REDDING BANCORP - 10-K Annual Report

[X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

[ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Common Stock, no par value per share

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes [X] No [ ]

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference to Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. [X]

Indicate by a check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act) Yes [ ] No [X]

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was approximately $45,278,458 as of February 1, 2004 which was calculated based on the last reported sale of the Company’s Common Stock. This calculation does not reflect a determination that certain persons are affiliates of the Registrant for any other purpose.

As of February 20, 2004, there were 2,710,058 total shares of the Registrant’s common stock outstanding.

Items numbered 10 (as to directors), 11 and 12 of Part III incorporate by reference information from the Registrant’s Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the solicitation of proxies for the Registrant’s 2004 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The 2004 Annual Meeting of Shareholders will be held on Tuesday, May 18, 2004.

Redding Bancorp (the “Holding Company”) is a financial holding company (“FHC”) registered under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and was incorporated in California on January 21, 1982, for the purpose of organizing, as a wholly owned subsidiary, Redding Bank of Commerce (the “Bank”). The Holding Company elected to change to a FHC in 2000. As a financial holding company, the Holding Company is subject to the Financial Holding Company Act and to supervision by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“FRB”). The Holding Company’s principal business is to serve as a holding company for Redding Bank of Commerce, RBC Mortgage Services, a California corporation (formerly Redding Service Corporation), and for other banking or banking-related subsidiaries which the Holding Company may establish or acquire (collectively the “Company”). The Holding Company also has an unconsolidated subsidiary, Redding Bancorp Trust. During the first quarter 2003, Redding Bancorp formed a wholly-owned Delaware statutory business trust, Redding Bancorp Trust (the “grantor trust”), which issued $5.0 million of guaranteed preferred beneficial interests in Redding Bancorp’s junior subordinated debentures (the “Trust Notes”). These debentures qualify as Tier 1 capital under Federal Reserve Board guidelines. The proceeds from the issuance of the Trust Notes were transferred from the grantor trust to the Holding Company and from the Holding Company to the Bank as surplus capital. The Trust Notes accrue and pay distributions on a quarterly basis at 3 month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 3.30%. The rate at December 31, 2003 was 4.45%. The rate increase is capped at 2.75% annually and the lifetime cap is 12.5%. The final maturity on the Trust Notes is March 18, 2033, and the debt allows for prepayment after five years on the quarterly payment date.

The Company will provide free of charge upon request, or through links to publicly available filings accessed through its Internet website, the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports, if any, as soon as reasonably practical after such reports have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Internet addresses of the Company are www.reddingbankofcommerce.com, and www.rosevillebankofcommerce.com. Additionally, reports may be obtained through the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at www.sec.gov.

The Bank was incorporated as a California banking corporation on November 25, 1981, and received its certificate of authority to begin banking operations on October 22, 1982. The Bank operates four full service branch facilities. The Bank established its first full service branch at 1177 Placer Street, Redding, California, and opened for business on October 22, 1982. On November 1, 1988, the Bank received a certificate of authority to establish and maintain a loan production office in Citrus Heights, California. On September 1, 1998, the Bank relocated the loan production office to 2400 Professional Drive in Roseville, California.

On March 1, 1994, the Bank received a certificate of authority to open a second full-service branch at 1951 Churn Creek Road in Redding, California. On June 30, 2000, the Bank received a certificate of authority to convert the loan production office in Roseville to a full service banking facility under the name Roseville Bank of Commerce, a division of Redding Banking of Commerce.

On June 15, 2001, the Bank acquired the deposit liabilities of FirstPlus Bank at Citrus Heights, California and has renamed the facility Roseville Bank of Commerce at Sunrise, a division of Redding Bank of Commerce. On February 22, 2002, the Roseville Bank of Commerce at Eureka Road, a division of Redding Bank of Commerce, relocated to its permanent location at 1504 Eureka Road, Suite 100, Roseville, California.

On January 2, 2003, Redding Service Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Holding Company, changed its name to RBC Mortgage Services (the “Mortgage Company”), an affiliate of Redding Bank of Commerce. The principal business of the subsidiary is mortgage brokerage services. The subsidiary has an affiliated business arrangement with the Bank of Walnut Creek (“BWC Mortgage Services”). Under the terms of the agreement, BWC Mortgage Services underwrites or brokers mortgage products and manages the independent contractors, supporting staff and broker relationships with various secondary market lenders. RBC Mortgage Services in turn provides office space, equipment and marketing support for the mortgage brokerage services. RBC Mortgage Services, through this agreement, offers a full array of single-family and multi-family residential real estate mortgages including equity lines. Earnings from the mortgage brokerage services, net of operating costs, are split equally between RBC Mortgage Services and BWC Mortgage Services. Before the formation of the subsidiary, mortgage banking services were performed as a department of the Bank.

The Bank is principally supervised and regulated by the California Department of Financial Institutions and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation . The Company operates in two distinct markets. Redding Bank of Commerce has historically been the leading independent commercial bank in Redding, California, and Shasta County, California though community banks and national banks make the competition more intense. This market has been expanding, but is still relatively small when compared to the greater Sacramento market, the location of Roseville Bank of Commerce, a division of Redding Bank of Commerce. Management believes that the two markets complement each other, with the Redding market providing the stability and the greater Sacramento market providing growth opportunities. At the time of this report the Bank ranked third in Shasta County for market share, 29^th in Sacramento County and 18^th in Placer County.

Through the Bank and mortgage subsidiaries, the Company provides a wide range of financial services and products. The services offered by the Bank include those traditionally offered by commercial banks of similar size and character in California. Products such as checking, interest-bearing checking (“NOW”) and savings accounts, money market deposit accounts, commercial, construction, and term loans, travelers checks, safe deposit boxes, collection services and electronic banking activities. The primary focus of the Bank is to provide services to the business and professional community of its major market area, including Small Business Administration loans, payroll and accounting packages, benefit administration and billing services. The Bank currently does not offer trust services or international banking services. The services offered by the Mortgage Company include single and multi-family residential residence new financing, refinancing and equity lines of credit.

