As
Federal Reserve Chair Powell
Says Would Not Resign
If Asked Contrast to FOIA
Denials and Merger Rubber Stamping
By Matthew R.
Lee, Video,
story,
FOIA
docs
NEW YORK CITY,
January 4 – Today Federal
Reserve Board Chairman Jerome
Powell said he would not
resign from his post if asked
by President Donald Trump. He
said this in response to a
question at an American
Economic Association event in
Atlanta. It sounds transparent
- but his Federal Reserve, at
least on complying with the
Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA), is not transparent.
And Powell was the Governor in
charge of denying the Press'
FOIA appeals, which he did
time after time. The context:
the US Treasury Department is
the next stage of a process to
try to weaken and take the
community out of the 1977
Community Reinvestment Act.
Docket file here.
The protagonist, akin to Scott
Pruitt when he was at the US
Environmental Protection
Agency or Ryan Zinke at
Interior, is Comptroller of
the Current Joseph Otting. On
September 12 Fair Finance
Watch (and on FOIA, Inner City
Press) commented to the OCC, here.
At the November 19 deadline,
not yet posted was Inner City
Press' November 17 fourth
comment, just as Otting's OCC
absurdly waited 13 days to try
to rule it does not have to
consider Fair Finance Watch's
comments on WSFS Bank's
application to acquire
Beneficial. Now, after the OCC
gleefully closed its comment
period on that, WSFS on
December 13 announced it will
close 25 branches. One would
think Otting would have to
re-open the comment period.
But that's not how Otting
rolls. And the Fed, on FOIA,
is absurd. On January 2 the
Federal Reserve unilaterally
extended its time to respond
to Inner City Press' FOIA
request about WSFS and CRA -
without any commitment to no
haul off and rubber stamp the
application. Here's what the
Fed wrote: "Mr. Matthew R.
Lee Inner City
Press P.O. Box
20047 Dag Hammarskjold
Station New York, NY
10017
Re:
Freedom of Information Act
Request No.
F-2019-00040
Dear Mr.
Lee,
On December 3, 2018, the Board
of Governors (“Board”)
received your electronic
message dated December 1,
pursuant to the Freedom of
Information Act (“FOIA”), 5
U.S.C. § 552, for all withheld
portions of the applications
by WSFS to acquire Beneficial,
including but not limited to
presumptively mis-labeled
“Confidential” exhibits about
WSFS's CRA program
(“Confidential” Exhibit 9)...
Pursuant to section
(a)(6)(B)(i) of the FOIA, we
are extending the period for
our response until January 16,
2019, in order to consult with
two or more components of the
Board having a substantial
interest in the determination
of the
request.
If a determination can be made
before January 16, 2019, we
will respond to you promptly.
It is our policy to process
FOIA requests as quickly as
possible while ensuring that
we disclose the requested
information to the fullest
extent of the
law.
Thank
you,
Freedom of Information
Office Board of
Governors of the Federal
Reserve System" Here from the
Federal Reserve, to which FFW
also commented, are the Fed's
Additional Information
questions sent December 18 to
WSFS and FFW: "This request
refers to the application by
WSFS Financial Corporation
(“WSFS”),
Wilmington, Delaware, to
acquire Beneficial Bancorp,
Inc. (“Beneficial”), and
thereby
indirectly acquire Beneficial
Bank (“Beneficial Bank”), both
of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, pursuant to
section 10(e) of the Home
Owners’ Loan Act following the
conversion of Beneficial from
a bank holding company to a
savings and loan holding
company. Following the
proposed acquisition, WSFS
plans to merge Beneficial Bank
into its subsidiary,
Wilmington Savings Fund
Society, FSB (“WSFS Bank”),
Wilmington, Delaware. Based on
our review of the current
record, the following
information, including the
information in the
Confidential Appendix, is
requested.
Please provide relevant
supporting documentation, as
appropriate.
1. Provide a description of
WSFS’s current non-banking
activities, including any
commercial activities
referenced in Item 210.50(a),
and identify the authority
upon which WSFS relies to
engage in such activities, as
well as any supportive
analysis.
