The SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: The Illusion Of Choice

   As a credit union member, ...  feel free to choose!

✅ Credit unions have long championed our unique difference as member-owned cooperatives versus investor-owned banks.  What is that unique difference? It's the "one member, one vote" democratic right to choose.  In this instance, SAFE members' democratic right to vote on the demise of SAFE Credit Union.

😎 What should be done if that boast of a democratic right to choose appears to be a sham - "a Hobson's choice"? [As in "Take it, or leave it!"]

✔ "A Hobson's Choice" is a free choice in which only one thing is actually offered. The term is often used to describe an illusion that choices are available.

The SAFE Board of Directors has voted unanimously to merge SAFE Credit Union, one of California's finest, with Boeing Employees Credit Union located in Washington State. [link]

✔  The SAFE Board and CEO claim the merger will bring indistinct benefits to SAFE members.  Independent assessments find otherwise:

 ✅ The "Otherwise"  Credibility 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 between $400 to $800 million [link], 3) the current cost of operating SAFE is superior (much lower!) [link], 4) current services/rates at SAFE are equal or better [link], 5) if necessary, there are several better merger candidates in California [link], 6) the "faux-ish" Board commitments of April 21, 2026 [link] with the questionable "34% increase in money returned to them" claim [link], and 7) the absence of an independent market valuation creating a fiduciary breach legal exposure [link].

😎 SAFE members will have the chance to vote on the proposed merger and dis-memberment of their credit union, what will their other choice be? 

 "Dis-memberment"?! Yikes...

The SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: Fox In The Hen House?

  This could get interesting!

😎 Looks like the SAFE members may have a better choice...  much better! 

✔ An interesting email:

 

"From my experience, SAFE Credit Union is offering exceptional value to both the membership and the Sacramento community. Please forward this proposal to the SAFE Board as an alternative for inclusion on any future merger ballot."

 

"Recommendation for SAFE membership vote:" 

"1) Agree to maintain the current California state-charter for at least ten years, with headquarters remaining in the Sacramento area.

 2) Agree to retain current service facilities, employee staffing levels, and the Sacramento-based leadership structure for at least 5 years.

 3) Fund a new share account at BECU for up to 10,000 existing SAFE members, who require BECU services.

 4) Immediately fund $500,000 dedicated to First-Time Home-buyer Grants, bringing this hallmark program to the Sacramento region. 

 5) Immediately fund an additional $1 million investment toward philanthropic initiatives  

 6) Provide immediate funding for 3 million meals through local Sacramento area food banks.

 7) Pay out a "Lets Stay Home" reward of $150 to each of the @ 245,000 SAFE members of record as of 12/31/2025. "

✔ Sounds like a good solution:  Just give the SAFE membership a choice! 

 

 "A fox is a wolf who sends flowers."

The SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: What if the "The Numbers" Don't Add Up?

                                  Bull's-Eye? ... or BS?

😎 The SAFE Board is clearly scrambling to justify the giveaway of SAFE Credit Union to Boeing Employees Credit Union in Washington State!

✅ From the SAFE Annual meeting [link] : "Through the combination, it is expected that SAFE members will see a 34% increase*** in the amount of money returned to them when compared to other institutions through lower fees, improved interest rates and more upon completion of this combination, up from $47 million to $63 million annually."

*** The estimated annual member value figure is based on SAFE’s 2024 financial metrics and represents the overall financial advantage members receive compared to other financial institutions. Amounts are rounded and provided for illustrative purposes." 

😎 Let's "parse" that claim by SAFE out!  [* To parse: to analyze a statement to discover its real implications]  

First, let's simplify that claim and eliminate the quantitative gumbo-mumbo-jumbo, which mostly seems intended to confuse, rather than enlighten. Here's the reworded summary:

✔ Simplified wording: After the completion of the merger, SAFE members should expect a 34% increase in the amount of money returned to them - up from $47 million to $63 million annually - based on SAFE’s 2024 financial metrics. [Miss anything? Reread it carefully! Was anything eliminated other than nonsense?]