Most of the Bank’s customers are small to medium sized businesses, professionals and other individuals with medium to high net worth, and most of the Bank’s deposits are obtained from such customers. The Bank emphasizes servicing the needs of local businesses and professionals and individuals requiring specialized services. The primary business strategy of the Bank is to focus on its lending activities. The Bank’s principal lines of lending are (i) commercial, (ii) real estate construction and (iii) commercial real estate.

The majority of the loans of the Bank are direct loans made to individuals and small businesses in the major market area of the Bank. The Mortgage Company provides residential real estate new financing, refinancing and equity lines of credit, 100% sold in the secondary market. See “-Risk Factors That May Affect Results-Dependence on Real Estate.” A relatively small portion of the loan portfolio of the Bank consists of loans to individuals for personal, family or household purposes. The Bank accepts as collateral for loans real estate, listed and unlisted securities, savings and time deposits, automobiles, machinery and equipment and other general business assets such as accounts receivable and inventory.

The commercial loan portfolio of the Bank consists of a mix of revolving credit facilities and intermediate term loans. The loans are generally made for working capital, asset acquisition and business expansion purposes and are generally secured by a lien on the borrowers’ assets. The Bank also makes unsecured loans to borrowers who meet the Bank’s underwriting criteria for such loans. The Bank manages its commercial loan portfolio by monitoring its borrowers’ payment performance and their respective financial condition and makes periodic and appropriate adjustments, if necessary, to the risk grade assigned to each loan in the portfolio. The primary sources of repayment of the commercial loans of the Bank are the borrower’s conversion of short-term assets to cash and operating cash flow. The net assets of the borrower or guarantor and/or the liquidation of collateral are usually identified as a secondary source of repayment.

The principal factors affecting the Bank’s risk of loss from commercial lending include each borrower’s ability to manage its business affairs and cash flows, local and general economic conditions and real estate values in the Bank’s service area. The Bank manages risk through its underwriting criteria, which includes strategies to match the borrower’s cash flow to loan repayment terms, and periodic evaluations of the borrower’s operations. The Bank’s evaluations of its borrowers are facilitated by management’s knowledge of local market conditions and periodic reviews by a consultant of the credit administration policies of the Bank.

The real estate construction loan portfolio of the Bank consists of a mix of commercial and residential construction loans, which are principally secured by the underlying project. The real estate construction loans of the Bank are predominately made for projects, which are intended to be owner occupied. The Bank also makes real estate construction loans for speculative projects. The principal sources of repayment of the Bank’s construction loans are sale of the underlying collateral or permanent financing provided by the Bank or another lending source. The principal risks associated with real estate construction lending include project cost overruns that absorb the borrower’s equity in the project and deterioration of real estate values as a result of various factors, including competitive pressures and economic downturns.

See “-Risk Factors That May Affect Results-Lending Risks Associated with Commercial Banking and Construction Activities.” The Bank manages its credit risk associated with real estate construction lending by establishing maximum loan-to-value ratios on projects on an as-completed basis, inspecting project status in advance of controlled disbursements and matching maturities with expected completion dates. Generally, the Bank requires a loan-to-value ratio of no more than 80% on single-family residential construction loans.

The commercial and construction loan portfolio of the Bank consists of loans secured by a variety of commercial and residential real property. The Mortgage Company makes real estate mortgage loans for both owner-occupied properties and investor properties. The Mortgage Company underwrites and sells the residential real estate loan directly in the secondary market, servicing included. The Bank does not provide for warehouse funding.

The specific underwriting standards of the Bank and methods for each of its principal lines of lending include industry-accepted analysis and modeling and certain proprietary techniques. The Bank’s underwriting criteria is designed to comply with applicable regulatory guidelines, including required loan-to-value ratios. The credit administration policies of the Bank contain mandatory lien position and debt service coverage requirements, and the Bank generally requires a guarantee from 20% or more owners of its corporate borrowers.

The following discussion describes the elements of an extensive regulatory framework applicable to financial holding companies and banks and specific information about the Holding Company and its subsidiaries. Federal regulation of banks, bank holding companies and financial holding companies is intended primarily for the protection of depositors and the Bank Insurance Fund rather than for the protection of stockholders and creditors.

The Holding Company is a financial holding company under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and subject to the Financial Holding Company Act (“FHCA”). The Holding Company reports to, registers with, and may be examined by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank (“FRB”). The FRB also has the authority to examine the Holding Company’s subsidiaries. The Bank is subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) and the California Department of Financial Institutions (“DFI”). In addition to banking laws, regulations and regulatory agencies, the Holding Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates are subject to various other laws and regulations and regulation by other regulatory agencies, all of which directly or indirectly affect the operations and management of the Holding Company and its ability to make distributions to stockholders.

A financial holding company, and the companies under its control, are permitted to engage in activities considered to be “financial in nature” as defined by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Federal Reserve Board interpretations (including, without limitation, insurance and securities activities), and therefore may engage in a broader range of activities than permitted for bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. A financial holding company may engage directly or indirectly in activities considered financial in nature, either de novo or by acquisition, provided the financial holding company gives the Federal Reserve Board after-the-fact notice of the new activities.

The FRB generally prohibits a financial holding company from declaring or paying a cash dividend which would impose undue pressure on the capital of subsidiary banks or would be funded only through borrowing or other arrangements that might adversely affect a bank holding company’s financial position.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) prohibits insured depository institutions from paying management fees to any controlling persons or, with certain limited exceptions, making capital distributions, including dividends, if, after such transaction, the institution would be undercapitalized.

In the event a bank desires to pay cash dividends in excess of such amount, the bank may pay a cash dividend with the prior approval of the Commissioner in an amount not exceeding the greatest of the bank’s retained earnings, the bank’s net income for its last fiscal year, or the bank’s net income for its current fiscal year.