2. Provide the following
required components of the
H(e)-3 Application:
a. Confidential disclosure
memoranda to the Merger
Agreement, required as
part of Item 110.10(b)
b. Evidence of shareholder
approval of the transaction,
required as part of
Item 110.10(d)
c. Parent company
(unconsolidated) cash flows
statements, referenced in
Item 330.10(d)
d. The ages of WSFS’s and
Beneficial’s directors and
senior executive
officers, referenced in Item
410.10(c)-1
e. An amended charter and/or
amended by-laws, if either
will be revised as
a result of the proposed
mergers, referenced in Exhibit
B.1
3. To the extent
not already provided, provide
an update on WSFS Bank’s
Community Reinvestment Act
(“CRA”) activities since its
August 2017 CRA Performance
Evaluation and Beneficial
Bank’s CRA activities since
its July 2017 CRA Performance
Evaluation, in assessment
areas in which the banks
operate. This response should
include any significant CRA
initiatives undertaken,
particularly with respect to
credit and deposit products
and retail banking services
targeted toward low- and
moderate-income (“LMI”)
geographies and individuals,
as well as information on
community development lending,
investments, and services WSFS
Bank and Beneficial Bank have
made since the banks’ last
evaluation period, including
the total
number, dollar amount, and
service hours, and a brief
description of the banks’ most
significant community
development loans,
investments, and services.
4. Revise the pro forma
financial statements that were
submitted on November
27, 2018, to reflect actual
reported balance sheet
information for Beneficial
(total assets balance should
match the balance reported on
FR-Y9C) and
update the relevant footnote
adjustments based on
information as of September
30, 2018 (footnote adjustments
related to accumulated other
comprehensive
income and retained earnings
are currently based on
information as of June 30,
2018).
5. Provide a parent company
only (unconsolidated) balance
sheet as of the end of
the most recent quarter,
showing separately each
principal group of assets,
liabilities, and capital
account components (e.g.,
common stock and preferred
stock, surplus, accumulated
other comprehensive income,
and retained
earnings), debit and credit
adjustments (explained by
detailed footnotes)
reflecting the proposed
transaction; and the resulting
pro forma parent
company balance sheet. The pro
forma balance sheet should
reflect the
adjustments required under
business combination and fair
value accounting
standards.
6. Clarify whether any of
WSFS’s Integration Plan
activities discussed in
WSFS’s response to Question 5
of the OCC’s Additional
Information Request
(dated November 15, 2018)
would include integration of
any of WSFS’s and
Beneficial’s IT systems prior
to WSFS’s receipt of the
Federal Reserve’s
approval of the transaction.
7. Provide a breakdown of the
branches that the combined
bank intends to retain
after the merger, including
whether any will be in low- or
moderate-income or
majority-minority census
tracts.
8. In the H(e)-3 application,
WSFS states that it will seek
“to incorporate
Beneficial Bank’s highly
successful strategies for
meeting the needs of its
communities into the combined
institution’s CRA programs.”
Please elaborate
on this statement, including a
discussion of what strategies
WSFS plans to
incorporate. Please indicate
whether the incorporated
strategies will be utilized
across the entire footprint of
the combined bank or in the
current footprint of
Beneficial Bank.
9. Please confirm that, upon
merger, WSFS will commit to
comply with 12 CFR 239.62, as
that section may be amended
from time to time by the Board
of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System (the “Board”)
with respect to
Beneficial’s liquidation
account.
Please submit your response
within ten business days,
addressed to Eddy Hsiao at
the Federal Reserve Bank of
Philadelphia. In addition, to
facilitate more timely
distribution of information,
please submit your full
response on E-Apps, the
Federal
Reserve’s web-based system for
electronic submission of
regulatory applications and
related documents.
In accordance with the Federal
Reserve’s ex parte procedures,
provide a copy of the public
portion of your response
(together with any
attachments) directly to the
commenter, Mr. Matthew Lee of
Fair Finance Watch. In
addition, please send a copy
of your response to your
application contacts at the
Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency." But wasn't the
OCC's comment period closed?
