| Mr. Robert E. FeldmanExecutive Secretary
 Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
 550 17th St. NW
 Washington, DC 20429
 RE: RN 3064-AC50  Dear Mr. Feldman:  I am a concerned citizen or community organization opposed to 
        watering down the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) requirements for 
        mid-sized banks. CRA is vital for increasing homeownership and economic 
        development in lower-income communities. However, your proposed changes 
        will halt the progress that has been made.  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 pre;- _e 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.  In the watered-down exam, you would allow mid-sized banks to choose 
        which community development activities they will undertake. Right now, 
        these banks must make community development loans, 
        investments and services. Your proposed test allows banks to choose only 
        one of the three activities. The result will be less community 
        development activity. You also propose that community development activities in rural areas 
        should benefit any group of 
        individuals instead of only low and moderate-income individuals.  
        But this will allow banks to cherry-pick and focus on affluent residents 
        of rural areas rather than the lower income consumers CRA targets.  
        Finally, you would also eliminate publicly available data on the small 
        business lending of mid-sized banks. Without data, community groups and 
        citizens cannot hold banks accountable for lending to small businesses 
        in their neighborhoods. In Michigan, the FDIC oversees 107 institutions, controlling $3 I 
        billion in assets. Overall, 93% have under $1 billion in assets and 22% 
        have between $250 million and $t billion in assets and would be effected 
        by the proposed changes in CRA regulations. One hundred percent of 
        assets in rural Michigan are controlled by institutions with less than 
        $1 billion and would therefore be subject to abbreviated CRA exams. 
        Eighty-nine percent of the institutions in urban areas have less than $l 
        billion in assets. If the proposed changes to CRA are adopted by the 
        FDIC, 46% of the assets in urban Michigan would not be subject to the 
        current level of scrutiny under CRA. Your changes directly oppose CRA's mandate to require lenders to meet 
        community needs. CRA is too important to be gutted, Please drop your 
        proposal like the two other federal agencies that recognized its harm to 
        underserved communities. Sincerely, Rachel WhiteDetroit, MI
 cc: Michigan Community Reinvestment Coalition National Community Reinvestment Coalition
 President George W. Bush
 Senators John Kerry and John Edwards
 |