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

 September I7, 2004

Mr. Robert E. Feldman
Executive Secretary
Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
55017th St. NW
Washington, DC 20429

RE: RIN 3064-AC50

Dear Mr. Feldman:

As a former legal services attorney, and a civil rights investigator who encounters on a daily basis low- and moderate-income persons is in need of a wide range of opportunities and services that the well-to-do are oblivious to, I urge you to not turn a blind eye to those less fortunate and withdraw your proposed changes to the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulations. CRA  has been instrumental in increasing homeownership, boosting economic development, and expanding small businesses in the nation's minority, immigrant, and low- and moderate-income communities: Your proposed changes are contrary to the CRA statute and Congress' intent because they will slowdown, if not halt the progress made in community investment.

Under the current CRA. regulations, banks with assets of at least $250 million are rated by performance evaluations that scrutinize their level of lending, investing and services to low- and moderate-income communities. The proposed changes will eliminate the investment and service parts of the CRA exam for state-chartered banks with assets: between  $250 million and $I billion. In place of the investment and service parts of  CRA exam, the FDIC proposes to add a community development criterion. The community development criterion would require banks to offer community development loans, investments and services.

The community development criterion would be seriously deficient as a replacement for the investment and services tests. Mid-sized banks with assets between $250 million and $ I billion would only have to engage in one of three activities: community development lending; investing or services. Currently, mid-sized banks must engage in all three activities. Under your proposal, a mid sized bank could now choose a community development activity that is easiest for the bank instead of providing an array of comprehensive community development activities needed by low- and moderate income communities. THIS IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH.

Here in the state of Iowa, ALL BUT ONE of the 297 banks regulated by the FDIC would be exempt from the stricter "three part test." The effect of removing that many banks from the need to engage ire all three levels of lending and services will be devastating to Iowa's rural areas as well as its larger urban communities.

The consequences for low- and moderate-income communities is that CRA examiners will no longer expect midi, size banks to maintain anchor build bank branches in their communities.  Mid sized banks will no longer make sustained efforts to provide affordable banking services, and checking and savings accounts to consumers with modest income. Mid-size banks will also not respond to the needs for the growing demand for services needed by immigrants which is a growing population in Iowa.

In summary, your proposal is directly the opposite of CRA's statutory mandate of imposing a continuing and affirmative obligation to meet community needs. Your proposal will dramatically reduce community development lading, investing and services. You compound the damage of your proposal in rural areas, which are least able to afford reductions in credit and capital. You also eliminate critical data on small business lending. Two other regulatory agencies, the Federal Reserve Board and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, did not embark upon the path you are taking because they recognized the harm it would cause.

CRA is too vital to the production and maintenance of affordable housing to be gutted by regulatory fiat and neglect. Please reverse your proposed course of action, or we will ask Congress to halt your efforts before the damage is-done.

Sincerely,

Keirsten Anderson
1407 N. Zenith Ave.
Davenport, IA 52804

Last Updated 10/20/2004 regs@fdic.gov

Last Updated: August 4, 2024