Regulators also have authority to prohibit a depository institution from engaging in business practices which are considered to be unsafe or unsound, possibly including payment of dividends or other payments under certain circumstances even if such payments are not expressly prohibited by statute. The FRB’s policy is that a bank holding company should not continue its existing rate of cash dividends on its common stock unless its net income is sufficient to fully fund each dividend and its prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with its capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition.

A financial holding company may acquire banks in states other than its home state without regard to the permissibility of such acquisitions under state law, but subject to any state requirement that the bank has been organized and operating for a minimum period of time, not to exceed five years, and the requirement that the bank holding company, prior to or following the proposed acquisition, controls no more than 10% of the total amount of deposits of insured depository institutions in the United States and no more than 30% of such deposits in that state (or such lesser or greater amount set by state law). Banks may also merge across state lines, therefore creating interstate branches. Furthermore, a bank is now able to open new branches in a state in which it does not already have banking operations if the laws of such state permit such de novo branching.

In the United States of America, banks, thrifts and bank holding companies are subject to minimum regulatory capital requirements. Specifically, U.S. banking organizations must maintain a minimum leverage ratio and two minimum risk-based ratios. The leverage ratio measures regulatory capital as a percentage of total on-balance-sheet assets as reported in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). The risk-based ratios measure regulatory capital as a percentage of both on- and off-balance-sheet credit exposures with some gross differentiation based on perceived credit risk. Under these guidelines, nominal dollar amounts of assets and credit equivalent amounts of off-balance-sheet items are multiplied by one of several risk adjustment percentages, which range from 0% for assets with low credit risk, such as certain U.S. government securities, to 100% for assets with relatively higher credit risk, such as certain loans.

The current U.S. risk-based capital requirements are based on an internationally agreed framework for capital measurement that was developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (“BSC”) in 1988. The international framework (the “1988 Accord”) accomplished several important objectives. It strengthened capital levels at large, internationally active banks and fostered international consistency and coordination. The 1988 Accord also reduced disincentives for banks to hold liquid, low risk assets. By requiring banks to hold capital against off-balance-sheet exposures, the 1988 Accord represented a significant step forward for regulatory capital measurement. The federal banking agencies require a minimum ratio of qualifying total capital to risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items of 8%, and a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to adjusted average risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items of 4%. The Company exceeds the minimum requirements.

Over the past 15 years the world’s financial system has become increasingly more complex and the BSC has been working for several years to develop a new regulatory capital framework that recognizes new developments in financial products, incorporates advances in risk measurement and management practices, and more precisely assesses capital charges in relation to risk (the “New Accord”). The BSC expects the New Accord would have an effective date for implementation of December 31, 2006.

The New Accord encompasses three elements: minimum regulatory capital requirements, supervisory review and market discipline. Under the first element, a banking organization must calculate capital requirements to credit risk, operational risk and market risk. The New Accord does not change the definition of what qualifies as regulatory capital, the minimum risk-based capital ratio, or the methodology for determining capital charges for market risk. The New Accord does provide several methodologies for determining capital requirements for both credit and operational risk.

For credit risk there are two general approaches; the standardized approach (based on the 1988 Accord) and the internal ratings-based (IRB) approach, which uses the institution’s internal estimates of key risk drivers to derive capital requirements.

The New Accord provides three methodologies for determining capital requirements for operational risk: the basic indicator approach, the standardized approach, and the advanced measurement approaches (AMA). Under the first two methodologies, capital requirements for operational risk are fixed percentages of specified, objective risk measures (for example, gross income.) The AMA provides the flexibility for an institution to develop its own individualized approach for measuring operational risk, subject to supervisory oversight.

The second pillar of the New Accord, supervisory review, highlights the need for banking organizations to assess their capital adequacy positions relative to overall risk (rather than to the minimum capital requirement), and the need for supervisors to review and take appropriate actions in response to those assessments. The third pillar of the New Accord imposes public disclosure requirements on institutions that are intended to allow market participants to assess key information about an institutions risk profile and its associated level of capital.

In order for a financial holding company to qualify as “well-run,” both it and the insured depository institutions that it controls must meet the “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” criteria set forth in Regulation Y. To qualify as “well-capitalized,” the bank must, on a consolidated basis: (i) maintain a total risk-based capital ratio of 10% or greater, (ii) maintain a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6% or greater and (iii) not be subject to any order by the FRB to meet a specified capital level. Its lead insured depository institution must be well-capitalized (as that term is defined in the capital adequacy regulations of the applicable bank regulator), 80% of the total risk-weighted assets held by its insured depository institutions must be held by institutions that are well-capitalized, and none of its insured depository institutions may be undercapitalized.

To qualify as “well-managed”: (i) each of its lead depository institutions and its depository institutions holding 80% of the total risk-weighted assets of all its depository institutions at their most recent examination or review must have received a composite rating, rating for management and rating for compliance which were at least satisfactory, (ii) none of the bank holding company’s depository institutions may have received one of the two lowest composite ratings and (iii) neither the bank holding company nor any of its depository institutions during the previous 12 months may have been subject to a formal enforcement order or action.

The Bank is a California chartered bank insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), and as such is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by the California Department of Financial Institutions (“DFI”) and the FDIC. As a non-member of the Federal Reserve System, the primary federal regulator of the Bank is the FRB. The regulations of these agencies affect most aspects of the Bank’s business and prescribe permissible types of loans and investments, the amount of required reserves, requirements for branch offices, the permissible scope of the Bank’s activities and various other requirements. The Bank is also subject to applicable provisions of California law, insofar as such provisions are not in conflict with or preempted by federal banking law. In addition, the Bank is subject to certain regulations of the FRB dealing primarily with check-clearing activities, establishment of banking reserves, Truth-in-Lending (Regulation Z), Truth-in-Savings (Regulation DD), and Equal Credit Opportunity (Regulation B).

