Originally passed in 1926, New York City’s Cabaret Law is an actively enforced ban on dancing and musical entertainment in any “room, place or space” that sells food or drinks unless those spaces obtain a special “cabaret” license. As a relic of Prohibition, the law first came into being as a means to police speakeasies, though now the long-standing Cabaret Law may finally be on the way out.The law has been controversial for years, though it has survived multiple attempts of repeal over the near-century that it’s been in place. However, Brooklyn city councilman Rafael Espinal hopes to change that, as he’s introduced a bill to finally repeal the Cabaret Law. The bill will be voted on Tuesday, though Espinal is confident he has the 26 voted need to pass it, telling the New York Times, “It’s over.”As a representative for Brooklyn, including Bushwick which contains a number of bars and D.I.Y. venues that host music regularly, Espinal argues that the law keeps bar and club owners “living in fear” and that it forces what could be safe gatherings underground and into potentially more-dangerous spaces. Currently, of the 25,000 establishments that sell food and drinks in the city, only 97 have a cabaret license. The low number is somewhat unsurprising, given that requiring a cabaret license costs time and money—in order to be approved, several agencies must approve a request and a venue must be zoned for commercial manufacturing.The history of enforcement of the Cabaret Law is spotty, with former Mayor Rudy Guiliani reviving the law in the 1990’s as a means to shut down dance clubs. In recent years, Mayor Bill de Blasio has cut back on enforcement of the law, and a spokesman for Mayor Bill de Blasio noted that “The mayor strongly supports repealing the law.” However, the spokesman also noted that mandatory security requirements for larger venues that were added to the law in the past 15 years, such as mandatory security cameras and certified security guards, still need to be honored and maintained.[H/T New York Times; Photo: Patrick Hughes]
Read Full Story Tucked away in one of Harvard’s most historic properties is a team of employees embarking on an effort to make event planning, often a big challenge at Harvard, easier. The Campus Services Events Management office is now a resource for anyone planning events on campus, whether you simply need advice on finding a venue or if you want the team to manage your entire event. The office, located within Loeb House, has also launched a website which organizes many University resources into one Web portal.More than a year ago, Campus Services began learning about the needs of the event planning community. “Some people said they would love to be able to research Harvard’s venues without having to visit a dozen different websites, some said they wish there was a group that could plan and manage their events,” said Director of Events Management Madeline Meehan. “Overall everyone wanted the information at their fingertips so we decided to offer a large portfolio of services and a robust website.”By logging into the website, a user can select the type of event they’re planning and the number of expected attendees. He/she is then presented with a number of venue options, contact information, policies and procedures, etc. “The Events Management office and the website are going to evolve over time. Our goal is to simplify the event planning process for everyone across the University,” said Meehan. “This is after all, a resource for the Harvard community.”
…and how tomorrow’s astronauts, dentists and archaeologists are using them today! It’s crazy to think about: Almost 50 million metric tonnes of e-waste is produced each year, according to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) website!But this isn’t the sort of mind-bending statistic that will get my kids’ attention. So let me paint a kid-friendly picture: 50 million metric tonnes of e-waste is equivalent to 125,000 jumbo jets—more than 82 times the number of these planes ever built!With that, I might get their interest—and we can start a conversation about why managing all the world’s e-waste is essential for a better future and how we can do our part by recycling our old electronics.The truth is, kids are often better at recycling than adults—and they are growing up in a world where recycling is becoming easier in some ways. So, I love that the elementary school students in Amsterdam—featured in the video posted below—are so excited and clear in their responses to our question, What do you think should happen to old computers? To hear their great