✔ So, 1) not going to argue with the math - $63 million/$47 million does in fact represent an increase of +34%, nor 2) whether or not the "expected" increase is realistic, nor 3) why use 2024 rather than 2025 as the base year, nor 4) even try to figure out how "other financial institutions" figure into all this, nor ask who those "others" are. [As McCartney said, "Let it Be"].

 ✔ Do need to point out that SAFE's annual reports state: 

2024 -"SAFE paid $34.6 million in dividends to members with savings and checking accounts" - dividends being the main way CUs "return money" to members . [link - page 9]  

2025 - "SAFE paid $67 million in dividends to members with savings and checking accounts. [link - page 12]

✔ If SAFE claims after the completion of the merger, that "the amount of money returned to the members" will jump to "$63 million annually" - should the SAFE member be pleased?

😎  The 2025 annual report states SAFE members  received $67 million in dividends last year. That "expected jump to $63 million upon completion" of the merger may please the folks in Tukwila, but in Sacramento - not so much.

✅ Here's the Credibility Scorecard to date: In prior posts, 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 between $400 to $800 million [link], 3) the current cost of operating SAFE is superior (much lower!) [link], 4) current services/rates at SAFE are equal or better [link], 5) if necessary, there are several better merger candidates in California [link], 6) the "faux-ish" Board commitments of April 21, 2026 [link] and now this questionable "34% increase in money returned to them", and 7) absence of an independent market valuation creates fiduciary breach legal target [link]

😎  Bull's-eye BS!... "for illustrative purposes", only!

   There's more... 

The New SAFE/BECU Mega Merger Meme: Fiduciary Doody?

                                             No Strings Attached? 

The questions continue to grow over the impartiality of the decision by the SAFE Board to cancel the charter of SAFE Credit Union; and, to hand over $4 +billion in California member-assets to Boeing Employees Credit Union of Washington State - for free!  85 years of thriving, homegrown, Sacramento-based success and ownership - up in smoke for no apparent reason.

✔ Now even the propriety of the SAFE Board has been directly challenged [link]. Another concern  added to the mounting list of prior questions. 

✅ Here's the Credibility Scorecard to date: In prior posts, 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 between $400 to $800 million [link], 3) the current cost of operating SAFE is superior (much lower!) [link], 4) current services/rates at SAFE are equal or better [link], 5) if necessary, there are several better merger candidates in California [link], and just added 6) the "faux-ish" Board commitments of April 21, 2026 [link].

😎 If you subscribe to our current "dog-eat-dog, anything goes" financial era, then it is hard to find fault with Boeing Employees Credit Union in this merger. They are getting a steal - literally! That's not surprising, since Boeing Employees Credit Union hired the top merger and acquisition (M&A) consultant in the U.S. - Jefferies [link] - to advise them.This merger is a "pure play" [link] for Boeing Employees Credit Union!

✔ The SAFE CEO and SAFE Board of Directors don't seem to have received equally astute M&A advice - if any - from their consultants on "this deal" - and it shows!  

✅ "Q: Why does a private company - like SAFE Credit Union - need an independent valuation?"  

"A: For private companies without publicly-traded stock, an independent valuation is the only reliable way to get an indication of value.  A value assessment can assist owners with compliance, legal issues of fiduciary duty, developing strategies and goals; and, also help you better understand what is working and what isn’t."

😎 Time to add breach of fiduciary duty as Lucky #7 to the list above?

  Has the SAFE CEO told the Board about their liability in all this? If not, go ahead and make that #8! [link]

The SAFE/BECU Mega Merger: More "Me/Me' Than Meets The Eye?

  ...Who nose?

We sniffed around a little yesterday on the question of what actually went down this week at the SAFE Annual Meeting [link].  Clearly some believe the SAFE Board has a "leg up attitude" toward  SAFE members' rights and the survival of the Credit Union.

✅ The financial logic underlying this merger with Boeing Employees Credit Union in Washington State certainly has lots of leaks. In prior posts, 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 between $400 to $800 million [link], 3) the current cost of operating SAFE is superior (much lower!) [link], 4) current services/rates at SAFE are equal or better [link], and 5) if necessary, there are several better merger candidates in California [link].

✔ All of Sacramento and 245,000 existing SAFE members are losing out in this "deal".

