UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(X) QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

OR

(  ) TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended: September 30, 2010

Commission file number: 001-15985

UNION BANKSHARES, INC.

P.O. BOX 667

MAIN STREET

MORRISVILLE, VT 05661

Registrant’s telephone number:      802-888-6600

Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report: Not applicable

Securities registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:

Common Stock, $2.00 par value	Nasdaq Stock Market
(Title of class)	(Exchanges registered on)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes [X]      No [  ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” ”accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).
Yes [  ]      No [X]

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock as of

October 29, 2010:

1

UNION BANKSHARES, INC.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

2

Part l Financial Information

  Item 1. Financial Statements

UNION BANKSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Unaudited)

See accompanying notes to unaudited interim consolidated financial statements.

3

UNION BANKSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

(Unaudited)

See accompanying notes to unaudited interim consolidated financial statements.

4

UNION BANKSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010 and 2009

(Unaudited)

	Common stock										Accumulated
	Shares, net of treasury		Amount		Paid-in capital		Retained earnings		Treasury stock		other comprehensive loss		Total stockholders’ equity
	(Dollars in thousands)
Balances, December 31, 2009	4,461,208		$9,844		$219		$36,494		$(3,724)		$(1,653)		$41,180
Comprehensive income:
Net income	-		-		-		4,205		-		-		4,205
Other comprehensive income,      net of tax:
Change in net unrealized gain      on investment securities      available-for-sale, net of      reclassification adjustment      and tax effects	-		-		-		-		-		458		458
Change in net unrealized loss      on unfunded defined      benefit plan liability,      net of reclassification      adjustment and tax effects	-		-		-		-		-		73		73
Total other comprehensive          income											531
Total comprehensive income													4,736
Cash dividends declared  ($0.75 per share)	-		-		-		(3,344)		-		-		(3,344)
Stock based compensation  expense	-		-		19		-		-		-		19
Purchase of treasury stock	(5,390)		-		-		-		(97)		-		(97)
Balances, September 30, 2010	4,455,818		$9,844		$238		$37,355		$(3,821)		$(1,122)		$42,494
Balances, December 31, 2008	4,474,598		$9,844		$207		$35,869		$(3,500)		$(3,270)		$39,150
Comprehensive income:
Net income	-		-		-		3,947		-		-		3,947
Other comprehensive income,      net of tax:
Change in net unrealized gain      (loss) on investment securities      available-for-sale, net of      reclassification adjustment      and tax effects	-		-		-		-		-		673		673
Change in net unrealized loss      on unfunded defined      benefit plan liability,      net of reclassification      adjustment and tax effects	-		-		-		-		-		167		167
Total other comprehensive          income											840
Total comprehensive  income													4,787
Cash dividends declared  ($0.78 per share)	-		-		-		(3,486)		-		-		(3,486)
Stock based compensation  expense	-		-		9		-		-		-		9
Purchase of treasury stock	(12,570)		-		-		-		(210)		-		(210)
Balances, September 30, 2009	4,462,028		$9,844		$216		$36,330		$(3,710)		$(2,430)		$40,250

See accompanying notes to unaudited interim consolidated financial statements.

5

UNION BANKSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Unaudited)

6

See accompanying notes to unaudited interim consolidated financial statements.

7

UNION BANKSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

NOTES TO UNAUDITED INTERIM CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Note 1. Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited interim consolidated financial statements of Union Bankshares, Inc. (the Company) as of September 30, 2010 and 2009, and for the three and nine months then ended have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for interim financial information, general practices within the banking industry, and the accounting policies described in the Company’s Annual Report to Shareholders and Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2009. In the opinion of Company’s management, all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments and disclosures necessary for a fair presentation of the information contained herein, have been made. This information should be read in conjunction with the Company’s 2009 Annual Report to Shareholders and 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A. The results of operations for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations to be expected for the full fiscal year ending December 31, 2010, or any other interim period.

Certain amounts in the 2009 unaudited interim consolidated financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the 2010 presentation.

Note 2. Commitments and Contingencies

In the normal course of business, the Company is involved in various legal and other proceedings. In the opinion of management, any liability resulting from such proceedings is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

Note 3. Per Share Information

Earnings per common share are computed based on the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period and reduced for shares held in treasury. The assumed conversion of available outstanding stock options does not result in material dilution and is not included in the calculation.

Note 4. Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued an Accounting Standards Update (ASU), Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures: Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements, to amend the disclosure requirements and clarify existing requirements related to recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements and employers’ disclosures about postretirement benefit plan assets. The guidance requires new disclosures regarding transfers of assets and liabilities between Level 1 (quoted prices in active market for identical assets or liabilities) and Level 2 (significant other observable inputs) of the fair value measurement hierarchy, including the reasons and the timing of the transfers. Additionally, the guidance requires a rollforward of activities, separately reporting purchases, sales, issuance, and settlements, for assets and liabilities measured using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3 fair value measurements). The new disclosure requirements apply to interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the new rules regarding purchases, sales, issuances and settlements associated with Level 3 measurements which are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Other than requiring additional disclosures, adoption of this accounting standard did not have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. See Note 8.