responses—including how they will use computers when they grow up—watch the video below.These kids know that used stuff—including technology—is not always garbage. They’re experiencing this fact first-hand as part of the 10,000-plus students in the City of Amsterdam school district learning coding and problem-solving skills on donated, refurbished computer systems from Dutch Bank, ABN AMRO.When ABN AMRO upgrades its technology, its used computers retire from financial analysis and begin a second life in underprivileged Amsterdam schools. This custom donation program, offered through Dell’s Asset Resale & Recycling (ARR) services, enables the schools to offer technology programs they could not otherwise afford —and supports ABN AMRO’s corporate responsibility goal of helping youth discover and develop their interests and talents.Dell’s ARR services has provided ABN AMRO with responsible, secure commercial recycling solutions throughout the Netherlands since 2010. In FY17, the company wanted to expand its solutions to include IT donation—a custom service Dell offers to all business customers worldwide.In FY17, Dell’s ARR program helped ABN AMRO donate more than 1,200 systems to over 80 primary schools throughout Amsterdam to foster computer literary and coding curriculum in their public education community.The recycling journey begins with the collection and tagging of ABN AMRO’s used equipment and then securely overwriting all data. Select refurbished computers are then donated to the City of Amsterdam school district, pre-loaded with all necessary educational software. The remaining systems that are not selected for donation are resold by Dell, and the proceeds fund the donation program (so it’s a self-funding program with no additional cost to ABN AMRO). Dell’s ARR handles all logistics of donating and delivering the computers to the schools.When the donated systems reach their end of life at the schools, Dell collects the used IT products and responsibly recycles them. Dell provides ABN AMRO with fully itemized reporting of each system’s journey from collection to recycling. This reporting, which we compile for all ARR customers, provides critical metrics for sustainability-minded companies like ABN AMRO.Dell’s ARR services understands that one size never fits all. Dell can provide flexible services including customized donation services, like the program Dell designed for ABN AMRO.“To make sure there are enough resources to serve the growing middle class, we have to move to a circular economy,” said Richard Kooloos, ABN AMRO’s director of sustainable banking. “And the best way to experience how the circular economy can work is to partner with and learn from companies like Dell who are actually doing it.”With Dell handling all operational aspects of the donation program, ABN AMRO is free to focus on volunteerism. Following the company’s “Partner of the Future” mission — to discover and develop talent in young children through education in sports, arts and entrepreneurship — its employees regularly lend their technology expertise to help students with their programming lessons.Since starting the donation program in 2016, more than 130 ABN AMRO employees have volunteered to teach students computer coding and literacy on the company’s donated, refurbished computers.Last year, the ABN AMRO Foundation partnered with the City of Amsterdam on the Coding for Amsterdam project, which set a world record for the most students (11,386) coding on a single day!Said Kooloos, “This program helps us achieve more social impact from each dollar we invest. And by giving computers a second life, we can help reduce the demand for raw materials.”Want to know how your organization can do the same? Check us out.Dell’s ARR services offers secure, convenient electronic disposition services for businesses in more than 49 countries and territories. Dell manages the full logistics from picking up to responsibly deposing any brand of owned or leased equipment. Once equipment is tested and cleaned, Dell will designate it for resale or recycling—and give you money back for items of value. For used equipment without resale value, Dell will properly dispose/recycle the IT equipment, meeting or exceeding regulatory compliance requirements. And Dell can customize this service for you. Learn more.This story shares one example of how Dell is committed to driving human progress by putting our technology and expertise to work where it can do the most good for people and the planet.We invite you to explore our FY17 Annual Update on our 2020 Legacy of Good Plan at legacyofgood.dell.com.