✅  From the SAFE Annual meeting link above: "With that in mind, 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, bringing this hallmark program to the Sacramento region. This grant program provides eligible members up to $8,000 to put towards a down payment or closing cost assistance for first home purchases.
• 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 region community."
  

  😎 Let's "parse"* those two out!  [* To parse: to analyze a statement to discover its real implications]   

  1) The $500,000 First Time Homebuyer Grants is a commitment by the SAFE Board to give SAFE members back $500,000 of the equity which already belongs to them, which is good. It will reduce the amount of the members' money being given away by the SAFE Board to Boeing Employees Credit Union from $400+ million to $399.5+ million. 

  2) The additional $1 million philanthropic investment commits to give $1 million more of the members' equity than planned for one year. This too is good! It will reduce the amount of the members' money being given by the SAFE Board to Boeing Employees Credit Union from $400+ million to $399+ million.

   3) At face value, these two commitments, taken together, appear to reduce the giveaway of the credit union by the SAFE Board from $400+ million to $398.5 million. Creating a somewhat better - really, really bad deal!

   4) Note however, that these two new commitments are not effective until after the merger is completed. So the current net financial benefit of these SAFE Board "commitments" is zero. Suppose that the SAFE Board hoped the members wouldn't notice!

   5) Either way the SAFE membership is out $400+ million and the Sacramento community is left "hy & dry-ant".

  .   Frankly, it's lookin' more and more like a "double leg lifter" by the Board!  

The SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: "We/We" Knows Best?

  .... Oh, really? "The combination between BECU and SAFE Credit Union is proceeding smoothly and according to plan."
  [link] .💣💣💣 During the SAFE Annual Meeting on April 21st, the SAFE Board attempted to defuse a rising member uproar over a secretive - seemingly insensible - merger, which has become a ticking time-bomb of reputation risk and a PR debacle.  ✔ Here's how well that SAFE Board bunkum went down! [take a look -link]Although the merger with Boeing Employees Credit Union has been over a year in the planning, SAFE members have never been engaged, consulted, nor involved in the process. The SAFE Board and CEO chose to surprise announce the merger as an "fait accompli" in November, 2025; yet, continue to refuse to inform SAFE members of the details of their "definitive agreement" [link]. With that "Sorry, it's a done deal" hubris,  SAFE senior leaders appear to have adopted the infamous, CU imperial "we/we" governance doctrine.  For SAFE member-vassals that means, from now on: "We will let you know what you need to know, when you need to know it."  The proposed merger, if it proceeds, will extinguish the charter, local focus, and independent existence of SAFE CU forever. A successful, 70 years of local control and operations discarded by a cavalier Board, backed by timorous senior leadership .Blunt indifference to the opinions of SAFE members and to the best interests of the Sacramento community at large, now seem to define the new/new vision of the Credit Union: ✅ "At SAFE Credit Union, you are a member, but please don't act like one!"    "After the confrontation, the source said security was called..."  Is that what you meant by:  "... proceeding smoothly and according to plan." ?
  

The SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: Pssst...!

   😎 Have You Heard What Happened At The SAFE                  Annual Membership Meeting This Week?

                         🐈 Here take a look [link] !

                           🙀 "Me-Me-Me" Meow! 

 More like "Me-Me-Me" Me-ouch!

The SAFE/BECU Mega Merger: The SAFE Annual Meeting - "Showtime In Sacramento!"

                                                             🎉🎉🎉  The 2026 SAFE Credit Union Annual Meeting 🎉🎉🎉                       Tuesday April 21, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. [link]                                                All current SAFE members are invited to attend!

✅ Credit Union mergers have become the most controversial topic within the credit union movement - signaling the end of an era, the end of an idea? The SAFE/BECU merger - surprise announced without SAFE member input in November, 2025 - has become the poster child for that debate. 

The SAFE CEO and Board have refused to release financial details of the proposed agreement to the SAFE members - the owners and shareholders of the credit union!  SAFE member-owners had never called for the merger, nor has any member group advocated that it be pursued. Who actually benefits from this merger?

The SAFE Annual membership meeting tonight should shed some much needed light on the controversy. Merger critics from the SAFE membership have broadly sounded the alarm all across California!

