Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Financial Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Financial Institutions seeks funds for employee pay, IT and examiner travel
Summary
The Board of Financial Institutions told the Senate Finance subcommittee it needs additional other‑funds authority to cover a July pay increase and higher travel and IT costs for bank examiners, and described the agencies it regulates as holding about $55 billion in assets.
The Board of Financial Institutions asked the Senate Finance subcommittee on transportation and regulatory matters for authority to spend additional other funds to cover employee pay and operating costs, commissioners told the panel on an afternoon in October.
Ron Bodvick, commissioner of the Consumer Finance Division of the Board of Financial Institutions, said the board’s mission is to “protect the citizens of South Carolina, strengthen consumer confidence, assure reliable access to financial services, and encourage economic growth.” He told the subcommittee the Consumer Finance Division regulates non‑depository mortgage lenders and servicers, supervised consumer finance companies, deferred presentment service companies and check‑cashing companies and is funded solely from fees charged to the entities it regulates.
Bodvick said the Consumer Finance Division requested a $144,000 increase in personal services to fund a 2.25% pay increase granted to state employees on July 1 and the associated employer contributions. “That is all I have for today,” Bodvick said, concluding his remarks and asking whether the committee had questions.
Cathy Bickham, commissioner of banking, represented the agency’s banking division and described the state‑chartered institutions her office supervises as holding more than $55 billion in assets. Bickham said her division requested $235,000 in additional personal services and employer contributions (broken down as $152,000 for personal services and $83,000 for employer contributions) and $27,900 for contractual services, primarily IT, and added that examiner travel has risen because staff examine banks statewide.
Both commissioners emphasized that the board operates as an other‑funds agency and that the requested increases do not seek general‑fund dollars but rather authority to spend the fees the agencies collect. The committee asked a brief procedural question about the pay increase and accepted the presentations without further action.
No votes or formal committee actions were recorded on the board’s requests during the hearing.
The subcommittee’s next meeting was announced for the following Wednesday, when the Department of Motor Vehicles, the infrastructure bank and the aeronautics commission will appear.
