of touch with the values of its members?
Back to top
View user's profile
anonymouscoward
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 2

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 5:26 pm    Post subject: My Rant
The UICCU Board and Director must take last nights vote at more than face value. I believe the main issue was not a only a rejection of the name Optiva but something much more subjective and personal; Iowans in general are very fair-minded and tend to reject unsound reasoning and can basically smell a rat a mile away - it's an innate sense that we should take pride in. Couple this with the general makeup of the Iowa City community and it was obvious this entire fiasco was doomed from the start. Not so much because the UICCU name was being replaced but 1) because membership was never given the opportunity to decide if the idea should even be pursued and 2) The process, including the over-the-top propagandizing by employees, smacks of corporate elitism - simply a dumb thing to try to pull in this town.
The Board and Directors obvious lack of understanding of the people that make up its core membership is astounding. This is an activist community and thinking they could basically ram this through "in the middle of the night" style with a cursory vote gives credence to those who say there is a hidden agenda and that the Board is out of touch. Whether there is more than meets the eye as to the impetus of the name change will be debated until, and unless, more facts come to light, however, my concern lies with the "daddy knows best" attitude put forth by the Board and unfortunately by the employees in their numerous letters of support.
Those that believe the members of the UICCU should defer to the Board/Directors decision on something as monumental as a change of the name of the Credit Union (and I emphasize "Union") do not seem to understand we are not customers of a bank - we are member-owners of our Credit Union and to borrow from Bush "we are the deciders" and last evening that decision came down. Not only was the name rejected but so was the entire process.
I must also say the campaigning done by UICCU employees was in bad form. I do not think they should have sat by in silence, however, the arguments they put forth and the vile directed at some of the more vocal opponents was counter-productive and has likely built a wall between the employees and many members. That is D-U-M-B and also bad business.
Back to top
View user's profile
ICE123
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 2

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 5:56 pm    Post subject: How can the management be so out of touch with the values...
I have been to pretty much every annual meeting the last 6 years, and the turnout was very poor, no one ever objected to anything... Maybe it is not just the BOD / Management that was out of touch but maybe the members should have been more involved also.

Possibly a change in the BOD could be a good thing, but I do not want these two people that started the petition to have anything to do the management of my credit union. I don't think they can be trusted.

By the way I am not an employee.

Todd Landerson
Back to top
View user's profile
bwright
 
 

Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 5

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 6:12 pm    Post subject: Middle of the night?
First,

Thank you to everyone who voted regardless of how you voted.

It was nice to see such a large turnout, though it would have been nice if we'd had that kind of response the first time around.

This process was night a "middle-of-the-night" operation. The membership was notified of the first vote with more advanced notice and more marketing materials than this second vote.

Iowans, I would agree, are generally fair minded, but as for smelling a rat, I'm afraid we are as susceptible or even more so to ill-meaning people as anyone else.

Otherwise, we would not have to spend so much time and energy training our staff to spot scams and head off the efforts of con artists that try to take advantage of our membership.

I personally find negative campaigning in the political arena distasteful at best, especially as it ends up making everyone look like a rat.

I also dislike dishonesty, which was definitely a tool used by some to obtain signatures on the petition.

But, the vote is done and we move on. My only hope is that the membership cares enough going forward to better attend future meetings where issues like this ARE discussed.

Perhaps it is not the Board that is out of touch with the members, perhaps it is the members that were out of touch with the Credit Union and the way the Credit Union works. Most members come in our doors and call us a "bank". Most members, unfortunately, do not understand that they can have a say.

Hopefully that has now changed.

If you didn't know about the name change process, you have only yourself to blaim for not attending the previous meetings.

Ben Wright
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 6:21 pm    Post subject:
I don't know anything about the role Cox and Taffe played in this series of events. But I think if you're going to accuse someone of lies or dishonest conduct, you should substantiate it, which none of these posts have done *at all*.

Moreover, anyone who thinks that 800 people waited a hour in bumper-to-bumper traffic to vote against the name change because they were "misled" or "lied to" is delusional. I didn't vote against the name change for that reason, and neither did anyone else who I talked to last night. Again, the management and its supporters have to face the fact they seriously misread their own community, and that they have no one to blame for that but themselves. Do they never leave their cubicles?
Back to top
View user's profile
bwright
 
 

Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 5

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 6:41 pm    Post subject: Response to hk
I didn't say that everyone was lied to or that that is why they were there.

We have several reports from many of the people that signed the petition that they WERE lied to or misled.

Not that it matters now, because I can't give you the proof in these posts that you want, and you have no reason to believe me anyway. After all, I'm an employee and must somehow be a puppet with strings going back to the corrupt leadership, right?

While I know it's is hard to believe, because most other organizations do not work this way, employees have their own voice at the Credit Union and are encouraged to think for themselves. That's part of why we can be so responsive to everyday member needs.

Post what you will in response. I'm going back to work.
 

hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:03 pm    Post subject:
Suddenly we go from hearing that specific people lied and are untrustworthy to the statement that "some people were lied to by someone" but that there isn't any proof of it. Dishonesty is a serious accusation. Do you make that accusation without any evidence? If there's evidence, let's hear it. But apparently when I ask for evidence is when you go "back to work."

Second, as I understand it, this is your argument: "Yes, the majority of the members thought the name change was a terrible idea. And yes, the management should have seen that coming and avoided all that expense. But we should never have found out any of that, because there shouldn't have been a second vote." Pardon me for not being reassured by that argument.

For a bunch of independent thinkers, the credit union employees sure do think alike. I've seen more evidence of independent thinking in Soviet-era "elections." Am I really to believe that a credit union employee would feel free to express opposition to the name change?
Back to top
View user's profile
Ham
 
 

Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:12 pm    Post subject:
I'll give some lies I was told.

1. I was told that UICCU will be taken over by aggressive management with the intention to convert it into a bank, and therefore creating a mass of cash for the boardmembers.

2. I was also told the "optiva" in CA. was trademarked and can't be used.

I was also told that They (Taffe and CO.) wanted to get "three designated candidates" off the Board and then fire our CU president. (This sounds more like just not liking a name change?)