In July 2010, the FASB issued an ASU, Receivables- Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses, to provide additional information to assist financial statement users in assessing an entity’s credit risk exposures and evaluating the adequacy of its allowance for credit losses. The disclosures will be required on a disaggregated basis- portfolio segment and class of financing receivable. The new disclosures will require an entity to provide credit quality indicators of financing receivables at the end of the reporting period by class, the aging of past due financing receivables at the end of the reporting period by class, the nature and extent of troubled debt restructurings that occurred during the period by class and their effect on the allowance for loan losses, the nature and extent of financing receivables modified as troubled debt restructurings within the previous twelve months that defaulted during the reporting period by class and their effect on the allowance for credit losses, and significant purchases and sales of financing receivables during the reporting period

8

disaggregated by portfolio segment. The ASU also requires existing disclosures be amended for an entity to provide disclosures about its financing receivables on a disaggregated basis including a rollforward schedule of allowance for credit losses for the reporting period on a portfolio segment basis with the ending balance further disaggregated on the basis of the impairment method and the related recorded investment in financing receivables as well as the nonaccrual and/or impairment status of financing receivables by class. The new and amended disclosures for public entities as of the end of a reporting period are effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending on or after December 15, 2010. The disclosures about activity that occurs during a reporting period are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The amendments in this ASU encourage, but do not require, comparative disclosures for earlier reporting periods. Other than requiring additional disclosures, the Company does not anticipate the adoption of this ASU will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Note 5. Investment Securities

Investment securities as of the balance sheet dates consisted of the following:

There were no sales of securities available-for-sale for the nine months ended September 30, 2010. Proceeds from the sale of securities available-for-sale for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 were $4.1 million. Gross realized gains from sales of investments available-for-sale were $74 thousand for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 with no gross realized losses. The specific identification method is used to determine realized gains and losses on sales of available-for-sale securities.

9

The amortized cost and estimated fair value of debt securities (dollars in thousands) by contractual scheduled maturity as of September 30, 2010 were as follows:

Actual maturities may differ for certain debt securities that may be called by the issuer prior to the contractual maturity. Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities in mortgage-backed securities because the mortgages underlying the securities may be prepaid, usually without any penalties. Therefore, these mortgage-backed securities are shown separately and not included in the maturity categories in the above maturity summary.

The fair values (dollars in thousands) of investment securities available-for-sale with gross unrealized losses aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous loss position were as follows:

The Company evaluates all investment securities on a quarterly basis, and more frequently when economic conditions warrant, determining if an other-than-temporary impairment exists. A debt security is considered impaired if the fair value is lower than its amortized cost basis at the report date. If impaired, management then assesses whether the impairment is other-than-temporary.

10

Authoritative guidance provides that an unrealized loss on a debt security is generally deemed to be other-than-temporary and a credit loss is deemed to exist if the present value of the expected future cash flows is less than the amortized cost basis of the debt security. The credit loss component of an other-than-temporary impairment write-down is recorded, net of tax effect, through net income as a component of net other-than-temporary impairment losses in the consolidated statement of income, while the remaining portion of the impairment loss is recognized in other comprehensive income (loss) reflected in stockholders’ equity in the balance sheet, provided the Company does not intend to sell the underlying debt security and it is “more likely than not” that the Company will not have to sell the debt security prior to recovery.

Management considers the following factors in determining whether an other-than-temporary impairment exists and the period over which the debt security is expected to recover:

At September 30, 2010, available-for-sale securities, consisting of two U.S. Government-sponsored enterprises, one agency collateralized mortgage obligation, one agency mortgage-backed security and one marketable equity security had unrealized losses of $12 thousand. Only the one marketable equity security has had an unrealized loss of greater than twelve months and the Company has the ability to hold such security for the foreseeable future. No declines were deemed by management to be other-than-temporary at September 30, 2010.

Investment securities with a carrying amount of $1.7 million and $3.6 million at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively, were pledged as collateral for public deposits and for other purposes as required or permitted by law.

Note 6. Defined Benefit Pension Plan

Union Bank, the Company’s sole subsidiary, sponsors a noncontributory defined benefit pension plan covering all eligible employees. The plan provides defined benefits based on years of service and final average salary.

Net periodic pension benefit cost for the three and nine months ended September 30 consisted of the following components:

Note 7. Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Accounting principles generally require recognized revenue, expenses, gains, and losses be included in net income or loss. Certain changes in assets and liabilities, such as the after tax effect of unrealized

11

gains and losses on investment securities available-for-sale that are not other than temporarily impaired, are not reflected in the statement of income. The cumulative effect of such items is reflected as a separate component of the equity section of the balance sheet (accumulated other comprehensive income or loss). Other comprehensive income or loss, along with net income, comprises the Company’s total comprehensive income or loss. As of the balance sheet dates, the components of accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax, were:

The following comprised total comprehensive income for the three and nine months ended September 30:

Note 8: Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures

The Company utilizes FASB Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, as guidance for accounting for assets and liabilities carried at fair value. This standard defines fair value as the price that would be received, without adjustment for transaction costs, to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Fair value is a market based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. The guidance in FASB ASC Topic 820 establishes a three-level fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value. A financial instrument’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.