Under California law, a state chartered bank is subject to various restrictions on, and requirements regarding, its operations and administration including the maintenance of branch offices and automated teller machines, capital and reserve requirements, deposits and borrowings, shareholder rights and duties, and investment and lending activities. Whenever it appears that the contributed capital of a California bank is impaired, the Commissioner is required to order the bank to correct such impairment. If a bank is unable to correct the impairment, the bank is required to levy and collect an assessment upon its common shares. If such assessment becomes delinquent, the common shares are to be sold by the bank.

Proposals to change laws and regulations governing the banking industry are frequently introduced in Congress, in the state legislatures and before the various bank regulatory agencies. The likelihood and timing of any proposals or legislation and the impact they might have on the Holding Company and its subsidiaries cannot be determined at this time.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) requires each federal banking agency to take prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of insured depository institutions, including but not limited to those that fall below one or more prescribed minimum capital ratios. The law required each federal banking agency to promulgate regulations defining the following five categories in which an insured depository institution will be placed, based on the level of its capital ratios: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized.

Under the prompt corrective action provisions of FDICIA, an insured depository institution generally will be classified in the following categories based on the capital measures indicated below:

An institution that, based upon its capital levels, is classified as “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized” or “undercapitalized” may be treated as though it were in the next lower capital category if the appropriate federal banking agency, after notice and opportunity for hearing, determines that an unsafe or unsound condition or an unsafe or unsound practice warrants such treatment. At each successive lower capital category, an insured depository institution is subject to more restrictions.

The federal banking agencies, however, may not treat an institution as “critically undercapitalized” unless its capital ratio actually warrants such treatment. If an insured depository institution is undercapitalized, it will be closely monitored by the appropriate federal banking agency. Undercapitalized institutions must submit an acceptable capital restoration plan with a guarantee of performance issued by the holding company. Further restrictions and sanctions are required to be imposed on insured depository institutions that are critically undercapitalized. The most important additional measure is that the appropriate federal banking agency is required to either appoint a receiver for the institution within 90 days, or obtain the concurrence of the FDIC in another form of action.

FDICIA also implemented certain specific restrictions on transactions and required federal banking regulators to adopt overall safety and soundness standards for depository institutions related to internal control, loan underwriting, documentation, and asset growth. Among other things, FDICIA limits the interest rates paid on deposits by undercapitalized institutions, restricts the use of brokered deposits, limits the aggregate extensions of credit by a depository institution to an executive officer, director, principal shareholder or related interest, and reduces deposit insurance coverage for deposits offered by undercapitalized institutions for deposits by certain employee benefits accounts.

The federal banking agencies may require an institution to submit to an acceptable compliance plan as well as have the flexibility to pursue other more appropriate or effective courses of action given the specific circumstances and severity of an institution’s noncompliance with one or more standards.

The Bank is subject to certain fair lending requirements and reporting obligations involving home mortgage lending operations and Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) activities. The CRA generally requires the federal banking agencies to evaluate the record of a financial institution in meeting the credit needs of their local communities, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods. In addition to substantive penalties and corrective measures that may be required for a violation of certain fair lending laws, the federal banking agencies may take compliance with such laws and CRA into account when regulating and supervising other activities.

On July 30, 2002, President Bush signed into law the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Act”). This is the most comprehensive reform since the securities acts of the 1930’s. The Act reaffirms the authority of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) with the goal of restoring investor confidence. The SEC has been assigned the task of implementing corporate governance through rulemaking under a short timeframe. The rules to date require:

•		both the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer to certify that disclosure of all material information is included in both quarterly and annual reports;

•		that the Company adopt a code of ethics and that every senior officer of the company abide by the code;

•		requires that the Audit Committee have substantial financial expertise;

•		that MD&A disclosures of off-balance sheet arrangements and aggregate contractual obligations are fully disclosed in the filings;

•		that insider trading is suspended during blackout periods;

•		establishing standards for attorney’s practicing before the SEC; and

•		fixes retention periods of records relevant to audits and reviews.

Final rules have been issued relative to auditor independence, accelerated filing dates for the 10-Q and 10-K reports, Audit Committee responsibilities and attorney conduct rules.

•		Auditor relationship shifts from Company management to the Audit Committee in relation to hiring, firing and compensation practices;

•		Establishing effective communications among auditors, audit committees and management;

•		Ensuring that the Company’s Audit Committee consist of financial experts with such attributes as education and experience as a principal financial officer, principal accounting officer, controller, public accountant or auditor; with experience actively supervising such accounting experts; or other relevant experience qualifying the members as financial experts.

•		Establishing procedures to allow whistle-blower access to the Audit Committee. For information concerning the role, independence and responsibilities of the Audit Committee please refer to the Company’s Audit Committee Charter included in the Company’s annual proxy statement as appendix “A”.

The breadth and volume of the new requirements affect all significant participants in the financial reporting process and the Board of Directors and senior management acknowledge that continued improvement and changes will come as experience is gained with the new rules and reporting requirements, while all efforts are geared towards full compliance to the intent of the Act.

In August 2003, the SEC issued proposed disclosure guidance related to director nominations and shareholder communications. The rules are an important first step in improving the proxy process as it relates to the nomination and election of directors. The SEC believes that better information about the way board nominees are identified, evaluated and selected is critical for shareholder understanding of the proxy process regarding nomination and election of directors providing transparency of the operations of the Board of Directors. For information concerning director nominations and stockholder communications please refer to the Company’s Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Charter included in the Company’s annual proxy statement as appendix “B”.

The commercial banking business in which the Company engages in is highly competitive. Generally, the lines of activity and markets served involve competition with other banks, thrifts, credit unions and other nonbank financial institutions, such as investment banking firms, investment advisory firms, brokerage firms, investment companies and insurance entities which offer financial services, located both domestically and through alternative deliver channels such as the Internet. The methods of competition center around various factors, such as customer services, interest rates on loans and deposits, lending limits and customer convenience.

