The SAFE Mega-Me Merger: Sacramento Gets SAC-ked?

 

       SAFE the "disappearing" credit union! **

✅ Sample Ballot for SAFE Credit Union Merger Proposal

Name of SAFE Member:__________     Account Number:___________

Please read the Notice of Special Meeting for the members of SAFE Credit Union. The SAFE Board has tried to let you know what you need to know, when you needed to know it. [link]. You know, we know, who knows best!

* By California law, this plan of merger must be approved by a majority of all SAFE members.

* But your vote really may not matter much, since by California law, a governmental override might be sought by us, the SAFE Board, if less than a majority of you approve. 

✔ Mark your choice [1 only], sign and submit this ballot: 

[ ] Approve the proposed merger with Boeing Employees Credit Union as unanimously endorsed by the SAFE Board of Directors.  The merger requires the transfer of all SAFE CU deposits, loans, and $400+ million of your ownership equity to BECU. Corporate control and regulatory supervision will also be moved from California to Washington State. SAFE Credit Union will disappear**.  Or...

[ ] Alternative recommendation for SAFE members: Maintain the current California state-charter for at least ten years, with headquarters remaining in the Sacramento area; retain current service facilities, employee staffing levels, and the Sacramento-based leadership structure for at least 5 years; fund a new share account at BECU for up to 10,000 existing SAFE members, who require BECU service; and distribute a "Lets Stay Home Special Dividend" of $150 to each of the 245,000 SAFE members of record as of 12/31/2025. Or...

[ ] Seek merger with our fellow Californians to the south in San Diego!

[ ] Do not approve the proposed merger.

✖ Signed:___________ Member's Name:_________ Date:_____

  Will DFPI approve a disappearing act... or suggest the Board reconsider or resign?

✷✷ California law: "A Plan of Merger must be approved by a majority of all the members of a disappearing credit union, by vote or written consent. " [link] 

Cal Coast And San Diego County Complete Merger Discussions!

    Cal Coast tried...      ... "jumping the shark"?

  [link]  "SAN DIEGO — California Coast Credit Union and San Diego County Credit Union have formally abandoned their planned merger, ending a year-long legal battle. The litigation led to numerous accusations from each side alleging numerous issues. Despite all that, Cal Coast CU CEO Todd Lane told the CU Daily there was “no bad blood”!"

An embarrassing SNAFU on the California merger scene, everyone gets a black eye! But is there an opportunity here for lemonade from a raw lemon?

San Diego County CU has $10 billion in assets and 44 branches in Southern California. An extremely efficiently managed CU with very high capital, low operating costs, delinquency/charge-offs minimal, and a strong reputation for service. What's not to like? 

✅ Lets take a look at SDCC as a merger option for SAFE, compared to you know who: 

 ✔ Capital

SAFE  Net Worth     2020 8.57%      2025 10.37%

BECU  Net Worth     2020 10.11%    2025 12.39% 

SDCC   Net Worth    2020 15.18%    2025 20.1%!

✔ Operating Costs 

SAFE   Net OPEX      2020 2.72%     2025 2.56%     

BECU   Net OPEX     2020 2.30%    2025 3.33%  

SDCC   Net OPEX:    2020 1.70%    2025 1.84% !

✔ So, who would you choose if you were a SAFE member-owner? Stay home in California as a $14 billion home-grown, home-owned, locally-controlled credit union, while gaining $1.5 billion in capital resources and a mentor who knows how to manage costs; or... you know who?

😎 And really, wouldn't you rather have free access to branches and ATMs in San Diego, Temecula, Escondido, Carlsbad, Mission Viejo, Yorba Linda, Chula Vista, San Ysidro, La Mesa, Cajon, Santee, Murrieta, Vista, Oceanside, Solano Beach... rather than Tukwila and Tacoma?

  Could the SAFE Board be riding the wrong horse? 

The SAFE Mega-Mistake Merger: This Is Getting Really Scary!

  

 ✔ Because now even the trolls agree it's a bad deal! 