The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are:

12

The following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for the Company’s financial assets that are measured on a recurring basis at estimated fair value:

Investment securities available-for-sale: Certain corporate debt securities, marketable equity securities and mutual funds have been valued using unadjusted quoted prices from active markets and therefore have been classified as level 1. However, the majority of the Company’s available-for-sale investment securities have been valued utilizing level 2 inputs. For these securities, the Company obtains fair value measurements from an independent pricing service. The fair value measurements consider observable data that may include market maker bids, quotes and pricing models. Inputs to the pricing models include recent trades, benchmark interest rates, spreads and actual and projected cash flows.

Assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, segregated by fair value hierarchy level, are summarized below:

There were no significant transfers in or out of Levels 1 and 2 for the quarter or nine months ended September 30, 2010. Certain other assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis, that is, the instruments are not measured at fair value on an ongoing basis but are subject to fair value adjustments in certain circumstances (for example, when there is evidence of impairment). Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis such as investment securities held-to-maturity, other real estate owned, impaired loans and mortgage servicing rights were not significant at

13

September 30, 2010 or December 31, 2009. The Company has not elected to apply the fair value option to any financial assets or liabilities other than those situations where other accounting pronouncements require fair value measurements.

FASB ASC Topic 825, Financial Instruments, requires disclosure of the estimated fair value of financial instruments. Fair value is best determined based upon quoted market prices. However, in many instances, there are no quoted market prices for the Company’s various financial instruments. In cases where quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on estimates using present value or other valuation techniques. Those techniques are significantly affected by the assumptions used, including the discount rate and estimates of future cash flows. Management’s estimates and assumptions are inherently subjective and involve uncertainties and matters of significant judgment. Changes in assumptions could dramatically affect the estimated fair values. Accordingly, the fair value estimates may not be realized in an immediate settlement of the instrument.

Certain financial instruments may be excluded from the fair value disclosure requirements. Thus, the aggregate fair value amounts presented may not necessarily represent the actual underlying fair value of all financial instruments of the Company. In addition, all nonfinancial instruments may be excluded from the fair value disclosures.

The following methods and assumptions were used by the Company in estimating its fair value disclosures for financial instruments:

Cash and cash equivalents: The carrying amounts reported in the balance sheet for cash and cash equivalents approximate those assets' fair values.

Interest bearing deposits in banks: Fair values for interest bearing deposits in banks are based on discounted present values of cash flows.

Investment securities: Fair values for investment securities are based on quoted market prices, where available. If quoted market prices are not available, with the assistance of an independent pricing service, management’s fair value measurements consider observable data which may include market maker bids, quotes and pricing models. Inputs to the pricing models include recent trades, benchmark interest rates, spreads and actual and projected cash flows.

Loans and loans held for sale: Fair values of loans are estimated for portfolios of loans with similar financial characteristics and segregated by loan type. For variable-rate loans that reprice frequently and with no significant change in credit risk, fair values are based on carrying amounts. The fair values for other loans (for example, fixed-rate residential, commercial real estate, and rental property mortgage loans, and commercial and industrial loans) are estimated using discounted cash flow analysis, based on interest rates currently being offered for loans with similar terms to borrowers of similar credit quality. Loan fair value estimates include judgments regarding future cash flows, future expected loss experience and risk characteristics. The carrying amounts reported in the balance sheet for loans that are held for sale approximate their estimated fair values. Fair values for impaired loans are estimated using discounted cash flow analyses or underlying collateral values, where applicable.

Deposits: The fair values disclosed for demand deposits or nonmaturity deposits (for example, checking and savings accounts) are, by definition, equal to the amount payable on demand at the reporting date (that is, their carrying amounts). The carrying amounts of variable-rate time deposits approximate their estimated fair values at the reporting date. The fair values for fixed-rate time deposits are estimated using a discounted cash flow calculation that applies interest rates currently being offered on time deposits to a schedule of aggregated contractual maturities on such time deposits.

Accrued interest receivable and payable: The carrying amounts of accrued interest approximate their estimated fair values.

14

Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) of Boston stock: The carrying amount approximates its estimated fair value.

Borrowed funds: The fair values of the Company’s long-term debt are estimated using discounted cash flow analysis based on interest rates currently being offered on similar debt instruments. The fair values of the Company’s short-term debt approximate the carrying amounts reported in the balance sheet.

Off-balance-sheet financial instruments: Estimated fair values for off-balance-sheet, credit-related financial instruments are based on fees currently charged to enter into similar agreements, taking into account the remaining terms of the agreements and the counterparties’ credit standing. The only commitments to extend credit that are normally longer than one year in duration are the Home Equity Lines whose interest rates are variable quarterly. The only fees collected for commitments are an annual fee on credit card arrangements and often a flat fee on commercial lines of credit and standby letters of credit. The estimated fair value of off-balance-sheet financial instruments is not significant.