Editor’s note: This is the first installment of a two-part series examining disciplinary policies and possible revisions to du Lac, the student handbook.When Alumni resident Zach Reuvers was sent to the Office of Residence Life and Housing (ORLH) for a disciplinary conference as a sophomore, he didn’t know what to expect.Reuvers, now a junior, was caught breaking parietals at 2:30 a.m. on a weekday. The next morning, he consulted du Lac, the student handbook, to learn about his punishment from ORLH, commonly called a “ResLife.”“This was my first time [facing a disciplinary conference], and I really didn’t know what I was up against,” Reuvers said. “I was thinking, ‘am I going to get removed from my dorm, kicked off campus, put on University probation?’”Reuvers said the vague wording in du Lac about the punishments for parietals violations — the handbook cites expulsion as a possible punishment — was problematic for him going through the process for the first time.Associate Vice President for Residence Life Bill Kirk said the University began a “major revision” of du Lac in the fall of 2007, and the administration is seeking input from student government and the student body.Student body president Grant Schmidt said student government is discussing possible changes to du Lac in several areas, including alcohol policy, disciplinary sanctions and sexual assault.“We are talking about things students care about,” Schmidt said. “We’re not just talking about, ‘Hey, we don’t want to see students punished as much.’ We just want to make sure the punishments are accurate and deserved.”Kirk said the wording for parietals violations is one of the segments of the handbook currently under examination.For parietals, the handbook currently states: “Overnight parietal violations are considered serious violations, and students who commit such violations shall be subject to disciplinary suspension or permanent dismissal.”The University does not allow students to be in the dorm room of a member of the opposite sex between 12 a.m. to 9 a.m. on weekdays and 2 a.m. to 9 a.m. on weekends.“You just don’t know what is going to happen because du Lac is pretty vague, and it pretty much lets [ORLH] have full discretion,” Reuvers said on facing the consequences for his parietals violation.Calling himself a “ResLife vet,” Reuvers said he has faced disciplinary sanctions from ORLH three times. The first two were disciplinary conferences and the third was an administrative hearing.Reuvers said sitting through the administrative hearing was an “intense” experience. He met with the complete ORLH staff and was questioned repeatedly about the events that led him to the hearing.“When you go into there, nobody’s your friend. You’re assumed to be guilty,” he said. “So it was scary, but at the same time it’s reality, and you have to take those things seriously.”There are currently two types of methods listed in du Lac used by the ORLH to discipline students: disciplinary conferences and administrative hearings. Students receive a letter informing them which method will be used.In a disciplinary conference, a student meets with one or multiple staff members from ORLH to “investigate, discuss and resolve the alleged violation,” du Lac states.The student can receive punishments ranging from a warning to disciplinary probation.Disciplinary suspension and permanent dismissal cannot be issued at a conference, and are reserved for administrative hearings.An administrative hearing, the more serious of the sanctions, requires the student to meet with two or three ORLH staff members. The full range of punishments is available to be issued, du Lac states.After the student attends a disciplinary conference or an administrative hearing, he or she is required to write a personal statement before ORLH makes its decision, Judicial Council peer advocate John Saulitis said.The Judicial Council peer advocacy program offers advice to students facing disciplinary sanctions and can sit in on the meetings but cannot speak on the students’ behalf.Saulitis said a student has certain rights during the disciplinary process that many do not know about. For example, students can schedule a meeting with someone from ORLH to look at their disciplinary file.Students are also allowed to have a peer advocate or friend come in with them to the meeting, although the peer is not allowed to have a speaking role, Saulitis said.“You can have someone come with you and sit in the meeting with you,” he said.Saulitis said the number one advice he gives to students who are going through the disciplinary with ORLH is to tell the truth.“I think anybody can tell when someone is being fake,” he said. “Be honest. Accept responsibly for what you did. Show that you’ve made a concerted effort to think about what you’ve done.”Saulitis said he also recommends students try to relax during their meeting.“It’s not the end of the world,” he said. “Ninety-nine percent of the cases at Notre Dame, you don’t get expelled. You’ve got to be able to relax because the people who do get expelled are really nervous and don’t know what to do and don’t handle it well.“If you get worked up [during your meeting with ORLH,] be able to step a back and breathe and get back in the rhythm of things again,” Saulitis said.Kirk said the Office of Residence Life hopes to get feedback on du Lac revisions from student government. Schmidt said student government will recommend revisions to du Lac, specifically regarding alcohol and disciplinary policies.“Our job is just to help them better understand the culture and help them understand how students act,” Schmidt said. The second and final installment of this series will examine possible changes to the policies in du Lac. It will run in tomorrow’s Observer.