✅ Yesterday's post [link] led to a lively - and lengthy! - commentary on the voting/approval process for the SAFE Board merger muck-up. Here's how it ended:

jim blaine June 27, 2026 at 10:01 AM

2:52pm You commented: "Not sure if SAFE hired someone to help with due diligence, but if they did, they should get their money back."

So at least we both agree that the merger is a really bad deal for SAFE members.

Take it you too would vote "NO" if you were a SAFE member!

Anonymous June 27, 2026 at 10:23 AM

Yes, IMO its bad for both SAFE members and Boeing members. As a SAFE member I would absolutely vote no.

 

😎 What was the SAFE Board thinking? As required by law, the majority of SAFE members are not going to vote for this merger mistake... 

 ... and the trolls agree with the member-owners!  

                              The SAFE Board is "(fill in the blank)".  

The SAFE Mega-Me Merger Mess: Depends On Your POV?

                        ✔ As the SAFE Leadership see themselves?

 ✔ As the financial experts see it!:

1]  Better rates                                            YES ◻    NO   ❎

2]  Lower operating costs                             YES ◻    NO   ❎

3]  Enhanced technology                              YES ◻    NO   ❎

4]  More branches/ATMs                               YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

5]  Retain local ownership/control               YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

6]  Assured increase in community support YES ◻    NO   ❎

7]  In-state California regulation                  YES ◻    NO   ❎

8]  Return of capital to SAFE members         YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

9]  Member dialogue prior to agreement      YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

10] Will strengthen the Sacramento area    😎  YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

 ✔ If 122,501 SAFE member-owners do not vote in favor of this "nothing-but-nonsense" merger, will DFPI follow the law and disapprove the merger or overrule SAFE members and the best interests of the people of California?

😎    DFPI's decision will be to determine among 1) the SAFE Board, 2) the impartial financial experts, and 3) the majority of all SAFE members who will not vote in favor of the merger...   

   Who's lion?

 😎 [link here for a detailed "Scorecard"]   

SAFE Board Promises More Merger Updates: "... Immediately Upon Completion Of The Combination!"

  ... but mega-me merger mistakes ain't! At least not for Sacramento!

A commenter on yesterday's post [link] correctly noted the SAFE Board did give "an update" at the SAFE Annual meeting in April!

✅ Here's what was promised by the SAFE Board in that informative merger "update" [link to full text]: 

"SAFE shared with its members at its annual meeting on April 21, 2026, two meaningful commitments that will benefit Sacramento-area members and the community immediately upon completion of the combination."

"For members: $500,000 dedicated to First-Time Homebuyer Grants. This grant program provides eligible members up to $8,000 to put towards a down payment or closing cost assistance for first home purchases." [at $8k a pop that would potentially help 62.5 of SAFE's 245,000 members ... immediately upon completion of the combination."] 

"For the community: An additional $1 million investment added to the $500,000 SAFE traditionally gives annually toward philanthropic initiatives that reflect what matters most to SAFE members and the Sacramento community." [The rest of the $400+ million in SAFE member equity will go to Tukwila and Boeing Employees' "... immediately upon completion of the combination."]

✔ Why doesn't the SAFE Board give the $1.5 million back to Sacramento folks now? Why wait until "... immediately upon completion of the combination?"

😎  If you will give me $400+ million bucks, I will give you back $1.5 million "immediately upon ... "!  H-m-m, what's the return on investment (ROI) for that "mega- duh" deal?  How would you calculate it?

 Anybody care to also point out that the SAFE Board can't promise anything "... immediately upon completion of the combination."   

The SAFE Mega-Me Merger: Breaking News!

Good Morning! Here Are Your Latest merger updates from the SAFE Board... 

 

 ✔ "We’ll be sure to share updates with members during the process to keep you up to date." [November, 2025 - link]

  What's the "hold up" ?

 

 

The SAFE Merger Misadventure: DFPI Regulatiory Approval - Real Or Rubber?

   Where the rubber meets the road?