 ✔ Get ready, get out the popcorn, it looks to be "Showtime in Sacramento"...!

😎 According to the management "Me's", the pluses: 

 "This partnership is a powerful alignment of purpose and potential that leverages our strengths and recognizes our shared values," said Faye Nabhani, President and Chief Executive Officer of SAFE Credit Union. 

😎 According to the SAFE "member mutineers", the minuses:

1. The loss of California regulatory jurisdiction and consumer protection. The transfer of $4.3 billion in assets belonging to 245,000 SAFE member-owners to an out-of-state credit union and the termination of SAFE’s charter will completely eliminate DFCI oversight. Consumer protection under the BECU charter will become the responsibility of the Washington State Department of Financial Institutions (DFI). There will be no accountability to former SAFE members, all of whom are citizens of California.

2. The transfer without member-owner compensation or benefit of all current resources and future earnings of a successful, locally supported eighty-five year financial enterprise has no economic rationale. The gifting of all SAFE assets, all future control, and all future earnings to BECU based solely on vague future promises is nothing less than a legally sanctioned theft of SAFE member resources. The true market value of SAFE Credit Union is $600 million to $800 million.  SAFE members-owners will receive nothing from this transaction. All $4.3 billion in SAFE Credit Union member-owner assets will be handed over to BECU. All $345 million in member-owner equity will be taken from member-owners without compensation.

3. The loss of critical competitive advantage and local owner governance. 
SAFE Credit Union’s competitive advantage is its unique responsiveness to its member-owners and the priorities of the local community. This has enabled SAFE to establish a dominant regional market position that cannot be easily replicated. When SAFE becomes a branch operation for BECU, this will be lost. Governance will be relinquished to an out-of-state entity which will dictate all services, products and pricing. The interests of SAFE Credit Union member-owners and the Sacramento region will become a secondary consideration for BECU. BECU’s sole interest is in gaining control of an established institution without investing the time and resources necessary to secure a market position in a major metropolitan region outside of its current service area.

4. Breach of fiduciary duty and a manipulated democratic voting process
A violation of fiduciary duty has occurred because the SAFE Credit Union Board of Directors deliberated in secrecy and has not acted in the best interests of the member-owners. The fiduciary duty of care and loyalty to the membership has been disregarded. This board does not represent the best interests of the member-owners because it has subverted and manipulated the democratic election process by deliberately excluding the membership from board representation. 

  "Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of a cancer cell." 

 

The SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: Another Blue Light Special?

      +++                                     The Original Mega-Me?

 [2005] "A resurgent Kmart, home of the blue light special, is buying the once-dominant Sears department store chain in a surprising $11 billion gamble. The combined company is expected to have $55 billion in annual revenues, 2,350 full-line and off-mall stores, and 1,100 specialty retail stores."

Kmart CEO Ed Lampert and Sears chairman Alan Lacy, in announcing the deal on Wednesday, promised up to $500 million a year in savings within three years from store conversions, back-office job cuts, more efficient buying of goods and possible store closings.  

✅ "It's an opportunity to transform two companies that once were great, into a great company relative to the 21st century. A key part of increasing productivity at the stores will be in the cross selling of the brands." 

"I think there's a presumption that you're going to see a lot of store closings. That's a wrong presumption, .... while some layoffs will be announced by the end of April, the vast majority of the work force of 400,000 will keep their jobs, Lampert said.  We are determined to be successful."

Company officials said the merger would help make their properties more profitable through a broader retail presence and improved operational efficiency in areas such as procurement, marketing, information technology and supply chain management. "The combination will greatly strengthen both the Sears and Kmart franchises, " Lacy said. "This will clearly be a win for both companies' customers, while significantly enhancing value for all shareholders."  

"CEO Alan Lacy will pocket about $27 million as a result of the merger." 

 "This partnership is a powerful alignment of purpose and potential that leverages our strengths and recognizes our shared values," said Faye Nabhani, President and Chief Executive Officer of SAFE Credit Union. 

😎 There are 5 Sears stores left in the United States as of September 7, 2025. The following stores were closed in 2021: Sacramento, CA, Boyle Heights, CA, Clovis, CA, Downey, CA, Long Beach, CA, Los Altos, CA,  Orange, CA, Pasadena, CA  Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Tukwila, WA was closed in 2024!

