Let all SAFE members truly decide!
😎 Did you know that the infestation of blog trolls is not unique to North Carolina? Even California suffers from that vulgar plague!
Those California stinkards are staunchly calling for DFPI to do its duty and let SAFE CU members vote on the merger-giveaway to Boeing Employees Credit Union in Washington State. They righteously call for democratic cooperative principles to be enforced by DFPI on this vote.
"Fair is fair, justice is justice, the rule of law must be followed! "
✅ "Pursuant to Financial Code §§ 15200 and 15201, the following general requirements must be met in order to complete a merger. "[link]
✔ "1. Commissioner approval: The merger must be approved by the Commissioner."
✔ "2. Board of Directors approval: The merger must be approved by a majority of the board of directors of each of the credit unions that is a party to the merger ("constituent credit unions"), "
✔ "3. Membership approval: a. Approval by majority of members:
✷✷ "A Plan of Merger must be approved by a majority of all the members of a disappearing credit union, by vote or written consent. "
"Notice of the meeting must be given to all members entitled to vote on the merger, either personally or by first-class mail, not less than 30 nor more than 90 days prior to the date of the meeting. No membership approval is required of a state-chartered credit union that is the surviving credit union in a merger. "
✅ Yes, DFPI should follow explicitly the requirement of California law and let freedom and democracy shine for the members of SAFE Credit Union, the citizens of Sacramento, and the people of California!
😎 If 122,501 of the 245,000 members of SAFE CU vote to approve the merger, then both cooperative and democratic principles will have prevailed in California!
You forgot to mention the part about the commissioner approval in the event they don’t get a majority vote. They likely won’t get that high of turnout. So are you opposed to the member vote? Do you seriously think the state shouldn’t approve this merger and that have valid reasons not to that are within their scope and role? They’re not going to deny the merger because the name will change and HQ goes away.
ReplyDelete4:01pm Included a link in the post to the full page summary from DFPI. Read the whole post before you troll. (Will avoid reaching conclusions with wrong facts... wastes other folks time babysitting all that)
DeleteThe law states specifically that a majority of all SAFE members "must" vote to approve the merger.
Hope everyone supports the democratic right of all SAFE members to vote and supports the law which requires a majority (50+%) of all SAFE members to vote in favor of the merger for it to be member approved.
The law doesn't permit a minority of SAFE member voters (<50%) to approve this merger.
You apparently don’t agree with the troll but I don’t see a point of view here. You strongly advocate for and support fair democratic processes for our director elections, but now in the case of a merger, you don’t support member democracy? You think the regulator should just decline the merger without a good reason that’s relevant to their role and scope so it doesn’t even get to a member vote?
ReplyDelete11:44am Another bit of troll mental fetish! I support the democratic process for both director elections and fully support the democratic process in this merger. It would be appropriate if the DFPI required - on behalf of 245,000+ CA citizens - that the merger vote results conform to California law.
DeleteTrolls don't read before they "think" as pointed out above, but there are numerous reasons that a majority of SAFE members will not vote for this giveaway merger...try here to broaden your insight...
https://www.secujustasking.com/2026/05/dfpi-on-safe-mega-merger-mia.html
... as you see there is no valid reason for DFPI to overrule a merger vote that receives only minority support.
DeleteDFPI should support the majority of SAFE if the vote can't past muster under the laws of CA!