I think they lied to me.
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:17 pm    Post subject:
Well that pins it down. You "were told" things by "them." Not by Taffe and Cox, apparently. But someone told you things about them which you have no reason to think are untrue. Therefore "they" lied to you.

Is that all it takes to call someone a liar?
Back to top
View user's profile
melt1971
 
 

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 6

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:25 pm    Post subject: HK ??? Who are you?
HK, the petition was posted in the earlier stories, perhaps you should contact the people on that list and ask them what they were told by Tim Taffe & Company...that would be the proof you're looking for. Not everyone on that list understood what they were signing or took the time to read the fact sheet first, I'm fairly confident in that remark. I realize some are just that passionate about the name and don't care what other people think or say and that's fine, that's part of what makes America so great. The others who posted on here have that same right and for you to personally attack people puts you on the same level as the ones who did the misleading or lying. The employees are back at work quickly trying to undo several months worth of work so if he says he has to "go back to work" I trust that's not a lie. Please try to get past the negativity and go on - business as usual. If you still think there's some kind of "conspiracy theory" or "middle of the night" operation, perhaps another financial institution would be a better fit for you, no disrespect of course. The credit union appreciates their members regardless of their vote, but personal attacks are not acceptable on either side.
Back to top
View user's profile
Ham
 
 

Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:46 pm    Post subject: oh my
Hk - Taffe told me. Sorry that wasn't clear.

Wake up. You're your own conspiracy.
Back to top
View user's profile
bsokal
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 1

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:53 pm    Post subject: The petition and the vote
I circulated one of the petitions. I required everyone who signed it to read it fully before they signed it. I made no false statements.

There were 2 petitions. One was a draft which I never saw; it was minimally circulated and signed by about 7 people.

The petition I circulated contained no lies. It said nothing about banks; it did not generally disparage management. It asked for a new election and it said why. That's it!

To those of you who did not read the petition signed by 143 credit union members, please don't tell me what it said. I read it.
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:56 pm    Post subject:
So when someone calls someone else a liar, and I suggest they should back it up with evidence, *I* am the one engaging in a personal attack? I didn't realize that asking someone to back up their accusations was so beyond the boundaries of civility.

Or is it a "personal attack" for a member to criticize the management's decisions? If you think that, you've got a funny idea about democracy (though one shared by Bush, Cheney, and company).

Please read. I never said anything was a conspiracy or that anything occurred in the middle of the night.

Ham: I give you credit for actually trying to articulate who lied to you and when, unlike the other posters on this site so far. But please clarify further: Taffe told you what? And better still, someone PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE explain how that excuses the management's pursuit of this fiasco?

I await some explanation of the credit union employees' unanimity on this issue. You can't have it both ways. Either that unanimity was not genuine, or there isn't a *single soul* at the credit union who shares the values of the membership. Which one is worse?
Back to top
View user's profile
peterj
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:59 pm    Post subject:
HK

We have to understand that proponents of the name change to Optiva will grab at any excuse to justify this huge fiasco

What has the cost been? Disterhoft says $400,000 but the total is likely to be much larger. First there was the $250,000 spent by Disterhoft on the consultant, then the signs, cards etc., and finally there is the employee time spent.

Remember this is OUR money that they are spending.

Proponents of Optiva in this forum will come up with all manner of red herrings and side issues to distract from the key issue you mention: How can the management be so out of touch with the values of its members?

It is clear that there needs to be profound change in the behavior of the management and of some of the employees. We will have to see if they have learnt the lesson of last night, which is: this is a member owned credit union and that management need to respond to our wishes.

There may be some (hopefully a very few) who refuse to learn this lesson. For those, there is some good news. It is relatively straightforward to set up your own Optiva Credit Union. I am sure Disterhoft will be very happy to get rid of the embarrassing signs and copyright at low prices.
Back to top
View user's profile
jmooe
 
 

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:01 pm    Post subject: The vote does not represent the majority
I have worked for other financial institutions in the area whose presidents and board members possess questionable ethics and are, by all means, only in it to make money and have no concern for their customers. In fact, I left another financial institution to come to the Credit Union solely based on the fact that the management and board of the former institution exhibited some of the most abhorrent ethics I have seen in any business.

Coming to the Credit Union has been an eye-opening experience. I had no idea that there were such incredibly amazing people that existed in the business world. What so many of you out there do not realize, and could never realize without working here, is just how incredible the president and board of the CU truly are. I love working here so much and have such strong faith in what they do each day that I would never doubt their convictions.

We convene for regular meetings during which we, as an organization, discuss, not the ways we can work to make more money, but the ways in which we can better serve our members every day. These meetings are led by the same person so many of you have tried to accuse of doing something conniving or underhanded. Nothing could be further from the truth.

This president and this board have only acted in the best interest of this membership and the potential membership that exists in the 14 counties we serve. They have acted to determine the ways in which we can better serve our members, and our potential members, every day. To suggest anything otherwise is a disgrace to the success and growth that has been achieved under their leadership; it is unfortunate that there are those out there that posses the impudence to disregard these achievements.

J Kelso
Back to top
View user's profile
Krelbon1
 
 

Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 9

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:26 pm    Post subject: Can people READ or just TYPE?
It doesn't sound to me like anyone is rationalizing or offering up "red herrings" at this point, though I certainly saw opponents of the new name doing so over the course of the last several weeks.

If you need proof of that, just look back at the many other postings over previous days.

It sounds to me like the employees are going back to doing what they have always done.

Taking care of the members coming in the door.

Stop ranting long enough to realize that the PEOPLE you are bad-mouthing are the REASON you LIKE the Credit Union.

You're so stuck on proof Rolling Eyes - let's see proof that the Board is out to get the members. They would gain nothing under any name as they are volunteers! Exclamation
_________________
BW
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:31 pm    Post subject:
Jmooe: Pardon my impudence. But where is your response to my argument? How could the management have misread their membership so badly? Shouldn't they have seen this coming?

Your post's title was "the vote does not represent the majority," but you make no attempt to defend that statement. Of course there are a lot of members who did not vote -- is that your point? But aren't 806 members a better indication of the majority than 631?

