More Leaders Speak Out on Dual Membership Requirement
November 6, 2015 3:29 PM
The debate over whether credit unions should be offered the choice to belong to either their state CU league or CUNA, or if the long-standing requirement for dual membership is better for the movement overall, was a hot topic at the California and Nevada Credit Union Leagues' Annual Meeting and Convention. Opinions of attendees varied widely for and against, with several stating they saw good points on both sides of the issue. Click through to read what other credit union leaders think, and maybe post comments of your own.
Anna Tellez, president and CEO, Antioch Community FCU, Antioch, Calif.
Credit unions should have the choice. Many credit unions cannot afford to belong to both CUNA and their state league, so the requirement puts pressure on them - especially in the case of small credit unions. I belong to both, and always have, because leagues are supportive of small credit unions, but choice is important. All credit unions should support each other no matter what.
Chuck Papenfus, president and CEO, Inland Valley FCU, Fontana, Calif.
We have to look at the whole issue. We need to see how CUNA is evolving. The [California CU League] board has had conversations on the topic and will be discussing the issue again in January. I am on the league board, so people come up to me to give me their opinions, and both sides make sense. It is hard to say not having a choice is good, but then again, every credit union needs to make a business decision how to spend its money.
Bill Cheney, president and CEO, SchoolsFirst CU, Santa Ana, Calif.
I have a different perspective on this, having been president of a credit union, then president of this league, then president of CUNA, and now president of a credit union again. I support dual membership, and so does my board and management team. The structure has worked very well for 80 years, but with consolidation I agree it is time to examine the issue.
Without context, of course having a choice is good. But with this issue, if we offer choice there will be winners and losers. It is important that our system remains strong in Washington, D.C., and in all 50 states. Unlike many other industries, there is a well-funded industry trying to put us out of business.
Joe Schroeder, president and CEO, Ventura County CU, Ventura, Calif.
I am a big choice guy when it comes to life in general. I understand the decision the CUNA board made [keeping the dual membership requirement], but I also appreciate the work Tom Dorety and the [CUNA System Structure and Governance] Task Force did. I think choice is a trend. There are only 6,000 credit unions now, and we are losing 325 a year. Some state leagues represent only a few credit unions, which is why there is consolidation at the league level.
The California League is so good, there is no way I would consider not belonging. It has so many good programs. But I talk to other credit union CEOs in other states, and they don't have as much confidence in their state league.
Shon Wellborn, president and CEO, Community CU of Southern Humboldt, Garberville, Calif.
I think credit unions should be given a choice.
Nader Moghaddam, president and CEO, Financial Partners CU
The landscape as we know it is about to change, but we need to take a measured, thoughtful look at how the evolution will shake out. Change is inevitable. The genie is out of the bottle. I think choice is important, but we have to strike a balance. When all the dust settles, I think we will be stronger on both the state and national level.
Gary Perez, president and CEO, USC CU, Los Angeles
I believe in optionality, but it is hard to see how it would work in practice. I worry what would happen if choice were offered and a large number of credit unions disaffiliated from either CUNA or their state league.
Hank Barrett, president and CEO, Valley First CU, Modesto, Calif.
Ultimately, credit unions should get choice, but we need to work out how it will work. Credit unions still need to stick together to have national-level advocacy. I think the two states that jumped out and offered choice are being premature. We have to make sure credit unions are united and speaking with a single voice.
Eileen Rivera, president and CEO, SkyOne FCU, Hawthorne, Calif.
I really wanted optionality. I was disappointed CUNA did not follow the recommendations of the [CUNA Structure and Governance Task Force]. We should be able to pick one or the other. Still, I am confident the debate will lead to a better system. I think the leagues and CUNA will work better together once this all shakes out.
John Cassidy, president and CEO, Sierra Central CU, Yuba City, Calif.
The credit union industry has finally positioned itself well to create unprecedented leverage in the marketplace, so it disappoints me to have this discussion at this time. Most great organizations fall apart from within, not from forces on the outside. This is the wrong time to have this debate. I don't want to see a battle within. For the sake of this movement, there are so many more important things for us to focus on. I think there were some communication issues that led to this all coming out now. It is disruptive for the wrong reason.
When it comes to advocacy, we don't need multiple voices. We can't have 50 different state leagues all bringing different messages to Washington. That will confuse the process and we will lose leverage.
