| SHOREBANK PACIFIC September 29, 2004  Robert E FeldmanExecutive Secretary
 Attn: Comments/ Legal ESS
 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
 550 17th Street, NW
 Washington, DC 20429
 Re: RIN Number 3064-AC50Dear Mr. Feldman:
 As - one of the few banks operating under a strategic plan for CRA 
        purposes, and - as one of four banks in the Pacific Northwest with a outstanding CRA 
        rating, and
 - as a bank primarily focused on rural development,
 we write to you to encourage:- the increased threshold for determination of a small bank without 
        regard to the size of the holding company, and
 - the provision for loans to rural residents as qualification for 
        community development credit.
 The existing regulations do not give proper credit to rural banks 
        because the very nature of rural communities is that their populations 
        blend the income within an SMSA so that they are not considered low 
        income even though there are significant low income groups within any 
        population classification. Our headquarters is in the second lowest 
        income per capita county in Washington state, but neither the county nor 
        the town are considered a low income area for CRA purposes. This is one 
        reason why we adopted the strategic plan approach to CRA compliance. 
        That condition just didn’t make sense. Our loans to entrepreneurs in 
        these areas are at least as oriented to traditional community 
        development criteria as the same loans that we make in urban low income 
        SMSAs.  To arrive at the strategic plan was a very intensive process wherein 
        we dedicated .5 FTE for a year to establish the plan and create the 
        monitoring and reporting structure. For a bank of less than $100MM in 
        assets this is a significant commitment. Another reason for this choice 
        of approach was because we are owned by a holding company with assets in 
        excess of $1B and thus needed to meet the large bank test. This too 
        imposed an unnecessary burden since we operate as an independent entity 
        and therefore were required to assume the same burden as a larger 
        institution without the resources. This cost has directly impacted our 
        earnings. That doesn’t seem to be the desired outcome of the regulation.
         Smaller community banks do not necessarily have the resources nor the 
        expertise to make the same investment decisions as larger banks. As a 
        result granting more flexibility to these banks to meet community 
        development goals utilizing their individual expertise, which is often 
        closer proximity to the customer that leads to financial advice, to the 
        community that provides leadership, and to developing public private 
        partnerships are ways that the community bank operates to the greater 
        benefit that cannot is not provided by the larger institutions. Allowing 
        them credit for doing so not only rewards what is already being done, 
        but recognizes the unique benefit that these institutions provide to 
        their communities.  Sincerely,David C.E. Williams
 ShoreBank Pacific
 203 Howerton Way
 Ilwaco, WA
 |