The mortgage brokerage business in which the Company engages in is highly competitive. The mortgage brokerage business competes with other banks, thrifts, government agencies, mortgage brokers and other nonbank organizations offering mortgage banking services.

Among the competitive advantages, major banks have an ability to finance wide ranging advertising campaigns and to allocate their securities into securities of higher yield and demand. Such institutions offer certain services such as trust services and international banking services that are not offered directly by the Bank (but are offered indirectly through correspondent relationships). Because of their greater total capitalization, major banks have substantially higher legal lending limits than the Bank.

In order to compete with major banks and other competitors in its primary service areas, the Company relies upon the experience of its executive and senior officers in serving business clients, and upon its specialized services, local promotional activities and the personal contacts made by its officers, directors and employees. For customers whose loan demand exceeds the Company’s legal lending limit, the Company may arrange for such loans on a participation basis with correspondent banks. Competitive pressures in the banking industry significantly increase changes in the interest rate environment, reducing net interest margins, and less than favorable economic conditions can result in a deterioration of credit quality and an increase in the provisions for loan losses.

As of February 1, 2004, the Company employed 107 full-time equivalent employees. Of these employees, 24 were employed in the Roseville market and 83 were in the Redding market. None of the employees within the Company are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. Management considers its employee relations to be excellent.

This report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). These statements are based on management’s beliefs and assumptions, and on information available to management as of the date of this document. Forward-looking statements include the information concerning possible or assumed future results of operations of the Company set forth under the heading “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” Forward-looking statements also include statements in which words such as “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “estimate,” “consider” or similar expressions are used. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including the risks discussed under the heading “Risk Factors That May Affect Results” and elsewhere in this report. The Company’s actual future results and shareholder values may differ materially from those anticipated and expressed in these forward-looking statements. Many of the factors that will determine these results and values, including those discussed under the heading “Risk Factors That May Affect Results,” are beyond the Company’s ability to control or predict. Investors are cautioned not to put undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. In addition, the Company does not have any intention or and assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements after the date of the filing of this report, even if new information, future events or other circumstances have made such statements incorrect or misleading. Except as specifically noted herein all referenced to the “Company” refer to Redding Bancorp, a California corporation, and its consolidated subsidiaries.

As a financial holding company, our earnings are significantly affected by general business and economic conditions. These conditions include short-term and long-term interest rates, inflation, monetary supply, fluctuations in both debt and equity capital markets, and the strength of the United States economy and local economies in which we operate. For example, an economic downturn, increase in unemployment, or other events that negatively impact household and/or corporate incomes could decrease the demand for the Company’s loan and non-loan products and services and increase the number of customers who fail to pay interest or principal on their loans. Geopolitical conditions can also affect our earnings. Acts or threats of terrorism, actions taken by the United States or other governments in response to acts or threats of terrorism and our military conflicts including the aftermath of the war with Iraq could impact business conditions in the United States.

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States. Its policies determine in large part our cost of funds for lending and investing and the return we earn on those loans and investments, both of which impact our net interest margin, and can materially affect the value of financial instruments we hold. Its policies can also affect our borrowers, potentially increasing the risk of failure to repay their loans. Changes in Federal Reserve Board policies are beyond our control and hard to predict or anticipate.

We operate in a highly competitive industry that could become even more competitive because of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. Banks, securities firms and insurance companies can now merge creating a financial holding company that can offer virtually any type of financial service, including banking, securities underwriting, insurance (agency and underwriting) and merchant banking. Technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for non-banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as automatic transfer and automatic payment systems. Many of our competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and some have lower cost structures.

The holding company, subsidiary bank and nonbank subsidiary are heavily regulated at the federal and state levels. This regulation is to intended protect depositors, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, not investors. Congress and state legislatures and federal and state regulatory agencies continually review banking laws, regulations and policies for possible changes. Changes to statutes, regulations or regulatory policies including changes in interpretation and implementation could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways including limiting the types of financial services and products we may offer. Our failure to comply with the laws, regulations or policies could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies and damage our reputation.

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to adapt our products and services to evolving industry standards. There is increasing pressure on financial services companies to provide products and services at lower prices. This can reduce our net interest margin and revenues from fee-based products and services. In addition, the widespread adoption of new technologies, including internet-based services, could require us to make substantial expenditures to modify or adapt our existing products and services. Our success depends, in large part, on our ability to attract and retain key people. Competition for the best people can be intense.

The business strategy of the Company is to focus on commercial, single family and multi-family real estate loans, construction loans and commercial business loans. Loans secured by commercial real estate are generally larger and involve a greater degree of credit and transaction risk than residential mortgage (one-to-four family) loans. Because payments on loans secured by commercial and multi-family real estate properties are often dependent on successful operation or management of the underlying properties, repayment of such loans may be subject to a greater extent to the then prevailing conditions in the real estate market or the economy. Moreover, real estate construction financing is generally considered to involve a higher degree of credit risk than long-term financing on improved, owner-occupied real estate. Risk of loss on a construction loan is dependent largely upon the accuracy of the initial estimate of the property’s value at completion of construction or development compared to the estimated cost (including interest) of construction. If the estimate of value proves to be inaccurate, the Company may be confronted with a project which, when completed, has a value which is insufficient to assure full repayment of the construction loan. Although the Company manages lending risks through its underwriting and credit administration policies, no assurance can be given that such risks would not materialize, in which event the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and business prospects could be materially adversely affected.

At December 31, 2003, approximately 64% of the loans of the Company were secured by real estate. The value of the Company’s real estate collateral has been, and could in the future be adversely affected by any economic recession and any resulting adverse impact on the real estate market in California. See “-Economic Conditions and Geographic Concentration ”- page 13.