Here's WSFS: "WSFS Financial
Corporation (Nasdaq: WSFS)
(“WSFS”) and Beneficial
Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: BNCL)
(“Beneficial”), jointly
announced a retail banking
office optimization plan that
aligns with the previously
reported intent to merge
Beneficial Bank into WSFS
Bank. The plan includes
the consolidation of 25% of
the combined Beneficial and
WSFS retail banking offices
due to an overall decline in
branch transactional activity,
Customers’ rapid adoption and
usage of digital services,
geographic overlap and
optimization
opportunities. To
continue delivering on its
mission of “We Stand For
Service” amidst evolving
Customer expectations, WSFS
also committed to reinvest an
incremental $32 million of the
estimated cost savings from
the retail office optimization
plan into a five-year
transformational investment in
technology and delivery
systems to create a top-tier
physical and digital servicing
platform that will
significantly enhance Customer
experiences across all
business lines.
Teams from both institutions
conducted an extensive
analysis of the combined
franchise to study market
overlap, transaction trends,
space considerations, cost of
ownership, business
opportunities, the brand
experience, visibility from
high-traffic roadways, and the
accessibility of each
location. WSFS leveraged
this due diligence to
determine that it will
consolidate 14 Beneficial and
11 WSFS retail banking offices
of the combined network.
WSFS also plans to sell five
additional retail
banking offices located on the
outer edges of the combined
core footprint. Most closures
will occur at the conversion
of Beneficial Bank into WSFS
Bank, which is expected to
occur in August 2019.
Eighty percent (80%) of the
consolidating retail offices
are less than three miles from
remaining locations, including
nearly a third that are less
than a mile away. WSFS
is offering jobs to all
Beneficial and WSFS team
members of the consolidating
banking offices within the
Retail Division of WSFS
Bank. WSFS will also
raise the minimum wage across
the combined organization to
WSFS’ current minimum of $15
an hour.
The planned combination and
ongoing delivery
transformation will make WSFS
the largest, premier,
longest-standing,
locally-headquartered
community bank for the Greater
Delaware Valley with
approximately $13 billion in
assets and growing.
“We have worked quickly, but
diligently, on our plan to
combine our two institutions,
which included identifying the
retail space that will best
help us deliver top-tier
quality services and solutions
for Customers across the
Delaware Valley,” said Rodger
Levenson, WSFS’ Executive Vice
President and Chief Operating
Officer, who will become
President and Chief Executive
Officer on January 1,
2019. “This retail
banking office optimization
initiative and our planned
technology reinvestment,
combined with a larger balance
sheet and an intimate
knowledge of the market,
affirms our unique position to
fill a long-standing gap
between big banks and smaller
community banks in the
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington
MSA.”
WSFS has posted on its website
(wsfsbank.com/beneficial) the
25 retail banking offices that
are slated to consolidate as
part of the retail banking
office optimization
plan. WSFS will begin
communicating these
consolidations and other
merger-related information to
Beneficial and WSFS Customers
in the first quarter of 2019
after the combination receives
regulatory approval and the
deal closes." The lists
are by country, only for
download. We'll have more on
this. A fifth comment
submitted including that "the
OCC is already undermining
CRA. Our comments to the OCC
on WSFS - Beneficial have yet
to be acted on. That comment
was submitted on November 6.
Now on November 19, two weeks
later, the OCC has tellingly
said it will not consider it -
despite a Federal Reserve
Board comment period on the
same transaction remaining
open until at least November
27. The OCC's attempt to
ignore substantive criticism
of some banks' performance,
while Comptroller Otting
previously solicited false
comments support his OneWest
Bank, are a symbol all what is
wrong with this process, and
today's OCC.
While if the past
is any guide the OCC will
forwarded ICP's comment to the
FRB by the FRB, we note in
this connection that WSFS'
comments on the ANPR favor, as
Otting clearly does, dulling
the LMI focus of CRA to make
it easier for banks. We
oppose all of this.
Since October 11
the OCC has denied expedited
process to our FOIA request(s)
for records essential in order
to comment on this proposal.
OCC Deputy Chief Counsel
Charles Steele on November 7
wrote on that “merger between
One West Bank and CIT Bank.
You do not demonstrate how
your request concerns a matter
of current exigency to the
American public or how a delay
in the OCC's response to your
request would compromise a
significant recognized
interest.” Now Inner City
Press has submitted an
unquestionably timely comment
to the Federal Reserve Bank of
Philadephia, with more for
example that "In the Salisbury
MD-DE MSA in 2017, WSFS for
conventional home purchase
loans based on its outreach
got two applications from
African Americans - and denied
them both. It got two from
Latinos and denied. From
whites it approve seven of ten
applications." And see below.
