| COAST COMMUNITY BANK September 10, 2004 Mr. Robert E. FeldmanExecutive Secretary
 Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
 550 17th Street, NW
 Washington, DC 20429
 Re: RIN Number 3064-AC50:FDIC Proposed Increase in the Threshold
            for the Small Bank CRA Streamlined Examination Dear Sir or Madam: I am Senior Vice President of Coast Community Bank in Ocean 
          Springs, Mississippi.  Coast Community Bank is a $150 million 
          asset bank, and I am writing to strongly support
            the FDIC’s proposal to raise the threshold for the streamlined
            small bank CRA examination to $1 billion without regard to the size
            of the bank’s holding company. This would greatly relieve the
            regulatory burden imposed on many small banks such as my own under 
          the current regulation, which are required
            to meet the standards imposed on the nation’s largest $1 trillion
            banks. I understand that this is not an exemption from CRA and that
            my bank would still have to help meet the
            credit needs of its entire community and be evaluated by my regulator.  
          However, I believe that this would lower my current regulatory burden. I also support
              the addition of a community development criterion to the small
              bank examination
              for larger community banks. It appears
            to be a significant improvement over the investment test. However,
            I urge the FDIC to adopt its original $500 million threshold for
            small banks without a CD criterion and only apply the new CD criterion
            to community banks greater than $500 million up to $1 billion. Banks
            under $500 million now hold about the same percent of overall industry
            assets as community banks under $250 million did a decade ago when
            the revised CRA regulations were adopted, so this adjustment in the
            CRA threshold is appropriate. As FDIC examiners know, it has proven
            extremely difficult for small banks, especially those in rural areas,
            to find appropriate CRA qualified investments in their communities.
            Many small banks have had to make regional or statewide investments
            that are extremely unlikely to ever benefit the banks’ own
            communities. That was certainly not intent of Congress when it enacted
            CRA.   An additional reason to support the FDIC’s CD criterion is
            that it significantly reduces the current regulation’s “cliff
            effect.” Today, when a small bank goes over $250 million, it
            must completely reorganize its CRA program and begin a massive new
            reporting, monitoring and investment program. If the FDIC adopts
            its proposal, a state nonmember 
            bank would move from the small bank examination to an expanded but
            still streamlined small bank examination, with the flexibility to
            mix Community Development loans, services and investments to meet
            the new CD criterion. This would be far more appropriate to the size
            of the bank, and far better than subjecting the community bank to
            the same large bank examination that applies to $1 trillion banks.
            This more graduated transition to the large bank examination is a
            significant improvement over the current regulation. I strongly oppose making the CD criterion a separate test from the 
             bank’s overall CRA evaluation. For a community bank, CD lending
            is not significantly different from the provision of credit to the
            entire community. The current small bank test considers the institution’s
            overall lending in its community. The addition of a category of CD
            lending (and services to aid lending and investments as a substitute
            for lending) fits well within the concept of serving the whole community.
            A separate test would create an additional CD obligation and regulatory
            burden that would erode the benefit of the streamlined exam. I strongly 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.
            I think that this change in the definition will go a long way toward
            eliminating the current distortions in the regulation. We caution
            the FDIC to provide a definition of “rural” that will
            not be subject to misuse to favor just affluent residents of rural
            areas. In conclusion, I believe that the FDIC has proposed a major improvement
            in the CRA regulations, one that much more closely aligns the regulations
            with the Community Reinvestment Act itself, and I urge the FDIC to
            adopt its proposal, with the recommendations above. I will be happy
            to discuss these issues further with you, if that would be helpful. Sincerely,
 Oliver A. Latil, IV
 Senior Vice President
 Coast Community Bank
 2314 Bienville Blvd
 Ocean Springs, MS
 |