The Company’s primary lending focus has historically been commercial real estate, construction and, to a lesser extent, commercial lending. At December 31, 2003, commercial real estate and construction loans comprised approximately 37% and 24%, respectively, of the total loans in the portfolio of the Company. At December 31, 2003, all of the Company’s real estate mortgage and real estate construction loans, commercial real estate loans, were secured fully or in part by deeds of trust on underlying real estate. The Company’s dependence on real estate increases the risk of loss in the loan portfolio of the Company and its holdings of other real estate owned if economic conditions in California deteriorate in the future. Deterioration of the real estate market in California could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. See “-Economic Conditions and Geographic Concentration ” - page 13.

Our operations are located entirely in California, which in recent years has experienced economic disruptions that are unique to the state. The fiscal and political uncertainty surrounding the state government’s financial condition, for example have a material adverse effect on our customer’s businesses or on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The income of the Company is highly dependent on “interest rate differentials” and the resulting net interest margins (i.e., the difference between the interest rates earned on the Bank’s interest-earning assets such as loans and securities, and the interest rates paid on the Bank’s interest-bearing liabilities such as deposits and borrowings). These rates are highly sensitive to many factors, which are beyond the Company’s control, including general economic conditions, inflation, recession and the policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies, in particular, the FRB. Because of the Company’s practice of using variable rate pricing and noninterest bearing demand deposit accounts the Company is asset sensitive. As a result, the Company is generally adversely affected by declining interest rates. In addition, changes in monetary policy, including changes in interest rates, influence the origination of loans, the purchase of investments and the generation of deposits and affect the rates received on loans and securities and paid on deposits, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk.”

At December 31, 2003, time certificates of deposit in excess of $100,000 represented approximately 24% of the dollar value of the total deposits of the Company. As such, these deposits are considered volatile and could be subject to withdrawal. Withdrawal of a material amount of such deposits could adversely affect the liquidity of the Company, profitability, business prospects, results of operations and cash flows. The Company monitors activity of volatile liability deposits on a quarterly basis. Approximately $30.0 million of the $79.9 million in time certificates of deposit over $100,000 act as core deposits with over five years history of rollover with the Company.

Because the Company conducts no other significant activity than the management of its investment in the Bank and Mortgage Company, the Company is dependent on these subsidiaries for income. The ability of the Bank and Mortgage Company to pay cash dividends in the future depends on the profitability, growth and capital needs of the Bank and Mortgage Company. In addition, the California Financial Code restricts the ability of the Bank to pay dividends. No assurance can be given that the Company or the Bank will pay any dividends in the future or, if paid, such dividends will not be discontinued.

The Company and the Bank are subject to extensive state and federal regulation, supervision and legislation, which govern almost all aspects of the operations of the Company and the Bank. The business of the Company is particularly susceptible to being affected by the enactment of federal and state legislation which may have the effect of increasing or decreasing the cost of doing business, modifying permissible activities or enhancing the competitive position of other financial institutions. Such laws are subject to change from time to time and are primarily intended for the protection of consumers, depositors and the deposit insurance funds and not for the protection of shareholders of the Company. The Company cannot predict what effect any presently contemplated or future changes in the laws or regulations or their interpretations would have on the business and prospects of the Company, but it could be material and adverse. See “-Supervision and Regulation.”

The Company’s operations are located and concentrated in California, particularly the counties of El Dorado, Placer, Shasta and Sacramento, and are likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. At December 31, 2003, approximately 64% of the Bank’s loan portfolio consisted of real estate related loans, all of which were related to collateral located in California. A change in California economic and business conditions may adversely affect the performance of these loans. Deterioration in economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on the quality of the loan portfolio of the Bank and the demand for its products and services. In addition, during periods of economic slowdown or recession, the Bank may experience a decline in collateral values and an increase in delinquencies and defaults. A decline in collateral values and an increase in delinquencies and defaults increase the possibility and severity of losses. California real estate is also subject to certain natural disasters, such as earthquakes, floods and mudslides, which are typically not covered by the standard hazard insurance policies maintained by borrowers. Uninsured disasters may make it difficult or impossible for borrowers to repay loans made by the Company.

As of February 1, 2004, the Company employed in the aggregate 107 employees. The Company considers employee relations to be excellent. A collective bargaining group represents none of the employees of the Company or its subsidiaries. Failure of the Company to attract and retain qualified personnel could have an adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. The Company does maintain life insurance with respect to two of its officers with regard to a salary continuation plan.

The Company’s allowance for loan losses was approximately $3.7 million, or 1.3% of total loans at December 31, 2003. Material future additions to the allowance for loan losses might be necessary if material adverse changes in economic conditions occur and the performance of the loan portfolio of the Company deteriorates. In addition, future additions to the Company’s allowance for loan losses on other real estate owned may also be required in order to reflect changes in the markets for real estate in which the Company’s other real estate owned is located and other factors which may result in adjustments which are necessary to ensure that the Company’s foreclosed assets are carried at the lower of cost or fair value, less estimated costs to dispose of the properties. Moreover, the FDIC and the DFI, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review the Company’s allowance for loan losses and the carrying value of its assets. The Bank was most recently examined by the FDIC in this regard during the first quarter of 2003. Increases in the provisions for loan losses and foreclosed assets could adversely affect the Bank’s financial condition and results of operations. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Asset Quality” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Allowance for Loan Losses (ALL).”

Federal law prohibits a person or group of persons “acting in concert” from acquiring “control” of a bank holding company unless the FRB has been given 60 days prior written notice of such proposed acquisition and within that time period the FRB has not issued a notice disapproving the proposed acquisition or extending for up to another 30 days, the period during which such a disapproval may be issued. An acquisition may be made before the expiration of the disapproval period if the FRB issues written notice of its intent not to disapprove the action. Under a rebuttal presumption established by the FRB, the acquisition of more than 10% of a class of voting stock of a bank with a class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act (such as the common stock), would, under the circumstances set forth in the presumption, constitute the acquisition of control. In addition, any “company” would be required to obtain the approval of the FRB under the BHCA, before acquiring 25% (5% in the case of an acquiror that is, or is deemed to be, a bank holding company) or more of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock, or such lesser number of shares as constitute control. See “-Supervision and Regulation-Regulation and Supervision of Bank Holding Companies.”