Given the false commenting
issues in the OneWest - CIT
proceeding, and the importance
of CRA to our communities,
this denial is insulting and
further makes this ANPR
commenting process, ostensibly
closing now on November 19,
illegitimate." Among
them, as reviewed by Inner
City Press: Fulton
Financial, on
which ICP has
previously
comment,
perhaps
understandably
given its
lending record
urges
“De-couple CRA
from Fair
Lending... CRA
and Fair
Lending have
complementary
but different
social and
policy
objectives.
CRA ratings
should not be
downgraded
based on the
results of a
bank's fair
lending
performance
and exam
results.” FFW
disagrees:
racial
discrimination
in lending
means a bank
is NOT meeting
the credit
needs of its
entire
community.
The ABA writes
that “'needs
to improve'
CRA rating and
should clarify
that such a
rating will
not be a de
facto bar to
opening new
branches or
engaging in
other
activities
requiring
regulatory
approval.” FFW
disagrees: a
bank with a
rare NTI (or
Substantial
Non-compliance)
record should
be barred from
merging or
expanding.
This is the
enforcement
mechanism of
CRA.
Th Association
of Military
Banks of
America urges,
“Because the
financial
challenges
military
communities
face are less
dependent on
income
distinctions
than in
geographically-defined
communities,
we recommend
that all
financial
services to
the military
community
should be
presumed to
qualify for
CRA credit,
regardless of
whether the
recipient fits
within a
classic LMI
category.” FFW
disagrees with
this blurring
of the lines.
Loans to five
star generals
are not CRA
loans.
Heartland Tri
State Bank
says “Any bank
with assets
less than One
Billion
Dollars should
not be subject
to CRA
examinations.”
FFW disagrees,
precisely
because such
banks play (or
don't play)
such a role in
the economies
of some
communities.
Meanwhile the
OCC is already
undermining
CRA.
The OCC has denied expedited
process to our FOIA request(s)
for records essential in order
to comment on this proposal.
OCC Deputy Chief Counsel
Charles Steele on November 7
wrote on that “merger between
One West Bank and CIT Bank.
You do not demonstrate how
your request concerns a matter
of current exigency to the
American public or how a delay
in the OCC's response to your
request would compromise a
significant recognized
interest.” Given the false
commenting issues in the
OneWest - CIT proceeding, and
the importance of CRA to our
communities, this denial is
insulting and further makes
this ANPR commenting process,
ostensibly closing on November
19, illegitimate, we contend -
while joining in NCRC's
comments, see below. On
November 6 at 5 pm, before any
midterm elections results came
in, Fair Finance Watch filed
comments at deadline with
Otting's OCC, on Wilmington
Savings Fund Society (WSFS)
Bank's application to acquire
Beneficial Bank in
Philadelphia and closed 30
branches, despite WSFS'
disparate lending record:
"This is a timely first
comment opposing and
requesting an extension of the
OCC's public comment period on
the Application by WSFS Bank
to Acquire Beneficial Bank. In
the the Wilmington MSA in
2017, WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
SOCIETY, FSB (WSFS Bank) had a
denial rate for the home
purchase loan applications of
African Americans that was
5.48 times higher than for
whites - an outrage,
significantly more disparate
that other banks in the
market. For Latinos, WSFS Bank
was and is worse, with a
denial rate for home purchase
loans 7.43 times higher for
Latinos than for whites.
This is not a
lending record and pattern to
impose on Philadelphia. And
consider this: if approved,
WSFS “plans to close 30 WSFS
and Beneficial Bank offices, a
quarter."
See, “WSFS bosses
Mark Turner and Rodger
Levenson plan to close 30 of
the combined companies’ 120
branches and eliminate around
350 of their 2,100 jobs.”
There is more to
say, and there are more
markets. But concerned as we
are about the OCC seeming to
take outrageous disparities
even less seriously than
before, we ar timely
submitting this one, for your
action. This is systematic
redlining; this proposed
acquisition could not
legitimately be approved and
WSFS Bank should be referred
for prosecution for redlining
by the Department of Justice
and the CFPB. But will today's
OCC do it? The branch closings
provides a second ground for
the requested evidentiary
hearing." What will Otting's
OCC do? On October 17, yet
more on Otting's assault on
the CRA became known. He has
taken to devaluing or lumping
together and not putting in
the docket or online the
comments of community groups,
calling them mass comments or
form letters - when he himself
not only solicited mass
comments for the OneWest - CIT
merger from which he
personally profited, but even
got some fraudulent comments.
