Shortly before year end, NCUA announced it had launched two newwebsites to increase transparency of the corporate resolutionsystem.

One site aims to offer information about the status of corporatesystem resolution. “This website provides transparency into theactual and projected costs incurred by federally insured creditunions as part of the Corporate System Resolution Program,” saidits statement of purpose. The other site offers details on NCUA’sGuaranteed Note Program, designed to provide long-term funding fordistressed assets from the five failed corporates. Both are easilyaccessible via a click from the main NCUA website atwww.ncua.gov.

Is NCUA in fact succeeding in bringing more transparency?Reactions are across the board, from cheers to jeers.

Birmingham, Ala.-based credit union consultant Dennis Dollarsaid, "Despite the voices of countless critics, NCUA seems to havedone as good of a job as possible with what they found themselvesdealing with in the corporate debacle. One of their biggestproblems in the eyes of the credit unions paying the bills forcorporate stabilization has been their inability to communicatetheir actions effectively on what is admittedly an extremelycomplex matter. I don't know if the new websites will help, butthey certainly won't hurt."

Olympia, Wash.-based credit union consultant Marvin Umholtz alsosaw the websites as a good thing. He worried that “we don’t knowexactly how deep the hole is,” but, to Umholtz’s eyes, the websitesmake more data more readily available and that, he believed, is astep in the right direction for NCUA.

The lateness in creating the sites–four years and counting intothe corporate catastrophes–was a gripe pointed to by some. AtNAFCU, CEO Fred Becker said, “I am glad the agency has finally donethis, but why did it take so long? It should have been done yearsago. This is a good thing. but it is late.”

At First Corp. in Phoenix, Chief Operating Officer Stacy Gliddensaid, “Why didn't NCUA launch these transparency sites when theywere determining the future of U.S. Central products and theWestern Bridge acquisition? The sites came too late for mypurposes.”

The CEO of a corporate, who requested anonymity, said, “It’sobviously a knee-jerk reaction to NAFCU’s call for moretransparency into the bidding process being used at the U.S.Central conservatorship. It’s window dressing. The timing wasobvious.”

NCUA spokesman John Zimmerman denied that last charge. In fact,NAFCU filed its FOIA request for more information about the U.S.Central bidding in December, many months after the process ofcreating the new sites had begun. Zimmerman wrote in an email.“Logistically, the websites have been under construction sinceAugust.... NCUA has made transparency a paramount concern whilepaying particular attention to breaking down complex data andinformation into more understandable terms."