Aaron Tveit(Photo: Caitlin McNaney) Here’s a quick roundup of stories you may have missed today and over the weekend. Aaron Tveit Heading to BostonAttention Tveiter Tots! There’s another chance to get up close and personal with your Broadway boyfriend Aaron Tveit. The Grease: Live star will headline at the House of Blues Boston in Boston, Massachusetts, on August 27. This gig is in addition to his previously reported solo show at New York hotspot Irving Plaza on June 11. Date(s) with Tveit? Talk about multiplying thrills.Megan Hilty Set for TV Adaptation of First Wives ClubBroadway bombshell Megan Hilty has been enlisted as one of the leads for a TV Land pilot of The First Wives Club, a remake of the 1996 hit movie. Penned by Rebecca Addelman, Deadline reports that the 2016 Tony nominee will star opposite Alyson Hannigan in the project, which will be set in present-day San Francisco. Hilty is set to take on the role of Kim, a once successful actress who is now too old for Hollywood, while Hannigan will appear as Maggie, an English professor. Separately, there’s still no word on whether the 2014 stage adaptation of the property will land on Broadway.B’way-Bound Groundhog Day Cancels First PreviewsLondon will have to wait a little longer to see Broadway favorite Andy Karl. The world premiere of the Main Stem-bound Groundhog Day at the Old Vic has canceled three previews owing to the “technical requirements” of the production. Directed by Matthew Warchus, with music and lyrics by Tim Minchin, the new musical will now begin performances on July 15 (instead of July 11); it will still officially open on August 16. According to the New York Times, the producing team has also recently undergone a shakeup; we hope that Groundhog Day will still start performances on the Great White Way as planned on January 23, 2017.Eclipsed to Land on West CoastThe Tony-nominated Eclipsed will have its west coast premiere engagement at San Francisco’s the Curran next spring. Directed by Liesl Tommy and written by Danai Gurira, the Broadway production is led by Oscar winner and 2016 Tony nominee Lupita Nyong’o.J.K. Rowling’s Cursed Child WarningThe eagerly-anticipated Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is set to begin previews in the West End on June 7. However, that doesn’t mean that spoilers are allowed—check out J.K. Rowling’s message to all of us about the project below. Star Files Aaron Tveit View Comments Megan Hilty
March 15, 2001 Gary Blankenship Senior Editor Regular News House bill would rewrite Art.V Senior Editor A proposed constitutional amendment that would do away with all judicial nominating commissions, require appellate judges up for retention to get a two-thirds approval rate, and dismantle The Florida Bar has been proposed in a rewrite of Article V introduced in the Florida House. HJR 627, by Rep. Fred Brummer, R-Apopka, would allow the governor to fill directly all appellate vacancies with the consent of the state Senate. It would also set a two-year minimum limit on writs of habeas corpus and give the legislature vastly increased powers over court procedural rules. And those are only some of the changes in the 36-page measure. Bar President Herman Russomanno said many of the changes in bill are “troubling” and some of the proposals would have the state revert to systems and practices which were purposefully changed decades ago to provide accountability and remove politics from the system. “Floridians expect fairness and impartiality in the court system and their expectations are justified and attainable,” Russomanno said. “But the efforts to stampede the judicial branch and the legal profession with unwarranted changes such as those proposed in HB 627 are completely contrary to what Floridians clearly want.” Bar President-elect Terry Russell said the bill ignores several past problems with the judiciary and court system that the current constitution fixes. “It’s regressive,” he said. Tallahassee attorney Barry Richard, the Bar’s outside counsel, said the overall effect of the proposal would be to increase the influence of politics in the court system. “This resolution would set our state back 100 years,” Richard said. “It would remove all checks on the politicization of judicial selection, place incumbent judges at the whim of the legislature or any groups of persons dissatisfied with a particular decision, and significantly reduce the independence of the judiciary, a critical element in the maintenance of a just and democratic society,” Richard said. The Bar has also picked up indications that the House Committee on Judicial Oversight could consider Brummer’s bill early in the Regular Session, which opened March 6 as this News went to press. At deadline, no companion bill had been introduced in the Senate. As a constitutional amendment, it must get a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate before it can be submitted to voters next year. Russomanno also said in many respects the Bar was “stunned” by the bill, particularly in that it addresses many issues studied extensively by legislative directive in recent years by the 1995 Article V Task Force, the 1997-98 Constitution Revision Commission and the 2000-01 Supreme Court Workload Study Commission. HJR 627 makes changes throughout Article V. One provision appears aimed at Secretary of State Katherine Harris’ actions in last year’s disputed election that were challenged in court. A new subsection (b) in Section 1 