Inner City
Press / Fair
Finance Watch
submitted
the documents
obtained under
FOIA into the
record
before the OCC. Now,
on a ten day
delay, the OCC
has put into the file
a cursory
memo of its
October 12
meeting with
bankers ranging
from Citigroup
(Lloyd Brown and Devika
Murray
Bacchus), Capital
One (James
Matthews), TIAA and
Regions to Wells Fargo,
Fifth Third, Huntington
and PNC, among
others.
This has the
trappings of
transparency,
but none of
the substance.
Topics of discussion
are
purportedly
listed - but
what was said,
particularly
by the OCC
participants:
Grovetta
Gardineer,
Senior Deputy
Comptroller
for Compliance
and Community
Affairs
Beverly Cole,
Deputy
Comptroller
for
Compliance
Supervision
Donna Murphy,
Deputy
Comptroller
for
Compliance
Risk Policy
Allison
Hester-Haddad,
Counsel, Chief
Counsel’s
Office
Daniel
Sufranski, Law
Clerk, Chief
Counsel’s
Office. Listed
but without
further detail
is, for
example,
"Logistical
issues,
including the
interrelated
nature of the
issues raised
by the ANPR, the
timing of the
rulemaking
process,
participation
by the other
federal
banking
agencies, and
whether
concepts not
discussed in
the ANPR would
remain under a new
rule." So
what was said?
And where is the
OCC's response
to Inner City
Press'
previous FOIA
request? We
will have more
on this.
Inner
City Press has
previously
commented that
"These
documents,
which must be
considered as
part of this
ANPR and any
subsequent
formal
rulemaking,
show that
fraudulent
comments
supporting
Otting's
OneWest were
submitted to
the OCC -
presumptively
attributable
to Otting.
The documents
show that the
OCC sought an
explanation
from Otting's
/ OneWest's
outside
counsel - and
the OCC's and
Justice
Department's
response to
date reflect
that no such
explanation
was ever
provided. The
OCC
nevertheless
approved the
merger and
even gave
weight to the
fraudulent
comments.
But via the
OCC and Regulations.gov
websites, we
are told "This
count refers
to the total
comment /
submissions
received on
this document,
as of 11:59 PM
yesterday.
Note: Agencies
review all
submissions,
however some
agencies may
choose to
redact, or
withhold,
certain
submissions
(or portions
thereof) such
as those
containing
private or
proprietary
information,
inappropriate
language, or
duplicate/near
duplicate
examples of a
mass-mail
campaign. This
can result in
discrepancies
between this
count and
those
displayed when
conducting
searches on
the Public
Submission
document
type." At
least ten
comments, all
under the name
Ceiba, were bundled
as one. Otting
is trying to
have it both
ways, or
worse. Under
him, the OCC has ignored the
rare racial redlining
settlement by Klein Bank,
rubber stamping Old National's
acquisition of the bank over
the timely and detailed
objection and public hearing
request of Fair Finance Watch.
Otting doesn't like public
hearings. In April 2018
his OCC approved
an application by E-Trade
Saving Bank which Fair Finance
Watch had challenged
based on the bank having
no fewer than six states rare
"Needs to Improve" CRA
ratings. FFW noted
rare Needs to Improve ratings
for the entire states of
Arizona, Colorado, Florida,
Georgia, Michigan and Oregon,
and an undeserved
“Satisfactory” for New York.
Otting's OCC, after the
approval, helpfully contacted
E-Trade Bank to tell it that
upon (Otting's) reflection, it
was no longer even subject to
the Community Reinvestment
Act. Another institution was
similarly contacted - the OCC
under Otting is going through
its roster of banks seeing
which ones it can "free" from
CRA even if they hadn't
requested in. In one case,
some in the bank still didn't
want Otting's freedom and move
more business into the bank to
get a second reversal of
Otting's orders. But it shows
where Otting is coming from,
beyond the unexplained
comment-fraud for which he
should be recused. Inner City
Press on October 11 raised the
E-Trade (and another bank)
issue into the record on the
Advanced Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. But, Otting being
Otting, his OCC denied
expedited processing for Inner
City Press' Freedom of
Information Act request bout
his deregulation move, ruling
that "You requested all
records in the OCC's
possession concerning the
applicability of the Community
Reinvestment Act to - or
exemption there from - any
affiliate of E-Trade or Bank
of America California NA for
the time period of October 11,
2016 to October 11, 2018. You
also requested expedited
processing of your request on
the basis that the ANPR on CRA
is open through November 19,
2018. Your request for
expedited processing does not
meet the criteria provided for
in 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(E) and
Treasury disclosure
regulations at 31 C.F.R.