Under the California Financial Code, no person shall, directly or indirectly, acquire control of a California licensed bank or a bank holding company unless the Commissioner has approved such acquisition of control. A person would be deemed to have acquired control of the Company and the Bank under this state law if such person, directly or indirectly, has the power (i) to vote 25% or more of the voting power of the Company or (ii) to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of the Company. For purposes of this law, a person who directly or indirectly owns or controls 10% or more of the common stock would be presumed to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of the Company and thereby control the Company.

As of December 31, 2003, the Company had 2,710,058 shares of Common Stock outstanding, of which 1,748,203 shares are eligible for sale in the public market without restriction and 961,855 shares are eligible for sale in the public market pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). Future sales of substantial amounts of the Company’s common stock, or the perception that such sales could occur, could have a material adverse effect on the market price of the common stock. In addition, options to acquire approximately 344,932 shares of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock at exercise prices ranging from $8.25 to $20.25 have been issued to directors and certain employees of the Company under the Company’s 1998 Stock Option Plan. No prediction can be made as to the effect, if any, that future sales of shares, or the availability of shares for future sale, will have on the market price of the Company’s common stock.

Advances and changes in technology can significantly affect the business and operations of the Company. The Company faces many challenges including the increased demand for providing computer access to bank accounts and the systems to perform banking transactions electronically. The Company’s ability to compete depends on its ability to continue to adapt its technology on a timely and cost-effective basis to meet these requirements. In addition, the Company’s business and operations are susceptible to negative impacts from computer system failures, communication and energy disruption and unethical individuals with the technological ability to cause disruptions or failures of the Company’s data processing systems.

The Company, in its ordinary course of business, acquires real property securing loans that are in default, and there is a risk that hazardous substance or waste, contaminants or pollutants could exist on such properties. The Company may be required to remove or remediate such substances from the affected properties at its expense, and the cost of such removal or remediation may substantially exceed the value of the affected properties or the loans secured by such properties. Furthermore, the Company may not have adequate remedies against the prior owners or other responsible parties to recover its costs. Finally, the Company may find it difficult or impossible to sell the affected properties either before or following any such removal. In addition, the Company may be considered liable for environmental liabilities concerning its borrowers’ properties, if, among other things, it participates in the management of its borrowers’ operations. The occurrence of such an event could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The Company has issued options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock at prices equal to 85% to 100% of the fair market value of the Company’s Common Stock on the date of grant. As of December 31, 2003, the Company had outstanding options to purchase an aggregate of 344,932 shares of Common Stock at exercise prices ranging from $8.25 to $20.25 per share, or a weighted average exercise price per share of $10.50. To the extent such options are exercised, stockholders of the Company will experience dilution.

The Company’s principal offices and the Bank’s main office are housed in a two-story building with approximately 21,000 square feet of space located at 1951 Churn Creek Road, Redding, California, 96002. The Bank owns the building and the 1.25 acres of land on which the building is situated. The Bank also owns the land and building located at 1177 Placer Street, Redding, California, 96001, in which the Bank uses approximately 11,650 square feet of space for its banking operations.

The Company’s Roseville Bank of Commerce at Eureka office is located on the first floor of a three-story building with approximately 8,550 square feet of space located at 1504 Eureka Road, Roseville, California. The Company leases the space pursuant to a triple net lease expiring in August 1, 2011. The Company’s Roseville Bank of Commerce at Sunrise office is a free standing building with approximately 4,982 square feet of space located at 6950 Sunrise Boulevard, Citrus Heights. The Company subleases the space from Wells Fargo Bank expiring on March 5, 2009.

The Company is subject to various pending and threatened legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company maintains reserves for losses from legal actions that are both probable and estimable. In the opinion of management the disposition of claims currently pending will not have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

No matters were submitted during the quarter ended December 31, 2003 to a vote of the Company’s security holders.

Item 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

Trades in the Company’s common stock are made through Hoefer & Arnett located at 555 Market Street, 18th Floor, San Francisco, California 94105. The Company’s common stock is traded on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol, “RDDB”. The following table, which summarizes trading activity during the Company’s last two fiscal years, is based on information obtained from the OTC Bulletin Board (www.otcbb.com). The quotations reflect the price that would be received by the seller without retail mark-up, mark-down or commissions and may not have represented actual transactions.

We believe there were approximately 500 stockholders of the Company’s common stock as of January 30, 2004, including those held in street name, and the market price on that date was $25.90 per share. As of January 30, 2004 there were 303 registered stockholders. On October 22, 2003 and 2002, a cash dividend of $0.65 per share was paid to stockholders of record as of October 1, 2003 and 2002 respectively. The Company currently expects to pay cash dividends at this rate in the future, but the Company’s ability to pay dividends is subject to certain regulatory requirements. The Federal Reserve Board (“FRB”) generally prohibits a financial holding company from declaring or paying a cash dividend which would impose undue pressure on the capital of subsidiary banks or would be funded only through borrowing or other arrangements that might adversely affect a financial services holding company’s financial position. The FRB’s policy is that a financial holding company should not continue its existing rate of cash dividends on its common stock unless its net income is sufficient to fully fund each dividend and its prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with its capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. The power of the board of directors of an insured depository institution to declare a cash dividend or other distribution with respect to capital is subject to statutory and regulatory restrictions which limit the amount available for such distribution depending upon the earnings, financial condition and cash needs of the institution, as well as general business conditions.