As of the balance sheet dates, the estimated fair values and related carrying amounts of the Company's significant financial instruments were as follows:

The carrying amounts in the preceding table are included in the balance sheet under the applicable captions.

Note 9. Subsequent Events

Subsequent events represent events or transactions occurring after the balance sheet date but before the financial statements are issued. Financial statements are considered “issued” when they are widely distributed to shareholders and others for general use and reliance in a form and format that complies with GAAP. Events occurring subsequent to September 30, 2010 have been evaluated as to their potential impact to the consolidated financial statements.

On October 20, 2010, Union Bankshares, Inc. declared a $0.25 per share regular quarterly cash dividend payable November 10, 2010 to stockholders of record on October 30, 2010.

15

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

GENERAL

The following discussion and analysis by management focuses on those factors that had a material effect on the financial position of Union Bankshares, Inc. (the Company) as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, and its results of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009. This discussion is being presented to provide a narrative explanation of the consolidated financial statements and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes and with other financial data appearing elsewhere in this filing and with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2009. In the opinion of the Company’s management, the interim unaudited data reflects all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, and disclosures necessary to fairly present the Company’s consolidated financial position and results of operations for the interim periods presented. Management is not aware of the occurrence of any events after September 30, 2010 which would materially affect the information presented.

CAUTIONARY ADVICE ABOUT FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

The Company may from time to time make written or oral statements that are considered “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements may include financial projections, statements of plans and objectives for future operations, estimates of future economic performance or conditions and assumptions relating thereto. The Company may include forward-looking statements in its filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in its reports to stockholders, including this Quarterly Report, in press releases, other written materials, and in statements made by senior management to analysts, rating agencies, institutional investors, representatives of the media and others.

Forward-looking statements reflect management’s current expectations and are subject to uncertainties, both general and specific, and risk exists that actual results will differ from those predictions, forecasts, projections and other estimates contained in forward-looking statements. These risks cannot be readily quantified. When management uses any of the words “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “seeks,” “estimates,” “may,” “could,” “would,” “should,” or similar expressions, they are making forward–looking statements. Many possible events or factors, including those beyond the control of management, could affect the future financial results and performance of the Company and could cause results or performance to differ materially from those expressed in forward-looking statements. Management has discussed some of the more likely factors that might affect forward-looking statements in this report on Form 10-Q. Those factors include the following:

16

When evaluating forward-looking statements to make decisions with respect to the Company, investors and others are cautioned to consider these and other risks and uncertainties, including the events and circumstances discussed under “Recent Developments” below, and are reminded not to place undue reliance on such statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and the Company undertakes no obligation to update them to reflect new or changed information or events, except as may be required by federal securities laws.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

In June 2010, The U.S. Banker magazine ranked Union Bankshares, Inc. number 41 based on 3 year return on average equity (ROAE), from a list including all U.S. banks and thrifts listed on major exchanges, pink sheets and stock trading bulletin boards or who filed with the SEC and had under $2 billion in assets. The Company had an ROAE of 13.07% and a 2009 ROAE of 13.29%. The Company has been ranked by the U.S. Banker Magazine in the top 125 or better for each of the last five years.

The U.S. and global economies have experienced significant stress and disruptions in the financial sector over the last three years but certain segments are showing signs of stabilization or recovery. Interest rates remain at historic lows, bank failures are higher than they have been in over 15 years, the FDIC collected three years of prepaid assessments from the remaining banks and the amount of government dollars pumped into the financial system is unprecedented. Dramatic slowdowns in the housing industry with falling home prices, continuing foreclosures and the high unemployment rate have resulted in significant problems for some financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities and investment banks. These problems have caused many financial institutions to seek additional capital, to merge with larger and stronger institutions and, in some cases, to fail. Economic instability progressed to many other business and government sectors and has affected the majority of consumers as well. Tough decisions face our elected representatives and local municipal governments as the recession continues and they face how to recover from the growing deficit situation without making the current recession worse. Resolution of the future of taxation, housing finance programs and entitlement programs including healthcare and government spending will affect all consumers and businesses including Union Bankshares, Inc. and its subsidiary, Union Bank (Union).

17

Despite the volatile economy, Vermont continues to have the lowest residential foreclosure rate in the country with 143 foreclosures in 2009, but the pace of foreclosures did increase 4.4% in 2009 from 2008. Also, as northern New England had not experienced the dramatic run up in housing prices, likewise, we have not seen the values drop as far as other parts of the country. New England has also not seen unemployment rates as high as some parts of the country (national average for September 2010 was 9.6%) with Vermont’s rate dropping to 5.8% for September 2010 from 6.6% in September 2009.

In response to the financial crisis affecting the banking and financial markets, many new laws, regulations and programs have been adopted or proposed. The Company’s 2009 annual report on Form 10-K/A discussed those that management believed would have a known impact on the Company or its operations. The discussion below mentions those government actions or initiatives that have changed or been added or whose financial impact on the Company is not yet known.

