Texas dues coverage appeared one-sided

<p>Amen to most of Mike Welch’s comments in his May 29th publisher’s column, “Focused associations up dues more easily.” I wish some of these same points would have been recognized by Credit Union Times’ news reports about the dues controversy in Texas. They seemed instead to focus only on the league’s argument that they needed money and that those opposed were simply not seeing the big picture or, that they were penny pinchers. It was actually about calling for accountability in the management of all resources. In Texas, for example, we have our services side losing money year after year even as that side of the organization receives a lot of endorsement income and holds about six million dollars in capital. Despite those resources, the league side receives a mere $50,000 each year in dividends and the capital shrinks by the amount of the losses. Would that kind of performance be tolerated in the real business world? Apparently it is acceptable to many in the credit union community as some consider it impolite or improper to even talk about such matters during a delegate meeting. Some believe that we should simply trust our elected officials. However after a period of time it must be recognized that politics are getting in the way of sound business decisions. If even a 5% return on equity could be achieved (services side), the league might not need a dues increase. That dividend could be $300,000 instead of $50,000. Those were some of the points some of us were trying to make in Texas. I really enjoy Credit Union Times, but as an “independent” publication, I frankly think it could have done a better job giving both sides of the Texas dues issue, although Welch’s column helps. Leagues need to focus on their core mission. P. H. Dews President/CEO Pegasus Credit Union Dallas, Texas</p>