FARMERS BRANCH, Texas - Once isolated from sharing concerns and positions with each other on key issues such as field-of-membership overlap and competition with large credit unions because of their logistics and financial resources, small credit unions in Texas have taken the first step in communicating with each other and regulators in a unified voice by forming a regional voluntary coalition. The coalition's first members are: Rodney Smith, president, Temple Santa Fe CU (Waco); Gary Parker, president, 1st University CU (Waco); Stephen Gibson, president, AT&T Employees CU (Dallas); Devora Mitchell, president, Winkler County CU (Kermit); and Emma Durham, president, San Angelo FCU (San Angelo). Of the nearly 800 credit union in the state, 60% of them are under $20 million in assets. Z. Suzanne Chism, president, Texas Health Resources Credit Union in Dallas and Asset Category Director for credit unions in the state from $10 to $20 million said small credit unions are realizing they've been too complacent and not outspoken enough on crucial issues such as field-of-membership overlaps. "They're the group most concerned and effected by overlaps but they've been the least responsive. Now they're ready to do some serious work and make some serious noise." "Apathy needs to be kicked aside," said David Morris,president, Amarillo Postal Employees CU and Asset Category Director for CUs under $10 million, and he urged small credit unions to "participate and speak out, otherwise bigger credit unions will dictate how things go." "When Gary Base, president of Community Credit Union in Plano gets all of the McDonald's restaurants in his field-of-membership, that's crossing the line," said David Morris. "There is a limit to field-of-membership and it's not the sky." (In January, Community CU was approved to expand its field-of-membership to include the employees of all the owner/operated McDonald's in Texas. That added about 23,000 potential members to the $700 million CU's membership of approximately 150,000.) Amarillo Postal Employees has about $9 million in assets. One of small credit unions' main concerns, explained Chism is the inadequate review of larger credit unions' fields-of-membership to see if they're violating their FOM restrictions. When you have situations where there are many large community charter credit unions in one area, Chism said it's difficult to prove a credit union knowingly signed someone up to be a member even though they weren't included in the CU's FOM. Harold Feeney, commissioner of the Texas Department of Credit Unions agreed there is no `watchdog group' in his department that checks whether a consumer applying to join a credit union is legitimately within that CU's FOM, "but we do review credit unions to make sure they have policies in place to ensure they stay within their field-of-membership." In July, the commission is scheduled to formally review the CU rules and regulations. In response to comments from CUs on this issue, Feeney said the department might consider implementing some policy. Small credit unions' lack of activity and involvement in the political and legislative process should not be misconstrued as lack of interest, stressed Durham. "It has more to do with thinking our opinion doesn't make any difference. But we're realizing now we're missing the boat on issues affecting small credit unions and we have to speak up and get involved. "The lack of a united effort among us has made change difficult for small credit unions. The issues are not as intimidating if we stand united. The coalition will serve as a communications mechanism to inform small credit unions throughout the state on important issues. We want to be strategically placed throughout Texas and be able to rally other credit unions in the state whenever it's necessary. After all, if you don't speak up, everyone assumes things are okay." Feeney emphasized that same point to small CU representatives at the roundtable discussion. He said he tried to convey to them that, "If you don't participate in the comment process before a decision is made on an application, you may get things that are not advantageous to you. Protesting after the fact is not effective." Feeney explained part of the problem is CUs' feeling of futility - a `what difference does protesting an application' make. If, for example, a CU files a protest comment letter over a larger CU's FOM expansion application, the protesting CU has the burden of proof to show they would be harmed by the FOM overlap. So there's a lot of work involved. Feeney reassured all CUs that "the department considers all protests and in many cases we have included exclusionary clauses in our decision." -
ekingoff@cutimes.com
