Logan served on the board and the supervisory committee for the old BF Goodrich FCU for roughly six years from 1998 until 2004. He resigned in 2004, he explained, over the board's decision to change the name from BF Goodrich to the Credit Union of Alabama, a decision the board would later have to revisit after litigation from the $654 million Alabama Credit Union, also based in Tuscaloosa.

“I resigned from the board because there was just no reason to make the change,” Logan said. “People don't understand that these name changes are expensive and there was just no reason to do that.”

Logan said friends urged him to run to get back on the board in 2004, but he lost. In 2006, he tried to run again in but the credit union rejected his candidacy for insufficient signatures.

“In my heart of hearts, I always thought those signatures were valid, but they ruled they weren't and what could I do,” Logan said.

This year, with the help of friends, Logan collected 592 signatures, almost 100 more than the 500 the credit union said he had to collect.

“It was hard to collect signatures, no kidding,” Logan said. “I was outside of that BF Goodrich plant, in the rain and cold at every shift change to get it done.”

Alabama One confirmed Logan's account of getting on the ballot but did not comment further.

Logan said he wanted to make sure he collected more than enough signatures because Lorrain Ramos-Baird, another member and former Alabama One employee, had been expelled from the credit union after it became known she was running for the board.

Ramos-Baird did not return calls for comment, but a law firm representing her in litigation with the credit union confirmed her expulsion. Alabama One had not cited a reason for its decision when it notified her was no longer a credit union member, according to the law firm.

Logan's determination to run for the board arose after the credit union's 2014 annual meeting when he and other members tried to ask questions about the credit union's dealings with Danny Ray Butler, a local business owner.

A federal grand jury indicted Butler for fraud and check kiting in October 2013 and the Alabama Credit Union Administration suspended four credit union employees in late February 2014 in connection with an investigation. The ACUA reversed the suspensions in middle of March 2014.

Butler, who pleaded guilty to fraud and check kiting in July 2014, received a sentence of three years in federal prison and restitution in after costing Alabama One $1.2 million and the SBA over $3 million in losses.

In addition, the credit union has faced a series of lawsuits from members who alleged that credit union representatives played a role in getting them to invest with Butler. As of press time, two of the original five had settled with confidentiality agreements in place, but three are still pending.

“We just need to see some transparency about all this,” Logan said. “One lawsuit is too many and five is just awful.”

Logan added that he and other members are also upset that Alabama One saw negative income this year of $7.82 million, according to NCUA data, and saw its equity ratio drop from 11.59% to 10.40% as its reserves shrank from more $65.6 million at the close of 2013 to $60.5 billion at the close of 2014.

Of that $7.82 million, $4.59 million came in the form of loss from the disposition of fixed assets, which Alabama One CEO John Carruth explained as a commercial property tied up in bankruptcy process.

“Regarding the CALL report, the credit union took the most conservative approach to a piece of commercial property that was the subject of differing appraisals,” Carruth wrote in an email. “The property in question has not been sold yet, however, and the credit union was instructed to report it the way that it did.”

Logan still wants answers on how the credit union made as many loans as it did to Butler and why the credit union was so slow to pick up on the check kiting.

“We are supposed to be democratically run and member owned,” Logan said. “When they wouldn't even let us ask questions at the meeting, I decided I had to run for the board again.”

In a previous interview with CU Times Carruth addressed the question of the lack of questions at the annual meeting.

“We get about that many people every year and the credit union followed the procedure that it always follows,” he told CU Times in March of 2014. . “It appeared that allies of the plaintiffs were trying to use the annual meeting for an improper purpose and to score points that they thought might increase pressure on the credit union to pay the plaintiffs money. An overwhelming vote of the members present rejected that attempt. Members have numerous opportunities to give the credit union feedback and express their concerns. Anyone complaining knows that.”