The Dodd-Frank Act, signed into law in July 2010, represents a dramatic rewrite of the rules governing all financial service providers and products and will usher in a new era of regulation. The Act has some key reform provisions that will level the playing field for community banks in some areas including: asset-based deposit insurance assessments, resolution of “too-big-to fail” institutions, regulation on nonbank competitors and others as discussed below. It will also mean numerous new regulations to be adopted by the regulators and implemented by the financial services industry. The Dodd-Frank Act requires more than 60 studies be conducted and more than 200 regulations be written over the next couple of years, resulting in years of uncertainty for banks and other affected entities. The Act’s impact will not only be felt by the banking industry but by consumers and businesses that rely on banks everyday to meet their financial needs. Also, many of the new rules require international cooperation and consistency with international standards, further complicating and likely delaying the regulatory implementation process.

The Dodd-Frank Act creates an independent Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection to oversee consumer financial protection regulations for all providers of financial services products with the exception of the Community Reinvestment Act requirements and ensure consumers are protected from unfair, deceptive or abusive practices. There are a number of current consumer regulations which may be amended as a result of this legislation. The Act authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to establish a multi-year program of grants, agreements and similar undertakings to promote initiatives that enable low and moderate income individuals access to financial products that meet their financial needs and are of reasonable cost. Products would include deposit accounts, savings accounts and closed end loans. The Secretary is also authorized to establish multi-year programs to provide low-cost alternatives to small-dollar loans.

The Dodd-Frank Act eliminated the requirement under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act for the preparation and inclusion in a nonaccelerated filer’s (less than $75 million in market capitalization held by nonaffiliates) annual report of an independent auditor’s attestation regarding the effectiveness of the company’s internal controls over financial reporting, which was to have begun for 2010. This should save the Company approximately $17 thousand, after tax, annually. Disclosure of management attestations on internal control over financial reporting is still required.

The increase in the FDIC insurance coverage limits to $250,000 per depositor per ownership category at each insured financial institution has been made permanent retroactive to January 1, 2008 which will have a negative effect on the FDIC insurance reserve in light of the thirteen financial institutions that failed between January 1, 2008 and October 3, 2008.

The temporary opt-in 100% guaranty on deposits in noninterest bearing transaction deposit accounts under the FDIC TAG Program which was scheduled to expire on June 30, 2010 for participating financial institutions continues until December 31, 2010 at a cost of 15 basis points per annum. The definition of noninterest bearing transaction deposit account changed on July 1, 2010 to qualifying deposit accounts paying a rate of 0.25% or less from its earlier definition of 0.50%. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the coverage is being extended to all banks for 2011 and 2012 but will only apply to demand deposit accounts where no interest is paid. The coverage will no longer be a special program but a part of the regular FDIC insurance coverage. The cost for this coverage has not yet been determined. The Dodd-

18

Frank Act removes the prohibition on payment of interest on demand deposit accounts as of July 21, 2011 but only accounts that pay no interest will be 100% insured.

The Dodd-Frank Act will also change the formula under which banks pay for FDIC insurance coverage from a quarterly assessment based on covered deposits at each quarter end to total average assets less average tangible equity. An effective date for this change has not yet been determined but management believes this change will lower future FDIC assessment costs for the Company once implemented. On the other hand, the Act also increases the FDIC’s minimum reserve ratio from 1.15% to not less than 1.35% of the estimated insured deposits or the new assessment base by 2020. This change could mean increased assessments in the future; however, the Dodd-Frank Act does require the FDIC to mitigate the effect of the increase in the reserve ratio on financial institutions, such as the Company, that are under $10 billion in assets. The Act also requires the FDIC to evaluate the definitions of core deposits and brokered deposits and their impact on the economy and the banking sector, as well as any potential impact from redefining core deposits.

The Act authorizes and encourages higher capital requirements to apply to insured depository institutions, bank and thrift holding companies, and systemically important nonbank financial companies but leaves much of the details up to the Federal regulators. These new requirements will include new “source of strength” rules for bank holding companies with regard to their depository institution subsidiaries. Eventually the requirements will also have to provide consistency with evolving Basel III standards which have not yet been finalized. Stricter capital standards will be imposed for interstate acquisitions requiring firms to be “well capitalized and well managed”. The Act also modifies regulations related to transactions with affiliates, lending limits, charter conversions, SEC’s elective investment bank holding company framework (eliminated) and supervision of securities holding companies.

The Act also will provide shareholders with a nonbinding say on pay and certain corporate affairs for publicly held companies. Smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, will be subject to a scaled-down version of these requirements. These changes will have to be aligned with the recently published guidance issued by the federal banking regulators in June 2010 which discusses better emerging practices related to incentive compensation operating models, including governance structures, identification and assessment of covered employees, quarterly and annual review processes, and the interface with the institution’s enterprise risk management program, as well as with SEC regulations yet to be fully developed.