 ✅ Anonymous June 18, 2026 at 9:07 AM "They are a safety and soundness regulator. You are missing the point anyway. The DFPI has no grounds, under either safety or soundness concerns or consumer protection, not to approve this merger, provided there is a yes majority of voters." 

Our commenter from yesterday seems to believe that DFPI falls into the rubber stamp definition of regulators: "A  mostly powerless yet officially recognized body that routinely approves or endorses programs and policies initiated by a controlling party." Mighty harsh critique! Certainly no need to lobby for "deregulation" if true!

It is pretty clear the knavish SAFE Board and senior leadership do not believe DFPI's claim that "California is the credit union charter of choice"!   But, if this merger mistake comes up for a SAFE member vote: California and credit unions nationwide will have the chance to judge for themselves the regulatory rigor of DFPI.  

😎 For, as our commenter so correctly declares: "DFPI has no grounds ... not to approve this merger,  provided there is a yes majority of voters."

✔ California law explicitly states that a majority of all SAFE members must vote in favor of the merger proposal for it to be approved.  If a majority of all 245,000  SAFE members do not vote in favor of merger, the merger is not approved!  

  If 122,501 SAFE member-owners do not vote in favor of this "nothing-but-nonsense" merger, will DFPI follow the law and disapprove the merger or overrule SAFE members and the best interests of the people of California?

  California credit union regulation... real or rubber? 

The SAFE Mega-me Merger: Awaiting Regulatory Approvals?

                                    Awaiting A Regulatory Blessing?

According to the SAFE Board:  "The combination process includes regulatory approvals, detailed integration planning, and ultimately, a SAFE member vote."

As easy as 1-2-3! 1) Regulatory approvals, 2) a detailed integration plan, and ultimately 3) a SAFE member vote. And BINGO!, the 85-year SAFE Credit Union charter is no more!

😎 Does this official outline of the merger process from the SAFE leadership make sense? 

Of course it doesn't! Shouldn't the 11-member SAFE Board - with a legal, fiduciary duty to 245,000 members in California - feel some obligation to first discuss the reasons for leaving home, and eloping to Washington, for a marriage of convenience with this hussie Huskie? Say perhaps, with "the family" in Sacramento? 

✔ Have the 245,000 SAFE member-owners requested this merger? No!

✔  Have the 245,000 SAFE members seen the "definitive merger agreement"? No!

✔  Have the 245,000 SAFE members been asked for input? No!

✔  Are the 245,000 SAFE members aware of the financial disadvantages of this merger [link]? No.

✔ Will the majority of all 245,000 SAFE members vote for this merger? No!

😎  Will   - a regulatory agency steeped in its role of consumer protection - approve a shotgun marriage?

  Department of Financial Protection and.. I do? Such a tinder moment!

CU Mergers And Conversions? NCUA Asks For Input; while California DFPI?

   Lets Hope Not!

DFPI likes to boast of its consumer protection and of California as "the charter of choice" for credit unions. The SAFE Board evidently doesn't believe DFPI is all it's quacked up to be. Instead, SAFE has chosen to "give it up" - even "give it away"! - and move to Washington!

NCUA - never really famous for "member engagement" - is reviewing its rules on merger and conversions; and has asked for input from the public! One comment on mergers comes from a new CU activist group, Endangered Small Credit Union Defense (ESCUD) [link]: 

✔ "ESCUD believes member engagement and notification should be strengthened, not weakened." 

✔ "Members are the owners of the cooperative. At the precise moment they risk losing their not-for-profit ownership rights, profit-sharing model, tax-exempt structure, and community-focused mission, they deserve clear, prominent, timely, and effective disclosures." 

✔ "We urge the NCUA to ensure that any final rule maintains — or even enhances — meaningful member awareness and participation rather than reducing procedural safeguards in charter-ending transactions."

😎 As to the "charter of choice", DFPI's latest "innovation" may be doing what was once thought impossible... 

  ... making NCUA look good!

 

The SAFE Mega-Me Merger: Member "Updates" - Chirp, Chirp?

   "Soon to be Globally Local!" 

