| September 13, 2004 
        Mr. Robert E. FeldmanExecutive Secretary
 Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
 Washington, DC 20429
 RE: Community Reinvestment, RIN Number 3064-AC50
         Dear Mr. Feldman:
         As a community banker, I join my fellow community bankers throughout 
        the nation in strong support of the FDIC's proposal to increase the 
        asset size limit of banks eligible for the streamlined small-bank CRA 
        examination. I also strongly support the elimination of the separate 
        holding company qualification.
         Our bank having an asset size of $401,902,000. is subject to large 
        bank CRA exam and is located in McAlester, Oklahoma. McAlester is a 
        small town in Southeastern Oklahoma which consists of approximately 
        17,870 citizens and our assessment area is Pittsburg County, which 
        consists of approximately 44,168 citizens. 
         The proposal will greatly alleviate unnecessary paperwork and 
        examination burden without weakening our commitment to reinvest in our 
        communities. Reinvesting in our communities is something we do everyday 
        as a matter of good business. My community bank will not long survive if 
        my local community doesn't thrive, and that means my bank must be 
        responsive to community needs and promote and support community and 
        economic development.
         Making it less burdensome to undergo a CRA exam by expanding 
        eligibility for the streamlined exam will not change the way my bank 
        does business. In fact, it will free up human and financial resources 
        that can be redirected to the community and used to make loans and 
        provide other services.
         It is important to remember that the streamlined CRA exam is not an 
        exemption from CRA. It is a more cost effective and efficient CRA exam. 
        Banks subject to the simplified CRA exam are still fully obligated to 
        comply with CRA. Just as now, community banks would continue to be 
        examined to ensure they lend to all segments of their communities, 
        including low and moderate income individuals and neighborhoods. It just 
        doesn't make sense and is inequitable to evaluate a 
        $500 million or $1 billion bank using the same exam procedures as for 
        $100 billion or $500 billion bank.
         One of the problems with the current large bank CRA exam is that the 
        definition of "qualified investments" is too limited, and qualified 
        investments can be difficult to find. As a result, many community banks 
        (especially those in rural areas) have to invest in regional or 
        statewide mortgage bonds or housing bonds and the like to meet CRA 
        requirements. These investments may benefit other areas of the state or 
        region, but they actually take resources away from the bank's local 
        community. Community banks and communities would be better off if the 
        banks could truly reinvest those dollars locally to support their own 
        local economies and residents.
         For this reason, I find that the FDIC's proposed community 
        development requirement for banks between $250 million and $1 billion is 
        more flexible and more appropriate than the large bank investment test. 
        The advantage to this proposal is that it continues to focus on 
        community development, but considers investments, lending and services. 
        It would let community banks pursue community development activities 
        that both meet the local community's needs and make sense in light of 
        the bank's strategic strengths.
         Similarly, the proposal will help rural banks meet the special needs 
        of their communities by expanding the definition of "community 
        development" so that it includes activities that benefit rural residents 
        in addition to low and moderate income individuals. Rural banks are 
        frequently called upon to support needed economic or infrastructure 
        development such as school construction, revitalizing Main Street, or 
        loans that help create needed or better-paying jobs. These activities 
        should not be ineligible for CRA credit because they do not benefit only 
        low-or moderate-income individuals. 
         The FDIC's proposed changes to CRA are needed to help alleviate 
        regulatory burden and would be a major improvement to the CRA 
        regulations. By easing regulatory burden, it will make it easier for 
        community banks like our bank to continue to provide committed service 
        to local communities that few other financial service providers are 
        willing to do. 
         Thank you for considering my views. Wanda L. Bass
 Chairman of the Board
 cc: The Honorable John D. Hawke, Jr.Comptroller of the Currency
 Independence Square, 250 E. Street, S.W.
 Washington, DC 20219-0001
 
 |