The FASB has also issued a number of new accounting proposals which are currently out for comment that would have an impact on the Company’s financial statements and/or footnote disclosures in the future if adopted. These proposals include a new statement of comprehensive income which would incorporate a continuous statement of financial performance pulling together information that is currently detailed in various financial statements and footnotes. A proposed clarification to accounting for troubled debt restructurings by creditors would assist creditors in determining whether a restructuring of a receivable meets the criteria to be considered a troubled debt restructuring, both for purposes of recording an impairment and for disclosure of troubled debt restructurings.

A new fair value measurements and disclosures proposal by FASB would require companies to use “mark-to-market” values for reporting financial instruments on their balance sheets. This means that under the proposal, all loans and debt securities would be recorded at fair value, as would most financial liabilities, including deposits. This proposal will distort the carrying values on the balance sheet and subject capital to volatility that is not reflective of a Company’s financial position or the cash flows expected to be generated. The proposal includes the addition of unfunded loan commitments to the balance sheet as an asset and a liability which would change the fundamental nature of the balance sheet and make historical ratio calculations meaningless. The requirement included in the proposal to measure loan loss reserves on a forward-looking “expected loss” vs. “incurred loss” and to add a component for debt securities held for long-term investment would further inhibit investment in the corporate sector and has the potential to create more volatile earnings. The proposal to record interest income on an after-impairment basis as opposed to based on contractual terms would make the accounting more confusing and subject otherwise firm data to the volatility that comes from the subjective provisioning process.

19

The SEC has proposed amendments to enhance the disclosure that registrants provide about short-term borrowings. Specifically, the proposals would require a registrant to provide a comprehensive explanation of its short-term borrowings, including both quantitative and qualitative information, including particularly whether these borrowings vary materially during reporting periods compared to amounts reported at period-end. In addition, the SEC issued two releases in August 2010 soliciting public comment regarding the impact on investors and issuers of incorporating International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) into the U.S. financial reporting system (GAAP).

The cost of doing business has increased dramatically in this regulatory environment as the number and extent of new regulations and the speed with which they must be implemented have put a strain on software providers and staff as well as customers and with the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act, it appears that it will continue to increase. The cost of mitigating long term interest rate risk by selling loans to the secondary market has increased dramatically and it is anticipated that this cost will continue to grow as the government sponsored entities continue to work through their own financial problems. There have also been many new regulations adopted that limit the type and amount of fees that may be imposed, which will have a future negative impact on community banks which did not create the economic problems but will be a big part of the solution.

Prior to the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act and as a result of the weakness of certain financial institutions, the FDIC took action that has resulted in increased future FDIC insurance assessments for United States FDIC-insured financial institutions, including Union. Banks were required to prepay an estimated three year assessment to the FDIC on December 30, 2009, which resulted in the Company recording a $1.8 million nonearning asset at December 31, 2009 which is being amortized over that three year period as the actual expense is recognized monthly. As of September 30, 2010, the remaining nonearning asset was $1.4 million. The FDIC also previously announced that it would increase its current assessment rate by three basis points effective January 1, 2011, but this proposed increase was reversed in October 2010.

On November 9, 2010, the FDIC issued a proposed rule that would change the deposit insurance assessment base from a depository institution’s adjusted domestic deposits to its average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity, which is defined under the proposal as Tier 1 Capital. The new base is larger than the current base and could result in a decrease in assessment rates of between 2.5 and 9 basis points for financial institutions, like the Company, that are classified in the lowest risk category. The proposed rule is expected to become effective for the second quarter of 2011. Management will evaluate the impact of the proposal on the Company, which it expects will result in a reduction in its deposit insurance assessment costs, when sample calculators become available. Based on the current FDIC insurance premium schedule in effect for 2010, we anticipate our assessment expense to be $455 thousand for 2010, of which $372 thousand was expensed during the first nine months of 2010, compared to $566 thousand for the first nine months of 2009, which included a $191 thousand special emergency assessment. Our estimate of 2010 FDIC assessment expense could be affected if another special assessment is levied, additional rate increases are imposed during 2010, or deposit levels differ significantly from our forecast.

It is not completely clear at this time what impact current or future government sponsored programs, regulations or legislation will have on the Company, its customers or the U.S. and global financial markets but there are a number of proposals pending that if or when enacted could have a future impact on the Company’s operating environment. In addition to the Dodd-Frank Act, those that might have a future impact are overdraft rules for electronic transactions, healthcare reform, mortgage bankruptcy cram down, increase in regulatory capital levels, more stringent liquidity requirements, credit and other concentration regulations, additional fair value accounting requirements or a merger of U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) accounting and international financial reporting standards. The Company’s management will continue to monitor and evaluate these pending proposals.

20

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The Company has established various accounting policies which govern the application of U.S. GAAP in the preparation of the Company’s financial statements. Certain accounting policies involve significant judgments and assumptions by management which have a material impact on the reported amount of assets, liabilities, capital, revenues and expenses and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. The SEC has defined a company’s critical accounting policies as the ones that are most important to the portrayal of the company’s financial condition and results of operations, and which require the company to make its most difficult and subjective judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates on matters that are inherently uncertain. Based on this definition, the Company has identified the accounting policies and judgments most critical to the Company. The judgments and assumptions used by management are based on historical experience and other factors, which are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Because of the nature of the judgments and assumptions made by management, actual results could differ from estimates and have a material impact on the carrying value of assets, liabilities, capital, or the results of operations of the Company.