 ✔ "We’ll be sure to share updates with members during the process to keep you up to date." [November, 2025 - link]

  

  What's the "hold up"?

The SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: Rigging Elections In California?

    Following the law?

June 10, 2026: WSJ Opinion: "Is California's Election 'Rigged'?" The Journal had a field day with the recent political back-and-forth on the abrupt fluctuations and snail's pace vote counts in The Golden Bear State.  The gubernatorial contest along with the LA mayoral race especially have sparked much controversy about the fairness of California election laws.

  

✅ Rigging elections in California? Get ready for more controversy. This round will feature SAFE Credit Union!

The proposed merger of SAFE CU with out-of-state Boeing Employees' CU is now "under review" by California's watch-dog credit union regulator, DFPI. A warning to SAFE members: Better watch that "watch-dog"! It may become a "pet poodle"! 

SAFE members, by law, will have the right to vote on the proposed merger; but, DFPI may choose to ignore the results of the member vote - and the law. That sounds like a rigged election, doesn't it? 

Is "the fix in" at DFPI? Here's what to look for:

✔  First note, that SAFE members did not request this merger! Pulling the plug on SAFE was a surprise attack by an aloof Board, backed by moribund management. The merger proposal will hurt SAFE members. [link]

✔ California law explicitly states that a majority of all SAFE members must vote in favor of the merger proposal for it to be approved.  If a majority of all 245,000  SAFE members do not vote in favor of merger, the merger is not approved!   

✔ But, DFPI by California law may overrule a vote of disapproval by the majority of SAFE members! 

As required by the law, shouldn't a must vote by the majority of all SAFE members be the real "definitive agreement" on this rogue merger issue?

Under what specific rationale and protocols would DFPI choose to override the SAFE members' must vote under California law? 

😎 Throwing out a legal, democratic vote by the SAFE membership? Wouldn't that be rigging an election in California?

  Why would a DFPI "may" override be more important, than a democratic member "must" vote?   

The SAFE/Wahington-Based BECU Mega-Me Merger: Spinning A Tale?

  

🦚🦚 Sacramento! Get ready for Was-Safe CU® 🦚🦚 

✔ Spreading our wings! 

✔ Strutting our stuff! 

✔ Feathering our nest! 

✔ And, proudly showing our ...  

                   

✔ All for you!

 

   Wow! Mission "Me"?

Why Did The SAFE Board Vote To Sack The Credit Union?

                                              If so, is Sacramento being "Sac"-ked"?

The discussion of the proposed acquisition of SAFE Credit Union by Boeing Employees' has heated up! The takeover has gained notoriety not because it is unique, but because it may foreshadow the demise of credit unions as cooperative financial alternatives. The irreversible paradigm shift, the canary in the cooperative coal mine.

The SAFE Board of Directors and CEO Faye Nabhani stated these reasons to pull-the-plug on SAFE as a locally controlled, independent home-town business:  "The new credit union will bring more value and benefits to our members and the communities we serve, with enhanced technology, increased community support, and more convenient banking services for members through all stages of their financial journeys."

✔ Let's check that statement out: [link here for broader 'Scorecard"]

1]  Better rates                                           YES ◻    NO   ❎

2]  Lower operating costs                             YES ◻    NO   ❎

3]  Enhanced technology                              YES ◻    NO   ❎

4]  More branches/ATMs                               YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

5]  Retain local ownership/control               YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

6]  Assured increase in community support YES ◻    NO   ❎

7]  In-state California regulation                  YES ◻    NO   ❎

8]  Return of capital to SAFE members         YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

9]  Member dialogue prior to agreement      YES ◻    NO   ❎ 

10] Will strengthen the Sacramento area     YES ◻    NO   ❎  

✔  Should the SAFE Board and CEO come out of hiding and fulfill their fiduciary responsibility to the Sacramento community by explaining their reasons for pulling-the-plug on 85 years of success ?     YES  ❎     NO ◻    

 What's to hide, when Sacramento has so much to lose?