provides that there must be some legal or equitable claim for a court to issue a quo warranto writ. It also limits cases when those writs could be used, which apparently would drastically limit citizens’ ability to challenge a public official’s action in court. The language specifically provides: “The power to issue a writ of quo warranto does not establish power to review any right, power or duty of a public official other than the right to hold the particular office claimed by such official, and the writ of quo warranto shall not be used for any purpose except to test a person’s authority to continue holding an office when challenged by competing claimant to such office.” The section would also allow the legislature by law to set a statute of limitation on the writs. Other sections on specific courts’ powers affect habeas corpus writs. The amendment adds language that judges may issue the writs “provided that such writs are subject to statutes of limitation of not shorter than two years from the final judgment or mandate on direct appeal in a criminal case.” Judicial Restraint Several other sections are aimed at restricting the power and activities of the courts. Section 1 would have language added that, “Subject to any additional limits in this constitution, the jurisdiction of such courts shall extend only to actual cases in law, equity, admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, and to actual controversies arising under the constitution and the laws of the State of Florida and of the United States.” Richard noted that could be read to eliminate the court’s authority to issue declaratory judgments and also to exercise oversight of the practice of law. The legislature also would be given power in that section to designate that a district court of appeal could exercise statewide jurisdiction “respecting any subject matter granted. . . by general law.” Richard said this provision could be read that the legislature could assign a matter to a DCA to the exclusion of the Supreme Court. Some observers have suggested the legislature could use the section to create a statewide court of criminal appeals. Court procedural rules “may not be inconsistent with statutes in place at the time of adoption of such rules, shall be revised to conform to subsequently adopted statutes that regulate substantive rights, and may be repealed by general law. Rules adopted pursuant to this section shall neither abridge, enlarge, nor modify the substantive rights of any litigant, but additional rulemaking power may be expressly delegated to courts by general law.” Richard noted that language eliminates the distinction between substantive and procedural rules and allows the legislature to write court rules. He said there has not been any criticisms or problems with rules that would justify such a change. Dropped from the constitution would be a provision requiring a two-thirds vote of both the House and Senate to override a court rule. The court would be allowed to issue advisory opinions on the request of the attorney general or governor, but opinions issued at the request of the governor “shall not be binding upon any party not voluntarily participating in such proceeding.” The measure would also limit the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to items enumerated in the constitution, including judicial discipline. Section 9 of Article V would be rewritten. Currently, when the Supreme Court certifies the need for new judges or to reduce judges, the legislature can change the number, but it requires a two-thirds vote. The bill would simply allow the legislature to set the number of judges by law, including the number in each circuit and county court. The Supreme Court would be able to make recommendations on increasing or decreasing the number of judges and also on changing the district and circuits. The proposed revision did keep the number of Supreme Court justices at seven. Retention Upped Section 10 would be changed to require that Supreme Court justices and district court of appeal judges get a two-thirds “yes” vote in their merit retention referenda. That could have a potentially devastating impact on the First District Court of Appeal and substantial impacts on other appellate courts. While all three First DCA judges on last November’s ballots would have been retained, it would have been very close if they were retained with 68 to 69 percent of the vote. However, all six judges on the 1998 merit retention ballot and all four on the 1996 ballot would have lost, as they garnered 63 to 64 percent “yes” votes less than the 66.67 required in the proposed amendment. Results from 1994 were not immediately available, but in 1992, all six First DCA judges on the ballot would have lost, as well as all five on the ballot in the Fifth DCA and two in the Second DCA. In 1992, there was organized opposition to then Chief Justice Rosemary Barkett and she wound up with 60.9-percent approval a landslide by most standards, but not enough under the bill. In addition, the other three justices on the ballot Justice Major B. Harding and former Justices Ben F. Overton and Parker Lee McDonald would have fallen short of the two-thirds vote, by one to less than two percent. As Richard noted, “Judges, who among public officers should be the least sensitive to public opinion, would be made more subject to the sway of public sentiment than executive or legislative officers.” Trial judges would remain elected, but