And again, I have not accused the management of being "conniving" or "underhanded." Nor has anyone else on this site. I accused them of being out of touch with their membership. I believe you when you say that they are good people. That doesn't mean they are good managers, as this fiasco amply demonstrates.
Back to top
View user's profile
tomtom
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 1

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:32 pm    Post subject: Membership Matters
As I read the comments below I notice many people trying to blame the board of directors. There are 45,000 member/owners of the credit union and only a few board members. If the member/owners were to be involved all the time instead of for just one vote, then things would be a lot different. Do not look at the board of directors as your scapegoat for the situation we are in. If anyone is to blame, it is we the members for our lack of involvement in our credit union. I believe the board of directors is doing an excellent job.
Back to top
View user's profile
DaveR
 
 

Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 1

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:35 pm    Post subject: One explanation.
The employees of the Credit Union came to work the day after the October 4th meeting knowing that "We are Optiva now."

For the past 4 months we have been working hard to mold this name in our own minds, and are plans for the future. We have developed marketing plans from the money spent with Weber Group, that would help us to sell that name. We will still be able to use that knowledge with our name UICCU (which makes this not a total financial loss).

For the past 4 months we have been gearing ourselves up with energy and enthusiasm... and all of a sudden that has been lost. Where does our energy and our enthusiasm go? Right back to the membership. Every one of us showed up to work this morning knowing that we are UICCU. We are fine with that. But now we are being told to be ashamed of ourselves, that we failed, that we dont understand the membership, that our family must be reorganized, that this was a fiasco.

We have learned a lot throughout this process... even better, the membership is more involved now than ever! We know that is a positive thing. We are doing our best to be Great Employees... but you must admit, it is very difficult to be the brunt of so many attacks. We believed in optiva. We wish the community would have had the chance to see what the name could have been. Instead, a few members spent the past 4 months giving that name a meaning contrary to what we had in mind.

This is over now. Optiva is lost forever. But the Board, the Management, and the Employees are still the wonderful people they always were.

Dave R
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:08 pm    Post subject:
DaveR:

I still can't help but wonder: why is it so terrible for a member to express the opinion that the management screwed up on this? Should we never criticize the management's decisions because they're trying so hard? Because they mean well? Because they're good people?

I really do believe that they are good people. If it really seemed like the management had "learned" from the vote, fine. But instead, at least judging from the posts here, it sounds like no one has learned anything. Instead, the vote was the result of "lies" and manipulations by "a few members" and doesn't reflect the majority, and the members themselves are to blame, and how dare anyone criticize us, etc. Just what is it you learned again?

Moreover, when I read someone mournfully describing how "we believed in Optiva" and "now Optiva is lost forever," I think: what planet are these people from? It certainly doesn't sound like the Iowa City I know. And that was borne out last night, wasn't it?
Back to top
View user's profile
Little Johnny
 
 

Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 4
Location: Eastern Iowa
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:11 pm    Post subject:
I fully support the CU Board and it's management. They have done wonderful things for the cooperative and this community and the name change would have been 1 more. I certainly wish it had been approved (again).

Last edited by Little Johnny on Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
 

tellthetruth
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 7

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:18 pm    Post subject: 2nd Vote was Compassionate
HK/Taffe/Cox

What you fail to realize is that the 1st vote was, by the strictest standards, completely valid. Our volunteer Board of Directors did not have to commit to a 2nd vote, and yet they chose to do so. Why? Because they obviously believe in the democratic process and care deeply about the credit union and the people they serve.

Imagine if we had a 2nd chance at every election in the US... perhaps more people would wake up and get involved the 2nd time around, once they realized the first outcome was less than favorable... a 2nd vote is virtually unheard of in any electoral process. Our Board should be absolutely commended for choosing to give every member the second chance to be heard.

The fact is our credit union made a greater effort notifying members of the first meeting, due to the delayed petition, and still we only had about 400 people attend. How can you blame a general lack of interest in the whole process on the Board?

The credit union is a member-owned financial cooperative, existing only to offer people a vibrant and viable alternative to banks. Have you taken a look down the street recently? Banks are like weeds, popping up on every corner. In order for us to continue offering the best rates on loans and deposits and fewer fees than our banking bacteria, we need to remove barriers to growth – that we might realize a greater economy of scale.

It’s a bona fide problem that almost 75% of our potential members are under the pretense of ineligibility that our current name implies. Our membership has also become increasingly disconnected from the University of Iowa; less than one third of our membership has any affiliation with the University. Now, we have grown regardless of this barrier, but we cannot expect this trend to continue as our environment becomes even more competitive.

Our volunteer Board of Directors are truly courageous visionaries for taking the initiative to be proactive rather than reactive, to be progressive rather than regressive. Bottom line, they care. Every member should feel insulted by your vicious comments; I know I am.
_________________
The Truth is Out There
Back to top
View user's profile
peterj
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:19 pm    Post subject: Thanks HK
Thanks HK for your thoughful posts. They make up somewhat for the incoherent ranting of Little Johnny.
Back to top
View user's profile
ag33
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 1

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:22 pm    Post subject: Fiasco?
I have been watching intently on what is going on with the UICCU changing its name to Optiva. I received the letter back in September telling me about the upcoming meeting in October to vote on the name change, actually I think I got two seperate letters. I attended the meeting in October and wasn't sold either way on the name but appreciated the vision of our board and our President to keep our "Credit Union" moving forward and continuing to be competitive in this market place. I respect them and thank them for volunteering for this great Credit Union.

I was quite shocked when coming back from a recent vacation to find that we were having a re-vote on the name change. I was at the first meeting, I listened to our board give a great explanation of why we were doing this, I voted yes and now I had to do it again? I heard rumblings of it not being a fair process. But, yet I walked in the door, they checked my ID, I had an opportunity to become informed and after that I made my decsion to vote yes. I walked out of there that night a little unhappy with some of the comments made to our board and CEO, I walked out of there unsure of what Optiva was, but I walked out of there knowing that our name would no longer be UICCU it would be OPTIVA.

So here is my question. How is that a fiasco? They held a special meeting according to the bylaws and it was approved by the credit union league.