1.5(e)." And that
regulation... requires a
formal certification. So Inner
City Press has appealed: "As
a a person primarily
engaged in disseminating
information, I am appealing
the denial of expedited
processing of my FOIA request,
summarized by the OCC as for
all records in the OCC's
possession concerning the
applicability of the Community
Reinvestment Act to - or
exemption there from - any
affiliate of E-Trade or Bank
of America California NA for
the time period of October 11,
2016 to October 11, 2018.
...The OCC under Joseph
Otting's actions to try to
find banks to exempt from CRA
outrageous and something on
which there is an
urgency to inform the public
concerning actual or alleged
Federal Government activity.
As noted in my request, this
is particularly the case given
the OCC's unilateral moves
regarding the CRA. I declare
under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and
correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief. Executed
on October 16, 2018." Watch
this site. Many more are
resisting Otting, but Federal
Reserve Bank of Cleveland
President Loretta J. Mester on
October 3 said
that "the OCC, a part of
Treasury, has put out an
advance notice of proposed
rule-making (ANPR) seeking
comment on ways to modernize
the CRA regulations. The
Federal Reserve is also
undertaking efforts aimed at
ensuring that the CRA
regulations continue to meet
the goals of the legislation
amid the evolving financial
services environment" - with
these as her footnotes for
that: "Brainard, Lael,
“Community Development in
Baltimore and A Few
Observations on Community
Reinvestment Act
Modernization,” Baltimore,
Maryland, April 17, 2018a
and Brainard, Lael, “Keeping
Community at the Heart of the
Community Reinvestment Act,”
New York, NY, May 18, 2018b.
Both of those Brainard
speeches were before Otting's
proposals. And since? Well,
the Fed after comments from
FFW and NCRC has asked
Synovus, "Synovus Bank
received a “Needs to Improve”
rating in the Tennessee state
assessment area for the
service test. Describe how
Synovus Financial is
addressing, or has addressed,
this rating." That's on its
now protested application to
the Fed to acquire FCB
Financial Holdings, Inc. (“FCB
Financial Holdings”) and
thereby indirectly acquire
Florida Community Bank, N.A.
In the OCC's ANPR docket file
is the President of
First National Bank &
Trust in Elk City, Oklahoma
who writes, "I firmly believe
that this form of oversite was
meant for metropolitan areas
and banks with multiple
branches. There’s got to be a
better way of monitoring and
locating those banks that
aren’t helping the population
it serves. I would be
surprised to find there are
very many banks that fail the
CRA examination." It's called
grade inflation. On September
29 The
Intercept has dug into
it, citing FFW's formal
request that Otting recuse
himself - and so here
now are some of the Freedom of
Information Act documents. On
October 2 in the Senate
Banking Committee, Otting
insisted he is not trying to
weaken the CRA; he called the
ANPR an "Advanced Notice of
Public Rulemaking" instead of
Proposed. He said he met with
1100 individuals - still
undisclosed - and expects five
to ten thousand comments on
the ANPR. (So far there are 33
listed but only 29 visible).
Senator Sherrod Brown began by
asking him indirectly about
the blogs at CFPB of Eric
Blankenstein. We'll have more
on this. And this - as
obtained by Inner City Press
and fellow NCRC
member CRC, here are more
of the documents, for
(this time) free download on Patreon.
On October
1 Inner City Press / Fair
Finance Watch
submitted the documents
obtained under FOIA into the record
before the OCC, stating that
"These documents, which must
be considered as part of this
ANPR and any subsequent formal
rulemaking, show that
fraudulent comments supporting
Otting's OneWest were
submitted to the OCC -
presumptively attributable to
Otting.