midterm vacancies, as well as all vacancies on the appellate courts, would be filled directly by the governor without using judicial nominating commissions. Those appointments would be subject to “the advice and consent of the Senate.. . . ” The Article V provisions setting up the JNCs and governing their actions would be stricken under Brummer’s measure. The bill provides that if the Senate is not in session when the appointment is made and does not call itself into session to consider a nomination within 30 days, then the nomination is deemed approved. If the Senate is in session and fails to confirm a nominee within 30 days, then the nomination is rejected, unless Senate rules allow for an exemption. If judges find their jurisdiction and powers limited, they could become more politically active. Brummer’s bill would constitutionally override judicial canons that prevent judges from becoming involved in partisan politics or expressing their views on issues likely to come before them on the bench. The bill specifically provides, “No judicial rule of conduct or other court rule may limit the political rights of candidates for election or appointment to judicial office, including, but not limited to, serving a political organization, endorsing or opposing other candidates for public office, making speeches, attending political functions, or making statements with respect to issues; however such limits consistent with other provisions of this constitution may be imposed by general law.” The amendment, while not mentioning it by name, would do away with or substantially reduce The Florida Bar by changing Section 15. That revised section would allow the legislature to assume at least some oversight of the profession. The section provides that the Supreme Court would have exclusive jurisdiction over admission and discipline for those practicing, according to a new phrase added to the section, “before the courts of this state.” Also added to the section is this provision: “The cost of such regulation and discipline shall be funded by appropriations, disciplinary penalties, and fees paid to the Supreme Court as authorized by general law. No attorney may be required to pay dues to any organization and no fees may be otherwise assessed by the court as a condition to admission to practice law before the courts of this state. The professional practice of law other than before the courts of this state may be regulated by general law.” “This provision would eliminate the Bar as an arm of the Supreme Court and make the court’s ability to regulate [the] practice [of law] entirely dependent upon the willingness of the legislature to fund the regulation,” Richard wrote. With the Judicial Qualifications Commission, the Bar’s four lawyer appointments would be taken away and given to the legislature. Among other changes proposed in Brummer’s bill are: • An addition to Section 14 that, “Any prevailing party in any civil proceeding or any defendant convicted in any criminal proceeding may be assessed, as provided by general law, the full cost of all services utilized and expenses incurred in such proceeding as determined by the clerk of the circuit or county court, to the extent that such services or expenses are provided by appropriations, fees, or service charges.. . . Such assessments may be enforced as any money judgment or tax obligation.” • An addition to Section 3(b)(5) that when a case is certified to the Supreme Court as being of great public importance, “the district court’s jurisdiction shall be retained unless and until the Supreme Court issues an order accepting jurisdiction.” • The opt-in, opt-out merit selection plan for trial judges added to the constitution in 1998 by voters would be stricken. (That was a two-part process. The voter approval in 1998 set up a referendum in every circuit and county last November, on whether voters wanted to continue electing their trial judges or switch to a merit system. By a decisive margin in every jurisdiction, voters chose to continue with elections.) • A provision of Section 14 that says courts have no power to fix appropriations would be changed to read that courts “have no power to fix or order any modification of appropriations.” • The requirement that one Supreme Court justice come from the jurisdiction of each of the five district courts of appeal would be removed. • The section that allows retired judges over the age of 70 to sit in temporary assignments would be removed. • Various requirements to hold law-related offices, such as judgeships, or elected state attorneys or public defenders, would remain unchanged except that those office-holders would not be required to be Florida Bar members. Instead they would have to be “authorized to practice law in Florida.” House bill would rewrite Art.V
December 1, 2002 Letters December 1, 2002 Letters L etters Stresslines This guy is joking, right? (“Boomers discover mortality,” November 1 News. ) Personally, I hope to extend middlesence as long as I can; and thus be more able to impart my legacy to others as long as I can (if they will listen anyway) — and make my life stand and stand and stand for something, and then when the time comes I am forced to lie down I will be ready, and feel that I well deserve the rest. And that includes embracing the oblivion of death, which I only hope comes so quickly and quietly, I don’t have time to pack a bag or see my entire life flash before my eyes. After all, I have lived a full, active life without fear of risk and with time for examination and self awareness, and have no reason to despair or regret what has been. I wish only this: That in my last times, I will be able to remember as many people that have touched my life as possible.Denise A. Scott (retired) Panama City