Looks like the fiasco was not enough people taking the time to become informed and to attend the meeting in October.
Back to top
View user's profile
jmooe
 
 

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:36 pm    Post subject: This one's for you, hk
hk:

Whoever you may be, my former post to this site was in response to the article above, printed in today’s paper, and is a reaction to the variety of things I have heard as an employee of the CU, a citizen of this community, and at last night’s vote as well as the previous vote. For you to suggest that I was even addressing you in my previous post is presumptuous and is an indication of the manner in which you took on the name change vote to begin with: Was the vote about you or about something larger than you?

I never had any intention of addressing the subject of my previous post and I don’t intend to in this one.

And, as I stated above, my post wasn’t directed at you. I’d prefer not to waste my time that way, but since you’ve made the implication that my managers are in some way not good managers, I am choosing to take the time. If I didn’t make it clear enough in my previous post, let me be clear now: The current management at the credit union is the absolute best and, if I should be so bold, none of us could ask for anyone better. If, for some reason, the current management should for some reason be replaced then, and only then, would your credit union, as you know it, cease to exist. (Thanks for that one, Taffe.)
Back to top
View user's profile
TiredofTaffe
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 1

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:54 pm    Post subject: Get a Life!
HK/COX/TAFFE

It is amazing the time and effort you have put in on this name change. It is a mere guess but I bet you are unmarried- but dating your sister, have squirrels as pets and blow in a jug for fun. The three of you would make a great movie- perhaps a remake of "The Three Stooges".

Taffe- nice leather fedora and trenchcoat. Who dresses you? Your Mom???
Back to top
View user's profile
My Man Godfrey
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 2

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:58 pm    Post subject: A plea to the employees of the credit union.
For the life of me, I cannot figure out why the credit union's employees have been so aggressive and emotional in pushing this ridiculous name change, but, whatever their reasons, may I make a request?

QUIT INSULTING THE INTELLIGENCE OF THE CREDIT UNION'S MEMBERSHIP.

We did not vote in large numbers against the name change because we were "misled" or "lied to." My only of for information about the name change came from the credit union itself; several account representatives tried to explain to me why the name change would be good for the credit union, and in the course of those conversations, I became more and more convinced that the name change was a disastrous mistake. No malicious or nefarious petitioners filled my impressionable mind with filthy lies. I have eyes, ears, and a brain, and all of these senses agreed that the old name was preferable in every regard. I don't need a map or a translator to help me identify cynical, patronizing corporate gimmickry.

Attacking the petitioning process also seems foolish; it was that petition that enabled the vote, and it was the vote that enabled the credit union's membership to repudiate the ill-advised name change to Advantial or Optavia or Financia or whatever. (I've been stabbing my ear with a Q-Tip in the hopes of permanent deleting the word from my memory bank.)

The army of Financia/Advantial/Thrivent/Optavia fans seem incapable of grasping that in this academic community, the baseline level of education and political involvement is quite high. We aren't children, and you don't know better than us.

Employees: quit dissing the membership, and please accept that we have legitimate, valid reasons for not wanting our local, community credit union to be renamed Excellencia, Loquaxis, Lexapro, Supremia, Successia, CitiQuestia, etc. We don't like having our intelligence insulted with sleazy corporate gimmickry.

My own reasons for opposing the name change are very similar to the reasons I would oppose a plan to replace our city parks with Hardee's restaurants and parking lots: I like my community, and am fiercely opposed to attempts to uglify it. The proposed name for the credit union was obnoxious and cynical; I don't want to be looking at it and hearing it every day for the next 40 years of my life.
Back to top
View user's profile
lizeisen
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 1

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:04 pm    Post subject: What if...
I have been a member of this wonderful Credit Union for many years. Those who have the responsibility of staffing, overseeing and running this Credit Union are indeed due respect and credit.

Idea

Since this credit union belongs to all of us...

WHAT IF we band together -regardless of how one voted - and give a VOLUNTARY contribution (amount is up to you) to the Credit Union to help offset the price of the research and printed products, learn something from all this, and move on.

What say ye?
_________________
Rev. Liz
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:49 pm    Post subject:
The worst thing that I have said about anyone here is that the management is out of touch with its members and that they made a bad decision that led to a fiasco. Apparently these are "vicious" comments.

On the other hand, calling someone a liar without substantiation, calling people fools and idiots, suggesting that the members are presumptuous to criticize the board that they *own* -- that's just good wholesome debate.

Again, let me see if I get the argument of ag33, tellthetruth, and Little Johnny: You don't deny that the membership voted last night to decisively reject Optiva. And you don't deny that, if the management knew anything about its members, it should have known from the outset that the name would bomb, and avoided the whole mess. But you say that none of that concern us, because the second vote never should have happened. If that's your idea of a persuasive argument, I'm not surprised that your side lost the vote.

Jmooe: Excuse me for being so presumptuous as to think you would deign to address me. After all, addressing me, as opposed to some unspecified people, would actually have required you to respond to specific arguments. But did you happen to notice that no one in "the article above" is suggesting that anyone did anything "conniving," either?

Take another look through these posts, jmooe, and see which side is casting aspersions on the motives and morality of the other. If you can't see the difference between criticizing a bad business decision and calling someone a liar, then I can't help you.

I must say, I remain puzzled by the people who are shocked that a member might want to speak out on such a trivial topic -- and then say so by speaking out on the same trivial topic. Like our tearful friend who couldn't believe that anyone would come out to the meeting last night to oppose Optiva "instead of" helping find a cure for cancer. As she stood there at the meeting last night to support Optiva, "instead of" helping find a cure for cancer . . .
Back to top
View user's profile
Rachel
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 1

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:35 pm    Post subject: Onward.
I think we can all save a little time here and get back to life. A vote for Optiva was won. A second vote was called for, and it lost. For the credit union, I can’t imagine it is easy to announce a new name and then essentially wait 6 months to give that name meaning or have people “experience it”. Most financial institutions across the country (including CUs) change their names without even asking for customer input.

I heard the suggestion at the meeting that the credit union should hold a contest for the name. I can’t fathom how that would work. If you get 500 submissions, who decides which ones to keep in the final list? Or do you give everyone 500 names to choose from? Or perhaps you draw a name out of a hat and that’s the one you are stuck with? Any way you slice it, getting 40 something thousand members to like one choice is impossible.