The SAFE Mega-Me: A Malware Merger ?

              Technically speaking, this merger doesn't compute.          

An oft-harped "reason" used to justify merger is management distress over outdated technology and the "overwhelming" costs required to go "digital".  Seems to make sense...  until you think about it.  Failed leadership, not old technology, is the usual culprit in the decline of a credit union.

In the case of SAFE Credit Union, last century technology is not a problem creating a need to merge. Actually the opposite is true. How do you know? Because SAFE CEO Faye Nabhani says: "In her role with SAFE Credit Union, Faye was the strategic leader and executive sponsor of SAFE’s core system conversion to Fiserv DNA, completed in April 2022. "

Not so with Boeing Employees Credit Union which has not made the latest transition to its Fiserv DNA software - a high risk, highly expensive, and often member-disruptive opportunity for misadventure. The proposal to merge will be a step back in tech-time for the member-owners of SAFE.

So, lets add "Issuing A Blank Check For A Future Tech Wreck?" to round out our Top 10 list of reasons that the Board/CEO give-away of SAFE Credit Union  just doesn't add up.

✅ The "Mal-Merger"  Incredibility Scorecard: It has been shown that 1) any benefits of the merger can be obtained for free by SAFE members [link], 2) the SAFE Board has voted to give away a financial institution with a fair market value over $400+ million [link] without member compensation, 3) the current cost of operating SAFE is superior (much lower!) [link] than BECU, 4) current services/rates at SAFE are equal or better [link] than BECU, 5) if necessary, there are several better CU merger candidates in California [link], 6) the SAFE Board 's "future" community commitments of April 21, 2026 [link] and questionable "increased returns" claims [link] are "faux-ish", 7) the absence of an independent, arm's-length market valuation of the merger has created a fiduciary legal exposure [link], 8) the lost of local independence and autonomy [link], 9) no greater access to branches [link], and 10) less advanced technology [link]. 

  Ten outa' Ten! A Bo Derek Merger!

           Malware, Malarkey, Malpractice... Malfeasance?

The SAFE Mega-Me: Most SAFE Members Don't Want To Leave Town!

 An Easy Choice For SAFE Members!

             "We're Globally Local!" 

                              or...

   

           "We're SAFE At Home!" 

                

   Heads up, Sacramento!                       Why Not Play It SAFE?

The BECU/SAFE Merger: "Be-Safe CU" - Rebranding The Mega-Me ?

 

   

   

                 Be-SAFE Credit Union                                               "We're Globally Local!"

    

 

 Bye-bye Sacramento Credit Union - BSCU?

The SAFE Mega-Me: The Board's Timeless Commitment To SAFE Members?

 

      Report From the Board Chair and the CEO

                         "SAFE’s Board of Directors, focused on responsible stewardship and the continued delivery of value to members, moved forward at the end of 2025 with a proposed combination with Boeing Employees' Credit Union ." 

"The Board and SAFE leadership are committed to ensuring that members are included, heard, and respected. Members can expect to receive informative updates about the combination and instructions on how to participate in the member vote well in advance. SAFE will encourage member engagement and participation in the process by inviting members to ask questions and discuss the combination directly with the Board of Directors and SAFE executive leadership."

😎 What's the holdup? 

 Perhaps it is... time for a change?

 

More SAFE Mega-Me Merger Malarky... #9 And Counting!

"More branches in locations that serve more members."

  [link] 

✅ "When can I start using both credit unions’ locations? "

 

✔ "BECU and SAFE are both members of the Co-Op Network.  Even before the combination is complete, you can continue to utilize the existing shared branch benefits provided by our mutual participation in the Co-Op Network Shared Branching Network.

 

   Over 5,600 Shared Branches - Feel right at home in all 50 states. Easy access to your money wherever you go.

 

😎 Q: So, how many of BECU branches do SAFE Credit Union members already have access to.... prior to the proposed merger?  [link]

 

😎 A: That's right:  ALL OF THEM! 

 

 Why not buy The Brooklyn Bridge instead? 

                              [It's still for sale! - link]