Skip Header

Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation

Each depositor insured to at least $250,000 per insured bank



Home > Regulation & Examinations > Laws & Regulations > FDIC Federal Register Citations




FDIC Federal Register Citations

1ST CONSTITUTION BANK

September  15, 2004

Mr. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary
Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
550 17th St. NW
Washington, DC  20429

Dear Mr. Feldman:

As a community banker, I join my fellow community bankers throughout the nation in strong support of the FDIC's proposal to increase the asset size limit of banks eligible for the streamlined small bank CRA examination.

The proposal will greatly alleviate unnecessary paperwork and examination burden without weakening our commitment to reinvest in our communities. Reinvesting in our communities is something we do everyday as a matter of good business. Our community bank will not be successful if the communities we are in do not thrive. To survive and be competitive with larger institutions we must service our trade area and promote and support community and economic development.

Making it less burdensome to undergo a CRA exam by expanding eligibility for the streamlined exam will not change the manner in which our bank does business. In fact, it will free up human and financial resources that can be redirected to the community and used to make loans and provide other services.

It is important to remember that the streamlined CRA exam is not an exemption from CRA. It is a more cost effective and efficient CRA exam. Banks subject to the simplified CRA exam are still fully obligated to comply with CRA. Just as now, community banks would continue to be examined to ensure they lend to all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income individuals and neighborhoods. It does not make sense and is inequitable to evaluate a $500 million or $1 billion bank using the same examination procedures established for $100 billion bank. These multi-billion dollar institutions routinely outbid smaller banks for funding projects, municipal bond bids, etc.

One of the problems with the current large bank CRA examination is that the definition of "qualified investments" is too limited, and qualified investments can be difficult to find. As a result, many community banks (especially those in rural areas) have to invest in regional or statewide mortgage bonds or housing bonds to meet CRA requirements.

These investments may benefit other areas of the state or region, but they actually take resources away from the bank's local community. Community banks and communities would be better served if the banks would truly reinvest those dollars locally to support their own local economies and residents.

For this reason, I find the FDIC's proposed community development requirement for barks between $250 million and $1 billion is more flexible and more appropriate than the large bank investment test. The advantage to this proposal is that it continues to focus on community development activities that both meet the local community's needs and. make sense in light of the bank's strategic strengths.

Similarly, the proposal will help rural banks meet the special needs of their communities by expanding the definition of "community development" so that it includes activities that benefit rural residents in addition to low-income and moderate-income individuals. Rural banks are frequently called upon to support special economic or infrastructure development such as school construction, revitalizing Main Street, or loans that help create needed or better-paying jobs. These activities should not be ineligible for CRA credit because they do not benefit only low-income or moderate-income individuals.

The FDIC's proposed changes to CRA are necessary to alleviate regulatory burden. Without changes such as this, more and more community banks will find they cannot sustain independent existence because of the crushing regulatory burden. Should our board of directors decide that it is no longer possible to be a community bank, there may be a decision made to sell our community bank to a larger institution. For many small towns and local communities, the loss of a community bank that is responsive to their needs would be a major blow to the local economy and the local community. By easing the regulatory burden, it will make it easier for community banks like ours to continue to provide committed service to local communities that few other financial service providers are willing to entertain.

Very truly yours,
Robert F. Mangano
President & Chief Executive Officer

Last Updated 10/16/2004 regs@fdic.gov

Skip Footer back to content