The documents show that the
OCC sought an explanation from
Otting's / OneWest's outside
counsel - and the OCC's and
Justice Department's response
to date reflect that no such
explanation was ever provided.
The OCC nevertheless approved
the merger and even gave
weight to the fraudulent
comments. On this record we
again insist that Otting be
recused from this ANPR and any
related rulemaking or
proceedings. We have other
substantive concerns about
this ANPR but view the
question of Mr Otting's
recusal (and of with whom he
has met, on which Inner City
Press has another long-pending
FOIA request) as threshold
matter than must be addressed
as quickly as possible."
The FOIA
document as provided by the
OCC and US Department of
Justice reflect that the OCC
never followed up on its lone
(and wan) question to Otting's
counsel as Sullivan &
Cromwell to explain the
fraudulent comments. Nor did
this counsel respond to
questions from The Intercept's
David Dayen, who reports:
"AFTER A YEARLONG effort to
obtain the information, which
included ongoing litigation,
the OCC made available 15
pages. They contain emails to
and from David Finnegan, an
OCC senior licensing analyst
who was a point of contact for
public comment on the merger.
Four individuals contended in
emails to Finnegan that they
never sent the comment letters
supporting the merger. “This
is to bring to your attention
that I received an email from
the office of OCC regarding a
subject I am completely
unaware of,” wrote one
individual (the OCC redacted
the emailers’ identifying
information). “I DID NOT send
the email below that you
responded to. This is a
fraudulent use of my email
account.” The other three sent
similar complaints.
The letter of support
attributed to these
individuals was identical to
the letter posted at the
OneWest Bank website.
Matthew Lee of Inner City
Press expressed outrage at the
fake comments. “There’s
nothing more offensive of
speech rights than
artificially presenting
someone as saying something
you don’t believe,” Lee said.
“You have the right to be
silent. It’s so beyond the
pale.”
FOIA
Finds: OneWest CIT Ban... by on
Scribd
Finnegan responded to these emailers,
thanking them for letting him know. He
also sent two emails to Stephen Salley,
an attorney with Sullivan &
Cromwell, who was representing OneWest
in the merger. “FYI and review. We would
appreciate any information you can
provide regarding this submission,”
Finnegan wrote to Salley on both
occasions.
Presumably, Finnegan reached out to
OneWest’s lawyer about the fake comments
because they featured the same form
letter that OneWest had written to
encourage public support. But the two
emails are the only record that OCC did
any investigation of the fake comments.
There is no reply from Salley or
Sullivan & Cromwell to the OCC, at
least not in written form. “By reaching
out to the attorneys immediately, it
suggests something serious, and yet
there’s no follow-up that’s apparent
whatsoever,” said Kevin Stein of the
California Reinvestment
Coalition...Olivia Weiss, a spokesperson
for CIT, forwarded a request for comment
to her colleague Gina Proia, who
declined to comment. Salley did not
respond when asked whether he or his law
firm responded to the OCC....In his
public comment for Inner City Press, Lee
asked for Otting to recuse himself from
the new rule-making, highlighting the
fake comment controversy. “Public
participation is key to CRA, on
performance evaluations and crucially on
bank merger and expansion applications,”
Lee wrote. He added that it’s unclear
whether the OCC has improved its
processes to prevent fake comments from
being submitted again in the CRA
rule-making. The public comment period
ends in November.
Otting is scheduled to appear at a
Senate Banking Committee hearing on
October 2, where his CRA push could be a
topic of discussion." We'll have more on
this Why didn't the OCC more seriously
look into this fraud? What has been
improved since? Shouldn't Otting be
recused, as Fair Finance Watch has
already timely requested? One analogy,
also noted by The Intercept, is to the
gaming of the FCC's process on net
neutrality, when even Senator Jeff
Merkley and Pat Toomey's identities were
borrowed, as reported
by the Washington Post's Hamza
Shaban. Unlike Otting to date, at
least the FCC's Ajit Pai responded, if
only to blame David Bray, as reported
by Adam Jacobson in RBR. Otting simple
refuses to answer - for now. From the
Fair Finance Watch / Inner City Press
comment: "Fair Finance Watch (and where
applicable Inner City Press) appreciate
the opportunity to comment on the Office
of the Comptroller of the Currencys
(OCC) Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPR) regarding the
Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). CRA
has leveraged significant amounts of
loans and investments for low- and
moderate-income communities.
