❋ Cheerleader for the SAFE Board of Directors, or advocate for SAFE members and the guardian of consumers and the laws in California?
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" in California if the rubber stamp label is accurate!
✅ DFPI likes to boast of its consumer protection, and that California is "the charter of choice" for credit unions. The SAFE Board evidently doesn't believe DFPI is all it's quacked up to be. Instead, the senior leadership at SAFE have chosen to give it all up - actually give it all away! - and move to Washington! So much for DFPI's charter of choice!
✔ If this merger mistake comes up for a SAFE membership vote, California and credit unions nationwide will have a chance to judge the true degree of regulatory rigor and the firmness of the promise to consumer protection at DFPI.
✔ As you've read, California law explicitly states that a majority of all SAFE members must vote in favor of this merger proposal for it to be approved.
✔ If the merger is not approved by a majority vote of all 250,000 SAFE members, then DFPI will have the choice to unilaterally approve or disapprove the merger proposal.
😎 DFPI alone will decide who really has the credit union "charter of choice" for 250,000 Californians. Will be interesting to see how DFPI justifies its choice, when the majority of all SAFE members do not approve.
