Can't help myself. Just read Dave Adam's letter about what "he thinks we should do about credit union conversions". I would like to remind your readers that Adams' contention that, "Undoubtedly many credit union CEOs may be secretly hoping to see more conversions so that they may one day have license to do the same" has no basis in fact. He has no information to back up his claim and he does a disservice to the many dedicated credit union CEOs in Michigan who are painted with a brush wielded by the CEO of our league. Certainly in a time in which CEOs, at all levels, are under such close scrutiny Adams' wild contentions has opened us to examination by those who would like nothing better than to find some dirty laundry. Adams, in his reckless fashion, has given them plenty of ammunition while exposing his own disdain for his membership base and his own board. He contradicts himself by contending that polling and committee/board processes has shown support for his position and then contends that many credit union CEOs are ready to convert. Perhaps they were just not included in the poll. He notes that in Michigan a state charter credit union must get 66% of the voting members to win a conversion attempt – maybe we should elect our president in the same way. Something tells me we would go leaderless for a fair piece of time. The fact that, in the Lake Michigan CU vote, the majority (over 60%) voted for the conversion didn't mean anything – they got stuffed. That's certainly the democratic process isn't it? His comments about "a Cadillac or other prizes at Christmas time" I will leave for the reader's interpretation as I haven't the foggiest what that means. Adams claims that the majority of member credit unions agree with a league policy that outlines its action in conversion attempts. I would disagree with his assertion that DFCU Financial was in the minority. There were many credit unions in Michigan who expressed their displeasure at the league's campaign and officious intermeddling in both the credit union's affairs as well as attempts to influence the regulators during the conversion process. There are many of us who recognize there are rules that govern the process and regulators charged with the oversight of the process. League activities, some of us believed, were inappropriate and we let the board know that. As a result of that campaign and other actions I believe our league is less trusted than at any time in its history. Adams calls for "bold leadership" on this issue. Let me say that there is never a day in which bold "intelligent" leadership is unwelcome. Adams demonstrates his management style by writing "I may even get criticism from my own member credit unions or even my own board members" – bold but hardly intelligent. Nothing like alienating your membership. The fact is that Adams' preamble to suggested "actions" displays a disdain for his own membership. Adams' recommendations do not deserve the slightest attention. Adams wants credit unions to confirm their intent. They do that every day in a difficult world – he should do the same. He wants to form some type of counter committee to the Coalition for Credit Union Charter Options, but Mr. Adams CUNA is our voice in Washington and I am sure quite capable of representing our interests in that regard. I have been involved in the credit union movement for some 40-plus years and I can tell you that I have not ever had a thought about converting. Unlike Adams, I am a true credit unionist schooled in the philosophy and too old to be tempted by any potential personal gain. One thing we learn early on is respect and I know and have known many credit union CEOs and respect too much to insult them as Adams has. Maybe Adams should spend some time trying to help them rather than suggesting their motives to cover his, self-serving, political ends. It is apparent that Adams has now taken on the role of savior exactly at the time we don't need it. I understand that the conversion of DFCU Financial will have a great impact on many different areas of the credit union world. The NCUSIF will suffer an opportunity loss of some half a million dollars- pretty hard to hide that. I am also confident that the board and management of DFCU have examined these issues closely. I remain confident that the NCUA will oversee the process and ensure the greatest member education. I believe leadership of DFCU has made a difficult and potentially perilous choice for their membership based on the circumstance particular to their credit union. I believe they have that right. I believe the Michigan League and CUNA should be working to improve the credit union environment by lobbying for a risk-based capital formula that removes the capital imbalance. My need to write this letter spells out a lack of credible leadership at least here in Michigan. This petty, political posturing by Adams, using attacks on credit union CEOs and his need to preview disagreement on the part of his own board, is childish. Does he really think we will consider him heroic or courageous? Adam's willingness to have published his absurd notions, particularly as it relates to credit union management, deserves a public response and his board should not ignore his attack, on the membership! Dennis Moriarity President UNITY Credit Union Warren, Mich.