From: Raphael Podolsky [mailto:RPodolsky@LARCC.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 10:31 PM
To: Comments
Subject: RE: RIN 3064-AC50
Raphael Podolsky
80 Jefferson St.
Hartford, CT 06106
October 7, 2004
FDIC FDIC
Dear FDIC FDIC:
Mr. Robert E. Feldman
Executive Secretary
Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
550 17th St. NW 20429
RE: RIN 3064-AC50
Dear Mr. Feldman:
I am a consumer advocate who works on behalf of low-income consumers.
I write to urge you to preserve the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act)
requirements for mid-sized banks.
CRA is vital for increasing homeownership and economic development in
lower-income communities. Since the passage of the CRA in 1977, great
progress has been made in ending redlining and pushing banks to improve
their lending performance in underserved communities. Banks have
improved their outreach efforts, removed barriers in underwriting
criteria that excluded credit-worthy low- and moderate-income
applicants, and created loan counseling programs that assist first-time
homebuyers. The CRA has played an important role in Connecticut, where
it has helped make banks more responsive to low-income community needs.
There is still a long way to go, however, and the proposed changes to
the CRA do not help us get there. At a time when stronger curbs against
predatory lending and other unscrupulous practices are needed, this
proposal weakens the already inadequate regulations of banks. In
Connecticut, few banks reviewed under the state CRA receive anything
more than a "satisfactory" rating, which is a minimally acceptable
rating, not a high rating. Of 45 banks listed on the Connecticut Banking
Commissioner's website, only 9 of them -- 20% -- had a rating of
"outstanding." The remaining 80% all had lower ratings.
Monitoring under CRA is an important element to press banks to work
toward an "outstanding" rating. The need for such movement is every bit
as important for mid-size banks as for large ones. Community
revitalization and wealth-building in low-income communities -- and
especially an increase in homeownership -- will not happen without the
active application of the CRA. It is an incentive which produces
results.
I understand that banks with over $250 million in assets must be
tested on their number of loans, investments, and services to low- and
moderate-income communities. But your proposal would eliminate the
investment and service requirements for all banks with under $1 billion
in assets. This will result in significantly fewer loans and investments
in affordable rental housing, health clinics, community centers, and
economic development projects.
I urge you to preserve full CRA coverage for mid-sized banks.
Sincerely,
Raphael L. Podolsky
Legal Assistance Resource Center of Connecticut
80 Jefferson St.
Hartford, CT 06106 |