"Is good for everything it should be good for! "
"From: SAFE Credit Union <@email.safecu.
Date: Tue, Aug 4, 2026 at 9:49 AM "
'An Important Milestone for SAFE Members "
Dear Valued SAFE Member,
"We’re excited to share an important milestone in the proposed
combination between SAFE Credit Union and BECU. The National Credit
Union Administration (NCUA), Washington State Department of Financial
Institutions (DFI), and California Department of Financial Protection
and Innovation (DFPI) have approved the proposed combination following a
comprehensive review."
"Regulatory approval marks a significant and exciting milestone. It
reflects the successful completion of a thorough, independent review and
confirms that the proposed combination meets the legal and regulatory
requirements needed to move forward to the next step. Just as
importantly, it reinforces the thoughtful due diligence and strategic
evaluation that led SAFE and BECU to propose coming together in the best
interests of members, employees, and the communities we serve."
"The next important step in the process is the member vote. "
1] Endorsed this merger as a good deal for SAFE members? YES ◻ NO ❎
2] Warranted that this merger is a sound business transaction? YES ◻ NO ❎
3] Verified thorough "due diligence" by the SAFE Board? YES ◻ NO ❎
4] Prohibited the return of capital to SAFE members ? YES ◻ NO ❎
5] Validated the SAFE Board's "comprehensive review"? YES ◻ NO ❎
6] Required future community support to increase? YES ◻ NO ❎
7] Guaranteed lower rates/more branches for SAFE members ? YES ◻ NO ❎
8] Ratified that SAFE had selected the best merger candidate? YES ◻ NO ❎
9] Confirmed the effectiveness of member dialogue prior to agreement ? YES ◻ NO ❎
10] Attested SAFE met minimum CU legal/regulatory merger requirements ? YES ❎ NO ◻
Snake oil aside, regulators have not approved this merger... California law states that a majority vote of all SAFE members is required for merger approval.
|
Excellent post here. Their member letter misrepresents the regulator’s scope in this part of the process, especially around the “strategic evaluation” and whether this makes sense or not from a member or community perspective. They did #10. That’s it.
ReplyDeleteThe letter could have said “Good news, the regulators verified there are no major outstanding exam issues, that the merger won’t create any consumer protection or safety and soundness issues, and that they have no legal or regulatory reason or precedent to prevent it”
members!!! we don't need to ask no stinkin' members ...
ReplyDelete