I see the Board had the option legally to call for the vote on March 8th. That means they could have done this one week after the name change, which would have deflated a lot of anti-Optiva peoples’ sails. They took the high ground and gave the petitioners their say. They had the meeting on the 28th. Now they get criticized for it.

Kudos to the Board and Management for keeping this CU strong! So they wanted to change the name (sounds like they will HAVE to eventually). Were they doing that just for fun or do we think they really feel it is the best interest for the long run? My guess is this wasn’t fun. Do a little research. Thousands of credit unions have changed their name in recent years. In addition, at least one CU closes about every day because they can’t compete in that industry. It’s a tough market.

I voted for Optiva. I saw the video on their site and though it looked fresh, not corporate. But I don’t HATE others for not liking it. I felt most people there (screamers aside) were civil credit union members. The Board and CEO were NOT condescending. But when I left the meeting and found a flier on my car that now wants to oust the Board members…? Is that what they get for giving the petitioners what they wanted?

I see nothing wrong with this credit union, and nothing wrong with the way it is run. I’ve been a member for a long time and watched the Board take some bold steps. And by the way, congratulations to them for being 12th out of over 8000 CUs in the nation for Member Giveback (I see on their website). If being in the top 1% of credit unions nationwide is out of touch, then good God don't touch me.

Most of all, congratulations to them for using the democratic process, twice! Whether you were for or against Optiva, what’s done is done. I hope you stand AGAINST this new initiative to remove the Board Members. It’s just not right.

Lastly, I heard them say that that the CU has grown at a record pace in this contrversial period. Could this all just be a huge marketing trick to get the word out that anyone can join? That would be brilliant!
Back to top
View user's profile
tellthetruth
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 7

 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:47 pm    Post subject: Finality
hk,

The lies I was referring to have been substantiated. Taffe's Guest Opinion proved my point when he claimed that the Board of Directors and Management were aiming to convert the credit union into a bank. There is not a shred of truth to this statement. What more evidence do you need?

I'm not posting here to change anyone's opinion on the name Optiva, or even on the merits of changing our name. My goal has only been to defend the volunteer Board of Directors, who have done nothing but selflessly promote our credit union. I have however shared my own personal feelings as to why we have sought to change our name, and I believe I have made several valid points that you have yet to address or even consider.

In this thread and another, the Directors have been unduly assaulted. I believe that we elect our leaders and place our trust in them to make better, more informed decisions than we are capable of making. I respect your opinion, and yet I choose to disagree with it.

Please answer my earlier question: What would you have done, as a business owner, having discovered that 75% of your potential patrons mistakenly assume that they are ineligible to buy what you are selling?

I am all ears. Anyone, please feel free to comment. Civil and spirited debate is appreciated.
_________________
The Truth is Out There
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 12:30 am    Post subject:
tellthetruth:

I can answer that question. I would have considered changing the name of the credit union, and I would have tried to find a name that wasn't likely to repel most of the current members.

Now can you answer mine? Which of the following statements is untrue:

1. The management should have known its membership well enough to foresee that they would reject the name Optiva.

2. If the management had known its membership well enough to foresee that its members would reject the name Optiva, they would not have spent $400,000 (or more) to promote that name change.

As for Taffe: He asserts that the management wants to convert the credit union into a bank. You then assert the opposite. Neither assertion is evidence that the other is untrue. So I guess I need more evidence than *no* evidence before calling someone a liar.
Back to top
View user's profile
peterj
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 12:50 am    Post subject: Difference in Vision?
Is there a difference in vision for UICCU?

It seems to me that most employee- members (together with the employee management) have a vision for UICCU that is growth oriented, aiming towards a larger institution that can provide more services.

Meanwhile, some (most?) regular members want a personal, open, not-mega scale institution that reflects the character of Iowa.

If there is this difference in vision then it is no surprise that we have had problems.

Is this difference in vision a correct interpretation? I would really appreciate your thoughts on this, given, I trust, in a friendly constructive manner. I am really trying to understand why we are in this situation.
Back to top
View user's profile
alan1983
 
 

Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 10

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 1:01 am    Post subject: Majority being used Falsely
The interesting thing about these posts is that they fail to account for the 40 thousand members voices that havent been heard.

We had a turnout of (from what i understand) 1.6% of the total membership last night. Yet, if you read posts... people keep saying that "most" of the members disliked the name and or process from Oct 4th. I dont think that statement can be made. The only statement that IS true would be "The majority of members that attended the meeting last night..."

I have a parent in Cedar Rapids that has asked the CU to open a branch in her city. Now... UofI would be a more difficult sell to students/faculty of Coe College, Kirkwood College, Mt Mercy and Hamilton College would it not?

I would like the CU to grow into CR! I dont think thats too big at all. I think that people assume by "growth" that the CU has aspirations of being in EVERY US STATE... I dont think thats true. I think they look for growth to immediate connecting counties in Iowa. (Do you agree peterj?)
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 1:24 am    Post subject:
Peterj's observation is a good one. To those of us who do not have an evangelical mission to bring financial services to the wider world, it seems fair to ask, "Why?" And to ask how the changes would benefit not just the management but *current members,* and to ask whether those benefits are worth the cost. (And, like My Man Godfrey, we don't all define cost purely in terms of money.) I'd like to hear that discussion, too.
Back to top
View user's profile
alan1983
 
 

Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 10

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 1:36 am    Post subject: Growth
Lets discuss growth.

If the CU doesn't put a focus on growth; where would people go when they come to Johnson County? (Probably a local bank).

And... there are current members (as i just said) who have asked the CU to "grow" and open an office in CR. If they were to do that... wouldn't they just be doing what is asked of them BY the membership?

Now... they know there is a difficult time selling the name UICCU (to potential non UofI members) in the county they already have branches. Did they forsee that this would be more of a challenge in joining counties they have been asked to spread by current members? Was that part of their decision to seek a new name?
Back to top
View user's profile
 

hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:00 am    Post subject:
You say, "If the CU doesn't put a focus on growth; where would people go when they come to Johnson County? (Probably a local bank).

But is it wrong to ask, "So?" Again, what's the harm to the current members if not everyone chooses the Credit Union? There may be a good answer to that question, but I'd just like to hear it.