😎 As of November 6, 2025, there are only 3 remaining US Kmart store locations still open with only 1 in the contiguous United States in Miami, Florida.  

 Just sayin'...  

The SAFE/BECU Mega-Mess Merger: "Bullish for Sacramento" ?

                   ...  or just "Breaking Stuff"?

                                   "Yada, more yada, and effusive ephemera, but..."

 ✔  "In your system, credit unions are sold — politely grabbed with paperwork — but sold, nonetheless. That is not cooperation. That is market logic wearing a cooperative costume.'

✔ "Worst of all, you have forgotten that credit unions were not built to win a market share war. They were built to change the rules of the game."

✔  "The cooperative movement was never meant to be efficient at the cost of being just. It was meant to be just even when inefficient. Because justice is the point."

      🎉🎉🎉  The 2026 SAFE Credit Union Annual Meeting  🎉🎉🎉  [link] 

                          Tuesday April 21, 2026 at 5:30 p.m.

                All current SAFE members are invited to attend!

 "Double BS"?... Bad for SAFE and Bad for Sacramento?

 

 

SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: California CU Regulator Asheep At The Wheel?

   

The California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation? [DFPI]

✅ Opponents of the SAFE/BECU Mega-Me have voiced concerns to the SAFE CEO [CUDaily story here], with their legislators, and in the Sacramento press. On January 21, 2026, a thoughtful, detailed 11-page letter was also sent to California's state credit union regulator - DFPI.

✔ DFPI must approve the SAFE merger on behalf of the 245,000 SAFE members and the State of California. 

  There has been no public acknowledgement nor response by DFPI to the merger, which SAFE announced in November, 2025. Who does DFPI represent - the best interests of the SAFE CEO and Board or the best interests of SAFE members and the citizens of California? 

✔ The following is the summary of the four major areas of concern expressed to DFPI: 

"1. The loss of California regulatory jurisdiction and consumer protection.

 The transfer of $4.3 billion in assets belonging to 245,000 SAFE member-owners to an out-of-state credit union and the termination of SAFE’s charter will completely eliminate DFCI oversight. Consumer protection under the BECU charter will become the responsibility of the Washington State Department of Financial Institutions (DFI). There will be no accountability to former SAFE members, all of whom are citizens of California."

  DFPI doesn't appear to be aware of, or concerned by, the national precedence the take-over of SAFE will have on all credit unions - large and small, in every state. Asleep at the wheel?

"2. The transfer without member-owner compensation or benefit of all current resources and future earnings of a successful, locally supported eighty-five year financial enterprise has no economic rationale.

The gifting of all SAFE assets, all future control, and all future earnings to BECU based solely on vague future promises is nothing less than a legally sanctioned theft of SAFE member resources. The true market value of SAFE Credit Union is $600 million to $800 million.2  SAFE members-owners will receive nothing from this transaction. All $4.3 billion in SAFE Credit Union member-owner assets will be handed over to BECU. All $345 million in member-owner equity will be taken from member-owners without compensation.".

  DFPI doesn't appear to be concerned with the expropriation of hundreds of millions of dollars from 245,000 SAFE members in California. Is this the current definition of "financial protection" in Sacramento?

"3. The loss of critical competitive advantage and local owner governance. 
SAFE Credit Union’s competitive advantage is its unique responsiveness to its member-owners and the priorities of the local community. This has enabled SAFE to establish a dominant regional market position that cannot be easily replicated. When SAFE becomes a branch operation for BECU, this will be lost. Governance will be relinquished to an out-of-state entity which will dictate all services, products and pricing. The interests of SAFE Credit Union member-owners and the Sacramento region will become a secondary consideration for BECU. BECU’s sole interest is in gaining control of an established institution without investing the time and resources necessary to secure a market position in a major metropolitan region outside of its current service area."

  There has been no call by DFPI for an open, public dialogue/forum on the proposed merger of SAFE among the 245,000 existing SAFE members, nor the 5.4 million potential SAFE members in California. Why hasn't DFPI demanded a full and fair disclosure to all SAFE members?