NCUA headquarters The NCUA board will discuss the process of getting rebates to credit unions from the closure of the Temporary Corporate Credit Union Stabilization fund, according to the agenda released Thursday. NCUA closed the fund Oct. 1 of last year, and said rebates are expected in 2018.“NCUA’s decision to close the stabilization fund and start issuing refunds was a victory for credit unions and we look forward to hearing the board’s thoughts during next week’s meeting,” said CUNA President/CEO Jim Nussle. “CUNA was the only national trade association advocating for refunds to begin in 2018, and more than 90% of credit unions who commented on NCUA’s proposal supported our position. Credit unions look forward to getting their money back and putting it to work for their members.”NCUA merged the stabilization fund with the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund last year. While CUNA supported the plan, it expressed concerns about the rise in the Normal Operating Level, saying it was too high. continue reading » 8SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr
ShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr For the first time in world history, a credit union has surpassed $100 billion in assets—and it continues to grow at a record pace.In the process, Navy Federal Credit Union has also entered the “Too Big To Fail” category, according to one economist.Navy Federal has for decades been a statistical outlier in the U.S. credit union community, and recent years have only seen it continue to sail far ahead of the rest of the CU fleet. Indeed, Navy FCU’s net income during just the first quarter of this year alone exceeded the individual assets of more than 85% of all U.S credit unions.As of March 31, Navy FCU reported it now has $103.2 billion in assets, up from the nearly $97 billion in assets reported at year-end 2018. continue reading »
This post is currently collecting data… The initial process of qualifying a borrower for a loan is built on verifying their ability to repay the loan using the resources they have on hand, but reviewing their finances doesn’t end when the loan gets booked. If anything, 2020 has been a good example of how a borrower’s resources might change throughout the life of the loan.While commercial loan review is not something new, we believe this is an excellent opportunity to evaluate your current procedures and exposure limits. The ultimate goal is to build a loan review schedule that efficiently matches your credit union’s resources with your risks. The time that your staff has to dedicate to loan review is finite so allocating more of your team’s time to the highest risks in the portfolio is essential. Below is a simple example of different review and monitoring levels that might be appropriate for a mid-size credit union.Level I – Payment Performance onlyThese loans are selected for further review only in the event of a missed payment. Exposure limits for unsecured loans are less than $20,000 and secured term loans are less than $75,000. Time needed: minimal Level II – Payment/Score ReviewThese loans are examined annually for payment performance, personal credit scores, and business credit scores. Exposure limits for unsecured loans are $20,000 – $50,000 and secured term loans are $75,000 – $250,00.Time needed: 2 hours per loanLevel II – Full ReanalysisThese loans are re-underwritten with current financials every 1-3 years. Exposure limits for unsecured loans are greater than $50,000 and secured term loans are greater than $250,000. Time needed: 10 hours per loanThis example demonstrates how a credit union should dedicate their resources to a smaller set of loans that represent a larger credit risk to the institution, instead of spreading their time between a larger number of loans that present less risk. In addition to tying up internal resources, Full Reanalysis reviews can present a challenge with member relations. An annual request for updated financials and tax returns from a lender is not usually a busy borrower’s highest priority so it’s important to collect only when necessary.Even when the economy is stable, portfolio monitoring will continue to be a large focus of examiners and auditors. A well planned strategy that is executed consistently will ensure better portfolio outcomes and a smoother exam experience.Whether you have a seasoned book of business or are looking to begin offering business loans for the first time, Lucro Commercial Solutions can help you establish policies that maximize your impact with your borrowers. We can assist with reviews by setting up custom Tickler workflows for your team or take it a step further and outsource your reviews to our dedicated compliance specialists and business loan experts. Visit www.lucro.org/What-We-Do/Lucro-Services to learn more or contact Tami Chandler at [email protected] 5SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr,Tami Chandler As VP of Underwriting, Tami leads the largest team at Lucro. She and her staff are responsible for underwriting more than $2.5 billion a year in small business loans! … Web: https://www.lucro.org Details This is placeholder text