If the members as a group want to expand to Cedar Rapids, then go for it. But do they? There's always going to be some members who wish the Credit Union were a little closer to home -- but that's just a rationale for limitless expansion. If I lived in Cedar Rapids, I'd think twice about whether I want to be a member of a large and growing credit union, or whether I'd rather be a member of a small and local credit union where my voice would be more likely to be heard. Worth thinking about, anyway.

I and many others have already said that it made sense to think about changing the name of the credit union. For the thousandth time, it is the name Optiva that bothers us, for reasons well stated by My Man Godfrey and many others. That was the choice that seemed so out of touch -- not the choice to consider a new name.

Finally, tellthetruth: You say, "I believe that we elect our leaders and place our trust in them to make better, more informed decisions than we are capable of making." That, more than any other statement on this site, shows how out of touch you are with this community. But look on the bright side: you've got a great future in the Republican Party!
Back to top
View user's profile
nd
 
 

Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am    Post subject: UICCU vs Optiva
I admit that I was strongly opposed to the UICCU changing its name the first time around -- so much so that I was moved to attend my first ever members' meeting -- more than most members did! However, the second time around, I WAS in favor of the name change because I believe it is in the best interests of the membership. Why? Because of the money spent thus far. Why else? Because nothing but the name was changing (how many times did they have to tell us?!) Would I have missed the old name? Yes. Did I like the way the first vote happened? No. But, you know what, I have a life. I simply cannot fathom the time some people spend on such silly issues. And who cares if the employees were in favor of it? Good for them for being progressive.

I have confidence in the Board of Directors and Mr. Disterhaft. He's brought many of the great things to the membership that you enjoy today.

Get over it.
Back to top
View user's profile
alan1983
 
 

Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 10

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:18 am    Post subject: Growth
Why was the credit union ever started in the first place; if not to grow.

By your question "What's the harm to the current members if not everyone chooses the Credit Union?"... what would have happened if someone asked that of the original 25 people who were members?

If the current members are proud of their institution, then what is the harm of sharing their institution with newcomers? A challenge to growth could very possibly be seen as someone who simply doesn't want to share.

By your queries, if a member worked for Kirkwood Iowa City... and was trasnfered to Kirkwood CR... they should accept the fact that their institution may never expand to meet their new needs.

After all... the credit union offered Debit Cards for the first time to meet the needs of the members. Is opening a branch in a new county different?

Should we ask the question... "Why do we continue to compete in the marketplace." You begin to imply that we are big enough... so why not give up now and leave it up for fate to decide. I think we all know that is now how the system works.

Im curious HK: What motivates you to question growth and expansion? Do you have a vested interest in the CU becoming stagnant?
Back to top
View user's profile
areyouserious
 
 

Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 17

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:53 am    Post subject: Ironical
Every single member of the credit union represented "growth" the instant they joined...

So if you don't like growth, you must hate yourself. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile
xrayanne
 
 

Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 1
Location: Solon
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:55 am    Post subject: UICCU
I'm happy that UICCU is back. Optiva sounded much like an eye pharmaceutical. One thought I had while standing in the packed lobby of the hotel last night was that I was pretty sure we were against fire code with the amount of people crammed in line.
Back to top
View user's profile
alan1983
 
 

Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 10

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:56 am    Post subject: Judgement
I agree that the majority of members that opposed the name change to Optiva, did so because they did/do not like the name. I also agree that the name does not represent our community. (As it has been said, the word means nothing).

My question is this: who bestowes meaning on a word/name? Is it the first person to use that name? Or is it anyone who chooses to use the name?

The complete english dictionary has to update annually to encorporate both new words, and old words that have taken on new meaning. (ie, the word "run" has more dictionary definitions than any other word. Were all those meanings to the word when it was first used?)

Does anyone agree that IF the name Optiva had passed... the Credit Union would have made the name synonymous with our community values. Just because it doesn't mean that today... doesn't mean that with use and effort it wont mean it tomorrow.

Did we jump the gun on Optiva? If the Credit Union has to change its name in the future... will we jump the gun again?
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:01 am    Post subject:
Hard as it may be for you to fathom, alan1983, I have no vested interest. I have never met Mr. Taffe and have talked with Jeff Cox briefly three times, and never about this topic. (Nor do I have any reason to think that *they* have vested interests.) Believe it or not, I just feel strongly about the issue, and enjoy debate and democracy. I guess that's just one of those crazy Iowa City values that so many of the Optiva supporters last night find so incomprehensible! Welcome to Iowa City!

Of course, it must be easier for you to think that everyone who opposed the name change has some nefarious ulterior motive or some connection to Cox and Taffe. 806 loyal friends willing to do their bidding -- Cox and Taffe must be great guys!

And no, I don't believe that I have any obligation to "share" the credit union with other groups and communities, especially if doing so means fundamentally changing its character. And yes, widely expanding the membership is different from offering services to existing members, because the latter does not dilute the current membership's ability to have a say in how the credit union is run. No?

Where is the evidence that by remaining a small, local credit union, we would cease to "compete in the marketplace"? One minute I hear how wonderfully the credit union is doing, the next I hear how desperately it needs to change. Why should I believe that that is true? Sorry, but "I think we all know that that is how the system works," is not persuasive, and barely qualifies as an argument. In fact, I don't know that that is how the system works. Feel free to enlighten me with something more than unsupported assertions.
Back to top
View user's profile
anonymouscoward
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 2

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:34 am    Post subject:
Can someone reconcile for me why if the UICCU is ranked among the best CU's in the country, continues to enjoy incredible membership growth with branches now in 14 counties and offers an ever increasing menu of financial services - all accomplished under the banner of the University of Iowa Community Credit Union - its continued and future success is suddenly in doubt because of a perception that its name is exclusionary? Huh?

I would really like someone that actually knows to tell us what the real reason is behind the effort to change the name of my Credit Union.

