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



Coachella Valley Housing Coalition

From: Patricia Sabala [mailto:psabala@cvhc.org]
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 1:20 PM
To: Comments
Subject: RIN 3064-AC50

October 4, 2004

Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary
Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
550 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20429

Re: The FDIC’s proposed change to the Community Reinvestment Act’s definition of a “small bank.”

Dear Sir:

As a concerned citizen and as an employee of the Coachella Valley Housing Coalition (CVHC), I am writing to express my adamant opposition of any changes to the Community Reinvestment Act.
Situated in Southern California, about 100 miles east of Los Angeles, the Coachella Valley is in a unique community known for its high-end luxury homes and vacation resorts in Palm Springs and Indian Wells. Little known is the fact that the Valley is primarily rural, and economically sustained by low-wage service and agriculture industry jobs.
The Coachella Valley Housing Coalition has committed 22 years to helping low income people improve their living conditions through advocacy, research, and the construction and operation of housing and community development projects. These efforts have meant the construction of more than 2,500 single family homes and apartment units for farmworkers, migrant farmworkers, seniors, and individuals with special needs, HIV/Aids and other chronic illnesses.

The Community Reinvestment Act is a critical component to CVHC’s affordable housing and community development efforts. According to Community Development Digest, the FDIC shortly will consider adopting the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) revision to the threshold for small institutions using streamlined evaluations to $1 billion in assets. An increase to the threshold of what is considered to be a small bank would devastate an already difficult working relationship between low-income housing builders like ourselves and small banks, especially in rural communities where we have found the need is greatest. According to the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, changing of the “small bank” definition will allow 2,000 insured institutions with total assets of almost $1 trillion and branches in more than 18,800 communities (96% of all FDIC-regulated banks) to receive a less stringent CRA exam. Because institutions with assets of $250 million to $1 billion comprise substantial market share in rural areas such as ours, a change will mean rural communities will have less access to institutions required to offer services and investments that benefit low and moderate income communities. The private market without regulatory incentives would not reach many rural and impoverished areas. In essence, the proposed FDIC rule would exempt many of our community’s critical partners from the effective and productive requirements currently in place. CRA has been a vital aspect of reinvestment in disenfranchised communities and should be held at a high standard of reporting due to historical discriminatory lending practices which lead to blight and disinvestment in low-income communities.

Small banks have always been an integral part of the communities they serve—they are more familiar with their surroundings and clientele, and their banking needs—CRA forces all banks to get out and serve the neighborhoods in which they operate. When banks infuse their services into a community that community thrives, businesses thrive, people purchase homes, etc. To reduce CRA’s mandate for “small” banks will cause banks to focus on easy and more profitable avenues of business rather than working towards a broader lending portfolio. Because government subsidies for housing are shrinking, now is not the time to decrease regulations for private capital to leverage scarce subsidy dollars.

CVHC has benefited greatly from CRA’s mandate on both large and small banks, through various loans and grants over the years. Communities will lose with less stringent CRA standards. I urge FDIC not to move forward with the OTS proposed rule.
I appreciate the opportunity to share with you my impressions on any changes proposed for the Community Reinvestment Act as it serves as a great tool for all our housing and community building efforts. Thank you for your consideration of my comments.

Sincerely,

Patricia Sabala
Housing Counselor
45-701 Monroe Street, Suite G
Indio, CA

 

Last Updated 10/12/2004 regs@fdic.gov

Skip Footer back to content