"4. Breach of fiduciary duty and a manipulated democratic voting process
A violation of fiduciary duty has occurred because the SAFE Credit Union Board of Directors deliberated in secrecy and has not acted in the best interests of the member-owners. The fiduciary duty of care and loyalty to the membership has been disregarded. This board does not represent the best interests of the member-owners because it has subverted and manipulated the democratic election process by deliberately excluding the membership from board representation." 

  Good governance, transparency, fiduciary responsibility? Why is DFPI being so sheepish, when so much is at stake for California - and beyond?

  Good governance, transparency, fiduciary responsibility... might add "DFPI credibility' to that list!

 

 

 

The SAFE/BECU Merger: Fiduciary Duty

    

  April 13, 2026: "Public Objections to Proposed SAFE/BECU Merger" [link] "...  disagreements over transparency, governance and the potential impact of the deal on members and the Sacramento community."

😎 Which picture best reflects the effectiveness of the Board in safeguarding the financial interests of SAFE members and the Sacramento community?

A.)

B.)

C.)

D.)

E.)

F.)

G.)

H.)

 

 

I.)  

All of the above? 

 

The SAFE/BECU Mega-Me Merger: Nothing to Write Home About!

   Amen! Home is where the heart is...

In a recent post [link] we took a look at some financial measures (loans, deposits, assets, capital, operating expenses), which compared the successful performance of SAFE versus its proposed merger partner from Washington State BECU.   

Remarkably, BECU is not outperforming SAFE in any significant measure except in the most important one! BECU is far more costly to operate! 

That doesn't seem to make sense. If the SAFE CEO and Board have thrown in the towel on their credit union, were there no other merger candidates available? What about large local CUs in California? No one was interested, or no one was asked?

Take a quick look at this list of California CUs. All are prospering in terms of loans, deposits, and assets; all are well-capitalized above the regulatory measure of 9%++.  So, let's focus on the key "where-the-rubber-hits-the-road" measure "operating costs" (OpEx). Do any of these California CUs perform better than BECU's OpEx of 3.33% at December, 2025? 

Golden 1 (Sacramento)         Assets: $21B   OpEx: 2.20%  Br: 62

SchoolsFirst (Tustin)             Assets: $35B   OpEx: 1.81%   Br: 69

Patelco (Dublin)                   Assets: $10B    OpEx: 1.84%   Br: 37

First Tech (San Jose)             Assets: $30B   OpEx: 2.83%   Br: 56 

San Diego County (S. D.)       Assets: $10B   OpEx: 1.84%   Br: 44

Redwood (Santa Rosa)          Assets: $10B    OpEx: 2.28%   Br: 21

Logix  (Valencia)                   Assets: $10B    OpEx: 1.84%   Br: 37

Star One  (Sunnyvale)           Assets: $10B    OpEx: 0.73%   Br: 7

All the @$10+ billion asset CUs in California operate at a significantly lower costs to members than BECU! Threw in the number of branches as a bonus, since that was claimed as one of the advantages of the SAFE/BECU merger. Question is : "Would SAFE members prefer to have 50 or 60 more branches in California or a new branch in Tukwila?"

😎 If the SAFE CEO and Board feel they can no longer lead; perhaps rather than just give it all away, they should consider leaving their heart in San Francisco... or maybe "Do you know the way to San Jose?"

  Most folks feel SAFE... at home.  

 

The SAFE/BECU Merger: Of What In The Future Are SAFE Leaders Afraid ?

   "Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!"

  ... or is it just a lack of focused-thinking, courage, and heart?

✅ Who raised the alarm and said they couldn't cope with the future at SAFE?

💢💢 "Uncertainty, irrelevance and AI,                 ... oh my!" 💢💢 !!!

☒  CEO Faye Nabhani? (1 SAFE member)

☒  The SAFE Board? (11 SAFE members)

⛶  SAFE Employees? (800 SAFE members)

⛶  The SAFE Member-Owners? (245,000 SAFE members)

⛶  The Greater  Sacramento Community (5.4 million potential SAFE members)  

😎 ... perhaps its time to discuss the future of  SAFE Credit Union with the real majority of stakeholders? 

  And regardless of what you've been told, Seattle/Tukwila is probably not The Emerald City!