Skip to main content
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government
Dot gov
The .gov means it’s official. 
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
Https
The site is secure. 
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Federal Register Publications

FDIC Federal Register Citations



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




FDIC Federal Register Citations

Community Bank of Marion County

April 5, 2004

Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary
Attention: Comments
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
550 17th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20429

RE: Proposed Revisions to the Community Reinvestment Act Regulations

Dear Robert E. Feldman,

As a community banker, I strongly endorse the federal bank regulator’s proposal to increase the asset size of banks eligible for the small bank streamlined Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) examination from $250 million to $500 million and elimination of the holding company size limit (currently $1 billion). This proposal will greatly reduce regulatory burden. I am the Compliance Officer of Community Bank of Marion County, a $213 million bank located in Ocala, Florida.

The small bank CRA examination process was an excellent innovation. As a community banker, I applaud the agencies for recognizing that it is time to expand this critical burden reduction benefit to larger community banks. At this critical time for the economy, this will allow more community banks to focus on what they do best – fueling America’s local economies. When a bank must comply with the requirements of the large bank CRA evaluation process, the costs and burdens increase dramatically. And the resources devoted to CRA compliance are resources not available for meeting the credit demands of the community. For example in my bank, while we are the largest community bank in our assessment area, increasing the asset size requirement would place more burden and concern on trying to collect and report the additional information by weighing the advantages of getting a community development loan on our books before another bank did. This would leave us less time to devote to working more personally towards helping areas and businesses that currently bank with us in our community, and trying to work towards better programs to assist/help other new people and businesses in our assessment area. Our bank is very active in community involvement, which I believe would be lost if our bank focused on the large bank CRA requirements, and the whole purpose of being a small bank would change. The additional cost of the large bank reporting burden under CRA for our bank is estimated to be $100,000 per year.

Adjusting the asset size limit also more accurately reflects significant changes and consolidation within the banking industry in the last 10 years. To be fair, banks should be evaluated against their peers, not banks hundreds of times their size. The proposed change recognizes that it’s not right to assess the CRA performance of a $500 million bank or a $1 billion bank with the same exam procedures used for a $500 billion bank. Large banks now stretch from coast-to-coast with assets in the hundreds of billions of dollars. It is not fair to rate a community bank using the same CRA examination. And, while the proposed increase is a good first step, the size of the banks eligible for the small bank streamlined CRA examination should be increased to $2 billion, or at a minimum, $1 billion.

Ironically, community activists seem oblivious to the costs and burdens. And yet, they object to bank mergers that remove the local bank from the community. This is contradictory. If community groups want to keep the local banks in the community where they have better access to decision-makers, they must recognize that regulatory burdens are strangling smaller institutions and forcing them to consider selling to larger institutions that can better manage the burdens.

Increasing the size of banks eligible for the small bank streamlined CRA examination does not relieve banks from CRA responsibilities. Since the survival of many community banks is closely intertwined with the success and viability of their communities, the increase will merely eliminate some of the more burdensome requirements.

In summary, I believe that increasing the asset-size of banks eligible for the small bank streamlined CRA examination process is an important first step to reducing regulatory burden. I also support eliminating the separate holding company qualification for the streamlined examination, since it places small community banks that are part of a larger holding company at a disadvantage to their peers. While community banks still must comply with the general requirements of CRA, this change will eliminate some of the more problematic and burdensome elements of the current CRA regulation form community banks that are drowning in regulatory red-tape. I also urge the agencies to seriously consider raising the size of banks eligible for the streamlined examination to $2 billion or, at least, $1 billion in assets to better reflect the current demographics of the banking industry.

Sincerely,

Denise Wall
Compliance Officer
Community Bank of Marion County

Last Updated 04/14/2004 regs@fdic.gov

Last Updated: August 4, 2024