We began enforcing the CRA in the South
Bronx then beyond starting in 1994, in
connection with the applications for
mergers or expansions on which banks'
records are considered. Numerous banks
excluded the South Bronx and Upper
Manhattan from their CRA assessment
areas even though, as we proved, they
collected substantial deposits from area
residents. We got six banks to open
branches and make lending commitments,
in the Bronx and beyond.
We concerned that the OCC's proposal
threatens to weaken CRA, see below. As
as relevant here, we commented along
with others on the CIT - OneWest
proceeding, and were concerned both by
OneWest's record under now-Comptroller
Otting and by what emerged as the gaming
of the system with pre-fabricated
comments Otting openly solicited. We may
comment in more detail on this later in
his ANPR proceeding.
For now we wish raise particular concern
about the approach signaled by Questions
21 and 15 and to emphasize that public
participate is key to CRA, on
performance evaluations and crucially on
bank merger and expansion applications.
Inner City Press, which often submits
FOIA requests to the OCC (which is,
frankly, slow), the Federal Reserve,
FDIC and even non-USA regulators many of
whom are faster than the OCC, emphasizes
that comment periods should never close
while information that is not
specifically exempt from disclosure
under FOIA is being withheld. Inner City
Press has pending with the OCC, but not
yet responded to, FOIA requests related
to this proceeding / process, that
should be responded to in full,
including any necessary appeal, during
this proceeding.
If the OCC proceeds to significantly
diminish the importance of assessment
areas on CRA exams, the progress in
increasing lending to low- and
moderate-income neighborhoods will be
halted. NCRC estimates that low- and
moderate-income neighborhoods could lose
up to $105 billion in home and small
business lending nationally over a five
year time period. We join in the
comments of NCRC, of which we are
members... We urge the OCC to go back to
the drawing board and develop reform
proposals with the Federal Reserve Board
and the FDIC.
And, for the reasons above and yet to be
submitted, we contend Comptroller Otting
should be recused from this process.
Thank you for your attention to this."
While Reuters blandly
noted that he is "a former
banker," the bank he headed,
OneWest, was accused of
predatory lending and when its
acquisition by the CIT Group
was challenged
by Fair Finance Watch, CRC and
others Otting arranged for
seemingly counterfeit or
compelled comments supporting
the merger. In this light,
Question 11 of his "Advanced
Notice of Proposal Rulemaking"
or ANPR
is noteworthy: "11. How can
community involvement be
included in an evaluation
process that uses a
metric-based framework?" How,
indeed. Here's what Otting
wrote as a banker, already
long public, in support of his
merger:
"From: Otting,
Joseph M [at] owb.com
Sent: Wednesday, January
07, 2015 5:00 PM
Cc: Haas, Alesia Jeanne;
Tran, Cindy; Kim, Glenn
Subject: Support For
OneWest Bank
Dear Friends,
We were excited to
announce on July 21,
2014, that IMB HoldCo
LLC, the parent company
of OneWest Bank entered
into a merger agreement
with CIT Group Inc. As
part of the applications
for regulatory approval
of the transaction, our
regulators are
interested in the
perspectives of the
public. We are writing
you to seek your support
of the Bank and pending
merger. This merger, if
approved, would create
the largest bank
headquartered in
Southern California with
a full suite of banking
products and services,
which will allow us to
better serve our
customers. We would
retain and grow jobs and
are committed to
continuing and expanding
our efforts to serve the
economic and development
needs of our community.
I would like to ask you
to take a moment to
click on the link below
and submit a letter of
support adding any of
your own words or
thoughts.
Please submit your
letter by clicking here,
or by visiting our
website at www.OneWestBank.com/merger-support (if
the link isn't clickable
or part of the link is
cut off, please copy and
paste the entire URL
into your browser's
address bar and press
Enter)
Thank you for your
support. Best
wishes for a successful
2015 and please call on
me if I can ever be of
assistance.
Joseph M. Otting
President and CEO
OneWest Bank N.A.
888 East Walnut Street
Pasadena, CA 91101"
There
is and will be fight-back,
under NCRC's TreasureCRA
campaign. Watch this site -
including on actual
enforcement of CRA.
***
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-303,
UN, NY 10017 USA
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2019 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|