The Company believes the allowance for loan losses is a critical accounting policy that requires the most significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of its consolidated financial statements. Adequacy of the allowance for loan losses is determined quarterly using a consistent, systematic methodology, which analyzes the risk inherent in the loan portfolio. In addition to evaluating the collectability of specific loans when determining the adequacy of the allowance, management also takes into consideration other qualitative factors such as changes in the mix and size of the loan portfolio, historical loss experience, the amount of delinquencies and loans adversely classified, industry trends, and the impact of the local and regional economy on the Company’s borrowers. Changes in these qualitative factors may cause management’s estimate of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses to increase or decrease and result in adjustments to the Company’s provision for loan losses in future periods. For additional information see FINANCIAL CONDITION- Allowance for Loan Losses below.

Given the disruptions in the financial markets over the last three years, the decision to recognize other-than-temporary impairment on investment securities has become more difficult as complete information is not always available and market conditions and other relevant factors are subject to rapid changes. The other-than-temporary impairment decision is a critical accounting policy for the Company. Accounting guidance requires companies to perform periodic reviews of individual securities in their investment portfolios to determine whether a decline in the value of a security is other-than-temporary. A review of other-than-temporary impairment requires companies to make certain judgments regarding the cause and materiality of the decline, its effect on the financial statements and the probability, extent and timing of a valuation recovery, the company’s intent and ability to continue to hold the security, and, with respect to debt securities, the likelihood that the company will have to sell the security before its value recovers. Pursuant to these requirements, management assesses valuation declines to determine the extent to which such changes are attributable to (1) fundamental factors specific to the issuer, such as the nature of the issuer and its financial condition, business prospects or other factors or (2) market-related factors, such as interest rate changes or equity market declines. Declines in the fair value of securities below their cost that are deemed by management to be other-than-temporary are (1) if equity securities, recorded in earnings as realized losses and (2) if debt securities, recorded in earnings as realized losses to the extent they are deemed credit losses, with noncredit losses recorded in Other comprehensive income (loss). Once an other-than-temporary loss on a debt or equity security is realized, subsequent gains in the value of the security may not be recognized in income until the security is sold.

The Company’s defined benefit pension obligations and net periodic benefit cost are actuarially determined based on the following assumptions: discount rate, current and estimated future return on plan assets, wage base rate, anticipated mortality rates, Consumer Price Index, and rate of increase in compensation levels. The determination of the pension benefit obligations and net periodic benefit cost is a critical accounting estimate as it requires the use of estimates and judgments related to the amount and timing of expected future cash outflows for benefit payments and cash inflows for maturities and returns on plan assets as well as Company contributions. Changes in estimates, assumptions and actual results could have a material impact to the Company’s financial condition and/or results of operations.

21

The Company also has other key accounting policies, which involve the use of estimates, judgments and assumptions, that are significant to understanding the Company’s financial condition and results of operations, including the valuation of deferred tax assets, investment securities and other real estate owned (OREO). See FINANCIAL CONDITION and the subcaptions Allowance for Loan Losses, Investment Activities and Liability for Pension Benefits below. Although management believes that its estimates, assumptions and judgments are reasonable, they are based upon information presently available and can be impacted by events outside the control of the Company. Actual results may differ significantly from these estimates under different assumptions, judgments or conditions.

OVERVIEW

The Company’s net income was $1.46 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 compared to $1.45 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, an increase of $15 thousand, or 1.0%. These results reflected an increase in net interest income of $127 thousand, or 2.8%, and an increase of $116 thousand, or 7.7%, in noninterest income, which was partially offset by an increase of $72 thousand, or 1.7%, in noninterest expenses, an increase of $125 thousand, or 166.7%, in the provision for loan losses and a $31 thousand, or 7.3%, increase in the provision for income taxes.

The Company continued to face a challenging low interest rate environment as the prime rate has remained unchanged at 3.25% for the last 21 months. Total interest income decreased by $120 thousand, or 2.1%, to $5.7 million in the third quarter of 2010 versus total interest income of $5.8 million in the third quarter of 2009, but that decrease was more than offset by the decrease in interest expense from $1.3 million in 2009 to $1.0 million in 2010, a decrease of $247 thousand, or 19.3%, between periods. The result of the changes in interest income and interest expense was that net interest income for the third quarter of 2010 was $4.7 million, up $127 thousand, or 2.8%, from the third quarter of 2009 of $4.6 million. The increase in net interest income was mainly attributable to the decrease in interest paid on time deposits, which mitigated the decrease in interest earned on interest-earning assets. During the third quarter of 2010, the Company’s net interest margin increased 16 basis points to 4.66%, from 4.50% for the third quarter of 2009. The Company’s net interest spread increased 21 basis points to 4.43% for the third quarter of 2010, compared to 4.22% for the same period last year. Further drops in the prime rate and/or increases in competitors’ deposit or market borrowing rates could be problematic as individual instruments continue to reprice.

