Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Credit Union Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances credit-union revisions despite objections over community-development limit
Summary
The Banking Committee voted to send HB7083 (LCO 6188) to the floor after debate. Senator Miller objected, saying changes would limit the Community Development Financial Institution option to a single credit union and exclude marginalized communities.
The Banking Committee voted to send House Bill 7083 (LCO 6188), a package of revisions to Connecticut’s credit union statutes, to the floor after a substantial debate over a provision limiting how many credit unions may be designated for a community-development role.
Senator Miller, a long-serving committee member who said she has worked to expand access to capital for the unbanked and underbanked, criticized a change in section 3 that she said would permit only one credit union to become a Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI). “To limit this idea…to one credit union, is not fair to the low or the marginalized, low income families that this program was intended to empower,” Miller said. “I think that to limit that is not fair. I think that it's an injustice, to be honest with you.”
Senator Berthel and other members said they would vote to advance the bill but encouraged continued discussions before the end of the session. Berthel noted the bill is a House product and suggested senators could attempt amendments later on the floor.
Committee staff and sponsors thanked industry stakeholders — including the Credit Union League, the Department of Banking and the Connecticut Bankers Association — for negotiations that shaped the JFS language. The committee chair summarized changes in the bill’s current form by noting adjustments to definitions (including “immediate family”), limits on nonmember payment amounts accepted by credit unions, and the removal of a provision in section 8 concerning motor vehicle repossessions.
A motion to “JFS to the floor” was made and seconded; a roll-call vote recorded several no votes including Senator Miller and a small number of representatives, but a majority supported advancing the measure. The clerk then called the roll for the consent calendar later in the hearing; HB7083 was not placed on the consent calendar and received an individual roll-call vote.
Sponsors and members said they expect further negotiation and possible floor amendments before final passage. Senator Miller said she may seek changes in the Senate to restore broader access for CDFI designation if the bill’s current language is not revised.