Is it:

- because the U of I is making us? Not true according to UI statements
- because people outside our local community don't think they can join? Obviously not true by the growth numbers
- because the Board and CEO think its the best move to position the CU for future growth therefore we must genuflect? Baseless conjecture
- because our CU leadership has bought into and seems to have instilled in SOME of the employees a clueless, sycophantic corporate culture that only equates success with more, more, more? Hmmmm...could be

Seriously, I really want to know.
Back to top
View user's profile
alan1983
 
 

Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 10

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:38 am    Post subject: Misunderstood Questions
***Im curious HK: What motivates you to question growth and expansion? Do you have a vested interest in the CU becoming stagnant?

I believe you may have read too much into my question madam/sir (I apologize I dont know which to address you... I do not mean any insult I swear!)

I have not mentioned anyone else. Nor have I said that I feel anyone has an alterior motive. I simply asked if you did. As you have asked many questions that other people have taken offensively (I guess it is difficult to determine someones tone via online forum).

And you answered my question: so I thank you. You are questioning "growth" because you are interested in the topic and you enjoy democracy/debate. That satisfies my query :) Thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile
alan1983
 
 

Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 10

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:54 am    Post subject: A decision for change.
I ask the question: Has anyone called Veridian lately?

It has been said that many other credit unions in our country have accomplished a name change to distinguish their identity in the community, and release themselves from regionally specific modifiers.

Has anyone called these credit unions? Have we asked them how their business was effected by the name change? If their business went strongly down... would the trend to change names continue?

Is it possible that the UofI would prefer the credit union to change its name? If the UofI did in some way pressure the CU... would they necessarily want the public to know they did? Would it effect public opinion of the U; which is currently struggling with its own issues.

Does the entirety of our future growth have to be at stake to make this decision? Is it possible that the board simply thought that it may help make things easier? We deal everyday with making things more efficient. We are always trying to get more things done better and faster and more efficient. Is UICCU the most efficient name we could possibly have?
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:57 am    Post subject:
I do not agree. Honestly, it seems like an awfully big leap to draw the conclusion you are drawing from that overheard conversation. What is your theory, that the directors of competing banks are joining the credit union, because they fear the juggernaut that the credit union will become once christened Optiva?

Even if everyone on this site had a "vested interest," would that make their arguments invalid? Presumably you don't think that about the management and credit union employees, who clearly have vested interests. Why not address the other side's arguments, rather than question their motives?

Finally, the plain implication of your arguments, as well as those of areyouserious, is that it is inconceivable to oppose growth for any reason under any circumstances, because the credit union grew each time one of us joined it. I can only assume you are against birth control as well. In any event, I think I know 806 people who are unlikely to be persuaded by that forceful bit of rhetoric. If it's really that hard to give a serious explanation of how the current membership benefits from growth, do you blame some of us for wondering?

I can't disagree that some posters here have apparently been offended by my questions. But could you please identify one question that I have asked that is, objectively speaking, offensive? One thing is true: It's always easier to be offended by an argument than to respond to it.
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 4:05 am    Post subject:
alan1983 -- I can't help but notice that part of your previous comment just disappeared -- the part about the overheard conversation that led you to think that people were joining the credit union just to subvert the organization. I don't know how that happened, but I point it out just so that my own post will make sense.

By the way, I've been a credit union member for ten years.
Back to top
View user's profile
alan1983
 
 

Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 10

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 4:21 am    Post subject:
To confess: it was not I that overheard the conversation. It was a friend (and an employee). But I felt it dishonest to pass that off as my own... so in an effort to be bigger than that... i removed it. And I appologize. Although, I trust his judgement of the situation. I do believe people on BOTH sides of this issue have encouraged people in their lives to join simply to vote in their favor. I do believe that is an argument that brings to question the validity of a 2nd vote.

I dont feel in any way that my arguments say that growth is the only option. I have merely challenged readers and yourself with questions to promote independant thought. I do believe in growth. If done steady and healthily. I believe the credit union has done a terrific job in growth over the years.

To go back to a previous point: The member who lives in CR. Opening a branch in CR would be just like offering a debit card. We would be doing so two-fold. 1) to serve our members who are there, 2) to encourage other people to join who are there.

When we offered debit cards we did so for the same two reasons. 1) to assist our current members with access to their accounts, 2) to encourage people to join us as we have the new and fantastic and simple way to access their accounts. Yes?
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:27 am    Post subject:
Why is it so hard to believe that the existing membership just didn't like the name? Is it really easier to believe that scores of people joined the credit union for the sole purpose of voting against the name change? If that's true, the name must be even more awful than I thought it was! Even I wouldn't have *joined* the credit union to vote against Optiva.

Moreover, suppose you're right. If the rules allow people to join at the last minute, what would be wrong with doing it? Why is it okay to join the credit union to get a debit card, but not to vote against an ugly name?

And I still don't get your argument about the debit card. Why is it inconsistent to suggest that the credit union should serve its existing members (for example, by offering debit cards) without necessarily expanding?
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:43 am    Post subject:
I don't know if anyone's still reading this thread. I think the vote totals speak for themselves. But if you're going to question whether they truly reflect the views of the larger membership, isn't there every reason to think that, if anything, they *under*-estimate the degree of opposition to Optiva? After all, credit union employees and their families made up a huge chunk of the pro-Optiva votes at that meeting, but make up a tiny fraction of the membership as a whole. There is no similar reason to think that the anti-Optiva voters are unrepresentative of the larger membership. I mean, come on, the management's institutional advantage in a vote like that is undeniable -- which makes it all the more shocking that they lost.
Back to top
View user's profile
 

DaveF
 
 

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 7

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 4:00 pm    Post subject: ;lashdflha;lashd
poyoi dhl;xhc l;vnzp oiyh. lkash uipyqui pn.

poyitiut,
puioq
Back to top
View user's profile
tellthetruth
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 7

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 4:01 pm    Post subject: Questions answered
hk, godfrey, peterj

To answer your questions briefly:

The 1st vote was legitimate. The Optiva name change was approved. The next logical step was to spend the money necessary to make the change.

You can basically cut and past the above answer for your other question as well. For whatever reason, once our volunteer Board of Directors made the compassionate decision to honor the petition in the 11th hour, more members decided to come out and take part in the process, having been given an unprecedented 2nd chance to make their voices heard. Consequently, the first vote was overturned.

Had more members shown up to the first meeting and exercised their right to vote, significantly less money would have been spent. No one is out of touch with anything. You admitted as much when you acknowledged that a name change makes sense. Many people I have spoken to expressed similar sentiments. The general consensus has been that the name selected was inappropriate.