The increase in noninterest income was partially due to the increase of $89 thousand in net gains on sales of loans held for sale from $314 thousand for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 to $403 thousand for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, despite the fact that the volume of loans sold to the secondary market decreased from $24.9 million in the third quarter of 2009 to $15.0 million in the third quarter of 2010. There was also an increase of $96 thousand, or 10.5%, in service fee income, which was mainly due to the increase in debit card and ATM income as well as an increase in loan servicing fees and merchant program income.

Salaries and wages were higher by $120 thousand, or 7.7%, for the third quarter of 2010 compared to the same period last year. Pension and employee benefits were down $61 thousand, or 8.0%. All other noninterest expenses combined were up $14 thousand, or 0.8%.

The Company’s effective tax rate rose to 23.8% for the three months ended September 30, 2010 from 22.8% for the same period in 2009, as taxable income increased, tax exempt income decreased slightly and federal tax credits recognized in the third quarter of 2010 were $15 thousand less than in the third quarter of 2009.

The Company’s total assets increased from $447.5 million at December 31, 2009, to $450.8 million at September 30, 2010, an increase of $3.3 million, or 0.7%. Deposits increased from $368.8 million at December 31, 2009 to $377 million at September 30, 2010, an increase of $8.2 million, or 2.2%. Borrowed funds decreased from $31.0 million at December 31, 2009 to $24.9 million at September 30, 2010, a decrease of $6.1 million, or 19.7%. Total loans, including loans held for sale, increased by $7.9

22

million, or 2.2%, from $358.1 million at December 31, 2009 to $366.0 million at September 30, 2010. Total loans at September 30, 2010 are net of $39.6 million in loans sold during the first nine months of 2010, the majority of which were residential real estate loans that the Company sold to mitigate future interest rate risk.

The Company’s asset quality has remained strong with September 30, 2010 total nonperforming assets at $6.1 million, or 1.36% of total assets, compared to $5.2 million, or 1.15% of total assets, at December 31, 2009 and $6.3 million, or 1.42% of total assets, at September 30, 2009. The loan loss provision for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 was $200 thousand, up from $75 thousand for the same period in 2009. The higher provision was deemed by management to be appropriate in light of the increase in both nonperforming loans and loans specifically reserved for since December 31, 2009, an increase in the qualitative reserve factors for commercial real estate, commercial, residential and junior lien portfolios, an increase in the average volume of loans, a change in the mix of the portfolio and the outlook for future economic conditions.

The following unaudited per share information and key ratios depict several measurements of performance or financial condition for the three and nine months ended or at September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively:

____________________

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Net Interest Income. The largest component of the Company’s operating income is net interest income, which is the difference between interest and dividend income received from interest earning assets and the interest expense paid on interest bearing liabilities. The Company’s net interest income increased $127 thousand, or 2.8%, to $4.7 million for the three months ended September 30, 2010, from $4.6

23

million for the three months ended September 30, 2009. The net interest spread increased 21 basis points to 4.43% for the three months ended September 30, 2010, from 4.22% for the three months ended September 30, 2009. The increase in the net interest spread was primarily the result of the drop in average interest rates paid on interest bearing liabilities from 1.49% for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 to 1.20% for the quarter ended September 30, 2010. The net interest margin for the third quarter of 2010 increased 16 basis points to 4.66% from the 2009 comparison period at 4.50%, reflecting the net effect of an increase in net interest income of $127 thousand and an increase of $4.4 million, or 1.1%, in average earning assets.

Yields Earned and Rates Paid. The following table shows for the periods indicated the total amount of income recorded from average interest earning assets and the related average tax equivalent yields, the interest expense associated with average interest bearing liabilities, the related average rates paid, and the resulting tax equivalent net interest spread and margin. Yield and rate information is average information for the period, and is calculated by dividing the annualized tax equivalent income or expense item for the period by the average balance of the appropriate balance sheet item during the period. Net interest margin is annualized tax equivalent net interest income divided by average earning assets. Nonaccrual loans or investments are included in asset balances for the appropriate periods, but recognition of interest on such loans or investments is discontinued and any remaining accrued interest receivable is reversed in conformity with federal regulations.

Tax exempt interest income amounted to $308 thousand and $315 thousand for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively and $861 and $955 thousand for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The following table presents the effect of tax exempt income on the calculation of the net interest margin, using a marginal tax rate of 34% for 2010 and 2009:

	For The Three Months Ended September 30,				For the Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2010		2009		2010			2009
	(Dollars in thousands)
Net interest income as presented	$4,698		$4,571		$13,971			$13,388
Effect of tax-exempt interest
Investment securities	31		30		93			96
Loans	98		103		270			308
Net interest income, tax equivalent	$4,827		$4,704		$14,334			$13,792

24

____________________

25