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

NORTHRIM BANK

September 16, 2004

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

Re: RIN # 3064-AC50

Subject: Proposed Revisions to the Community Reinvestment Act Regulations Dear Mr. Feldman,

I am the President and CEO of Northrim Bank, a commercial bank located in Anchorage,
Alaska. At $739 million in assets, we are subject to the large bank CRA exam and data reporting requirements. I am writing to you to communicate my strong support for the FDIC's proposal to change the definition of "small bank" by raising the asset size threshold to $1 billion, without regard to the size of a bank's holding company. I also support the inclusion of a community development criterion in the small bank test, but strongly oppose the addition of a separate community development test. Lastly, I support amending the definition of "community development" to include a focus on rural residents.

When the CRA regulations were rewritten in 1995, the most significant improvement in the new regulations was the addition of the small institution CRA examination, which actually did what the act required:

• It had examiners look at each bank's loans and assess whether the bank was helping meet the credit needs of the bank's entire community.
• It did not impose an investment requirement on small banks, since the act is about credit, not investment.
• It added no data reporting requirements on small banks, fulfilling the promise of the act's sponsor, Senator Proxmire, that there would be no additional paperwork or recordkeeping burden on banks if the act passed.
• And it created a simple, understandable assessment test of the bank's record of providing credit in its community: the test considers the institution's loan-to-deposit ratio; the percentage of loans in its assessment areas; its record of lending to borrowers of different income levels and businesses and farms of different sizes; the geographic distribution of its loans; and its record of taking action, if warranted, in response to written complaints about its performance in helping to meet credit needs in its assessment areas.

Since then, the overall regulatory burden on small banks has been increasing. Examples include new data gathering and reporting requirements under HMDA, the USA Patriot Act, the privacy and information security provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and recent amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act. But the nature of community banks has not changed. When a community bank must comply with the extensive requirements of the large institution CRA data gathering and reporting, and the large bank CRA examination, the costs to and burdens on that community bank increase dramatically.

The transition from a small bank to a large bank, for purposes of CRA, imposed a very large additional burden to my bank here in Alaska. Due to the loan data collection and reporting requirements, the need to document investments and services, and the time required for CRA exam preparation, the CRA Officer position increased from 25% to 100% of an officer's job. In addition, the Chief Financial Officer spent began spending countless hours working on the details of complex community development investments to try to meet the unspecified and arbitrary "qualified investment" threshold. As a large bank, by CRA definition, we have experienced CRA examiners arbitrarily assigning levels of value that were lower than what we expected to the number and dollars of our qualified community development donations and investments. These were donations and investments that greatly benefited our communities and on which our bank spent numerous hours and significant financial resources. The time spent on managing these investment decisions imposed a significantly higher regulatory burden that drains both money and personnel away from our staff being able to help meet the credit needs of our communities.

I believe that it is as true today as it was in 1995, and in 1977 when Congress originally enacted CRA, that a community bank's role is to meet the credit needs of its community by making a certain amount of loans relative to its deposits. A community bank's operations are typically not complex; it's basically taking in deposits and making loans. Its business activities are usually focused on small, defined geographic areas where the bank is known in the community. The small institution examination accurately captures the information necessary for examiners to assess whether a community bank is helping to meet the credit needs of its community.

While the small institution test was the most significant improvement of the revised CRA, it was not appropriate to limit its application only to banks with less than $250 million in assets, because it deprived many community banks from any regulatory relief. Currently, a bank with more than $250 million in assets faces significant requirements that substantially increase regulatory burdens without consistently producing additional benefits as intended by the Community Reinvestment Act. In today's banking market, even $500 million to $1 billion banks often have only a handful of branches.

This proposal reflects a more appropriate implementation of the Community Reinvestment Act and is clearly a major step toward reducing the regulatory burden on those institutions that would be defined as "small" institutions. This change would not reduce the number or quality of small business and affordable housing loans that we make, but it would relieve Northrim Bank from the requirement to meet the same CRA standards that are imposed on the nation's largest $1 trillion banks. In addition, it would reduce Northrim' s staff burden by one-fourth to one-half of an officer level position through elimination of loan data collection, editing and reporting to the Federal Reserve, plus other activities related to preparation for a large bank CRA exam. It would also eliminate the bank's need for an annual subscription to CRA data management software. I estimate that the proposed change to the small bank definition could save the bank upwards of $25,000 per year.

I also support the addition of a community development criterion to the small bank examination for banks over $500 million. The current small bank test looks primarily at lending, and adding community development lending (and services to aid lending and investments as a substitute for lending) to the exam seems to fit well within the goal of serving the entire community. However, I oppose the idea of adding a separate community development test, as it would seriously negate any regulatory relief gained by the streamlined exam and it would compound the complexity of measuring the relative value of loans vs. investments vs. services. It would also create the impression that community development lending is different from the provision of credit to the entire community.

We have experienced difficulties finding qualified investments of the size and complexity expected by our CRA examiners in our communities. Those few that are available in our markets have been difficult to make because we have to compete with much larger institutions that want to "grab up" all of them. As the smallest "large CRA bank" in Anchorage, we compete for limited qualified investments with a local institution three times our asset size ($2.1 billion,) as well as with Wells Fargo and Key Bank. Mortgage-backed securities, used by many institutions in the lower 48 as community development investments, are not readily available for Alaska mortgages, as recognized by our FDIC examiners. Low Income Housing Tax Credit projects in our assessment areas are few and far between. Instituting a separate Community Development test that includes lending, investments, and services would increase the level of regulatory burden experienced by us and by our examiners.

I support the FDIC's proposal to change the definition of "community development" from only focusing on low- and moderate-income area residents to including rural residents. Rather than providing a specific definition for "rural," I believe the FDIC should rely on the definition of "rural" that each community, county, or state uses in providing services to its communities. Alaska has many rural communities that would benefit from the inclusion of a focus on rural residents in the community development definition.

In conclusion, I strongly support changing the definition of "small bank" to include those with assets of $1 billion or less. I see this as a vitally important step in improving the CRA regulations and in reducing regulatory burden on our nation's smaller banks. I also support eliminating the separate holding company qualification for the small institution examination, since it places small community banks that are part of a larger holding company at a disadvantage with their peers and has no legal basis in the act. Community banks will still be examined under CRA for their record of helping to meet the credit needs of their communities; however, this change will eliminate some of the most problematic and burdensome elements of the current CRA regulation faced by community banks now drowning in regulatory red-tape.

Sincerely,

R. Marc Langland
Chairman, President , and CEO Northrim Bank
Northrim BanCorp Inc.
P.O. Box 241489
Anchorage, Alaska 99524-1489
Phone: (907) 562-0062 • (800) 478-2265

Cc: The Honorable Alan Greenspan, Chairman
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20551
 

Last Updated 09/28/2004 regs@fdic.gov

Last Updated: August 4, 2024