Let me address another question that popped up regarding growth, and the success we have had in recent years regardless of the challenge our current name creates. First of all, the fact that we have had such tremendous success is a testament to the leadership both the Board and Management have provided, in recognizing the needs of our membership. This lends to the notion that they are very much "in touch" with our members. It is no accident that the UICCU is Numero Uno in the State of Iowa in total member give back. Secondly, our credit union is a business. Every member is an owner, and we all have potentially different ideas of how the business should be operated. One thing I think we can all agree on, however, is that we would all like our credit union to remain competitive, so we can all benefit with better rates on loans and deposits, fewer fees, top notch service and convenient access to our accounts. To suggest otherwise is silly.

I think most everyone would also agree that the banking environment has changed….radically. You only need to look down the street to see that banks are overly abundant. Rather than simply react and regress due to this changing dynamic, we need to continue to grow that we can create a greater economy of scale, in order to keep providing the best products and services at the best prices to the membership. What is our alternative? Should we shrink, increase fees, raise rates on loans and reduce rates on deposits to protect our already slim margins? Does this make any sense? We still put an extraordinary amount of emphasis on providing quality, local service at the branch level, regardless of growth.

One last thing with regards to the name Optiva, or any made up name for that matter. A name in and of itself has no meaning other than what we as individuals choose to assign it. Think about that for a moment. Many people chose to positively embrace the name and give it an optimistic meaning. Others chose to see it negatively. Neither choice is wrong or right. A name is not intrinsically brilliant, just as it not inherently ugly (or repelling/repulsive, to use your choice of words). You made a conscious decision and chose to interpret Optiva negatively. You had the choice to interpret it otherwise.

Thanks for being civil.
_________________
The Truth is Out There
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:01 pm    Post subject:
"No one is out of touch with anything?"

From all appearances, roughly 100% of the credit union employees and their family members at that meeting voted for Optiva. Thus a *very* large majority of the non-employee members voted to reject it. That statement is just as true of the first vote as of the second vote. And when the number of people voting rose, Optiva did worse. People on this thread have repeatedly explained how the name choice offended their values. Obviously, then, the employees and the management have a very different set of values than the membership. Why shouldn't that bother the members, who, after all, own the institution?

"No one is out of touch with anything?" Amazing.
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:14 pm    Post subject:
Plus, my question was: which of the following two statements is untrue, and why:

1. The management should have known its membership well enough to foresee that they would reject the name Optiva.

2. If the management had known its membership well enough to foresee that its members would reject the name Optiva, they would not have spent $400,000 (or more) to promote that name change.

I answered your question promptly and easily, tellthetruth. Why won't you answer mine?
Back to top
View user's profile
DaveF
 
 

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 7

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:21 pm    Post subject: Stop feeding the troll...
HK you are an antagonist and instead of comming up with solutions you just want to bitch and moan about the process. You just need to get over it. Bottom line, the Board and CEO of the credit union wanted to progress the credit union, which they have done effectively for the last 5 years, but this time by changing the name. And instead of looking at the positives of this you want to look at all the negatives and cry foul. The credit union is still OUR (yes, yours and mine) credit union. It still has the UICCU name/logo (until the UofI tells the credit union to change it) and it still has the services which make it one of the best in the nation. All of this I remind you was under the current leadership of this Board and CEO. Now because of a name change which was approved, then voted down by a revote (which didn't have to happen mind you) you want to cry foul and yes, bitch and moan. Frankly I'm tired of you and your ramblings. Go hide under the bridge, and to everyone else, stop feeding the troll. I'm going to enjoy the service I GOT and I'm STILL getting.

Thank you to the Board, CEO, and employees for staying great no matter what name you wear!
Back to top
View user's profile
tellthetruth
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 7

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:54 pm    Post subject: Questions answered part deux
I'll answer your questions again.

1) The membership voted to change the name to Optiva. The membership then voted to repeal the first vote.

I may sound like a broken record, but here goes:

2) The membership voted to change the name to Optiva. If the membership had not voted to change the name to Optiva, another name would have been selected, and who knows, maybe another petition might have been drafted and yet another re-vote taken place to repeal the original vote.

We can't make people attend their own meetings. We can only send notice after notice, reminding them that they have the power to decide their own future. If they choose not to show up and exercise their right to vote, they can apparently demand a re-vote. As mentioned earlier, imagine if we could re-vote in national elections. Maybe the people that procrastinated the first time would come out in droves to get it right the 2nd time.

No one is out of touch with anything. You admitted that it makes sense to pursue a name change. Any more questions? I enjoy repeating myself, after all I am a member of the credit union. Wink
_________________
The Truth is Out There
Back to top
View user's profile
hk
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 22

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 10:50 pm    Post subject:
You have a funny idea about what it means to answer a question. Nothing you say is inconsistent with the truth of those two statements. I have to assume that you can't refute them, don't I? How about answers instead of evasions?

And DaveF: Why is it so hard to address issues, rather than impugn someone's motives and character?

If the management responded to the vote by saying, Look, we made a mistake, we should have seen it coming, we're sorry, we'll try to take some time to learn who are members are and what they want, we'd all feel much better. But all I'm hearing is denial and disparagement of anyone who would dare question a decision by the management. Now that's good customer relations!
Back to top
View user's profile
tellthetruth
 
 

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 7

 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:46 pm    Post subject: Hello again
The responsibility and consequences of the vote and re-vote, rests on the shoulders of the membership, because ultimately the decision to change the name to Optiva, and then to repeal that decision, was made by the voting membership.

This is a democratic process. You can't point an accusatory finger at one individual or a few individuals, for that matter. It doesn't work that way.

You seem to be getting upset about something?

Let me ask you another question. Why did you choose to associate the word Optiva with negativity? Between observation and reaction there is freedom of choice (S.Covey, 7 Habits...). You could have chosen positivity. A word only has the power you choose to give it.
_________________
The Truth is Out There
 

Back to top
View user's profile
nd
 
 

Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 3

 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:27 am    Post subject: To hk
Seriously. Get a life.
Back to top
View user's profile