In addition to the restrictions imposed under federal law, banks chartered under California law generally may only pay cash dividends to the extent such payments do not exceed the lesser of retained earnings of the bank or the bank’s net income for its last three fiscal years (less any distributions to stockholders during such period). In the event a bank desires to pay cash dividends in excess of such amount, the bank may pay a cash dividend with the prior approval of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions in an amount not exceeding the greatest of the bank’s retained earnings, the bank’s net income for its last fiscal year, or the bank’s net income for its current fiscal year.

One of the provisions of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 signed by President George W. Bush, included changes in how dividends are taxed. Investors will now pay lower tax rates on dividends received from domestic corporations and qualified foreign corporations. In the past, dividend income was another source of ordinary income, taxed at the investors’ normal tax rate. Beginning in 2003, the maximum tax rate on qualifying dividends has dropped to either 5%, 10% or 15% depending on the investors’ tax bracket. The lower tax rate is scheduled to expire in 2008.

The following chart sets forth information for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, regarding equity based compensation plans of the Company.

During 2003, the Company did not conduct any unregistered offerings or sales of its securities, nor did it repurchase any of its outstanding securities.

The selected consolidated financial data set forth below for the five years ended December 31, 2003, have been derived from the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements and should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, included elsewhere in this report.

Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL CONDITION

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company and related notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this report. This report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). These statements are based on management’s beliefs and assumptions, and on information available to management as of the date of this document. Forward-looking statements include the information concerning possible or assumed future results of operations of the Company set forth under the heading “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” Forward-looking statements also include statements in which words such as “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “estimate,” “consider” or similar expressions are used. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including the risks discussed under the heading “Risk Factors That May Affect Results” and elsewhere in this report. The Company’s actual future results and stockholder values may differ materially from those anticipated and expressed in these forward-looking statements. Many of the factors that will determine these results and values, including those discussed under the heading “Risk Factors That May Affect Results,” are beyond the Company’s ability to control or predict. Investors are cautioned not to put undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. In addition, the Company does not have any intention or and assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements after the date of the filing of this report, even if new information, future events or other circumstances have made such statements incorrect or misleading. Except as specifically noted herein all referenced to the “Company” refer to Redding Bancorp, a California corporation, and its consolidated subsidiaries.

Our Company was established to make a profitable return while serving the financial needs of the business and professional communities of our markets. We are in the financial services business, and no line of financial services is beyond our charter as long as it serves the needs of businesses and professionals in our communities. The mission of our Company is to provide its stockholders with a safe, profitable return on their investment, over the long term. Management will attempt to minimize risk to our stockholders by making prudent business decisions, will maintain adequate levels of capital and reserves, and will maintain effective communications with stockholders.

Our Company’s most valuable asset is its customers. We will consider their needs first when we design our products. High-quality customer service is an important mission of our Company, and how well we accomplish this mission will have a direct influence on our profitability.

Our vision is to embrace changes in the industry and develop profitable business strategies that allow us to maintain our customer relationships and build new ones. Our competitors are no longer just banks. We must compete with financial powerhouses that want our core business. The flexibility provided by the Financial Holding Company Act will become increasingly important. We have developed strategic plans that evaluate additional financial services and products that can be delivered to our customers efficiently and profitably. Producing quality returns is, as always, a top priority.

The Company’s long term success rests on the shoulders of the leadership team to effectively work to enhance the performance of the Company. As a financial services company, we are in the business of taking risk. Whether we are successful depends largely upon whether we take the right risks and get paid appropriately for the risks we take. Our governance structure enables us to manage all major aspects of the Company’s business effectively through an integrated process that includes financial, strategic, risk and leadership planning.

We define risks to include not only credit, market and liquidity risk - the traditional concerns for financial institutions - but also operational risks, including risks related to systems, processes or external events, as well as legal, regulatory and reputation risks. Our management processes, structures and policies help to ensure compliance with laws and regulations and provide clear lines for decision-making and accountability. Results are important, but equally important is how we achieve those results. Our core values and commitment to high ethical standards is material to sustaining public trust and confidence in our Company.

Through our corporate governance structure, risk and return is evaluated to produce sustainable revenues, reduce risks of earning volatility and increase stockholder value. The financial services industry is exposed to four major risks; liquidity, credit, market and operational. Liquidity risk is the inability to meet liability maturities and withdrawals, fund asset growth and otherwise meet contractual obligations at reasonable market rates. Credit risk is the inability of a customer to meet its repayment obligations. Market risk is the fluctuation in asset and liability values caused by changes in market prices and yields and operational risk is the potential for losses resulting from events involving people, processes, technology, legal issues, external events, regulatory or reputation.

Our corporate governance structure begins with our Board of Directors. The Board of Directors evaluates risk through the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and four Board Committees:

•		Loan Committee reviews credit risks and the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses.

•		Asset/Liability Management Committee (“ALCO”) reviews liquidity and market risks.

•		Audit Committee reviews the scope and coverage of internal and external audit activities.

•		Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee evaluates corporate governance structure, charters, committee performance and acts in best interests of the corporation and its stockholders with regard to the appointment of director nominees.

These committees review reports from management, the Company’s auditors, and other outside sources. On the basis of materials that are available to them and on which they rely, they review the performance of the Company’s management and personnel, and establish policies, but neither the committees nor their individual members (in their capacities as members of the Board of Directors) are responsible for daily operations of the Company. In particular, risk management activities relating to individual loans are undertaken by Company personnel in accordance with the policies established by the Board committees.

To ensure that our risk management goals and objectives are accomplished, oversight of our risk taking and risk management activities are conducted through three senior management committees.

•		The Senior Leadership Committee establishes short and long-term strategies and operating plans. The committee establishes performance measures and reviews performance to plan on a monthly basis.

•		The Credit Round Table Committee establishes corporate credit practices and limits, including industry concentration limits, approval requirements and exceptions.

•		The Technology Steering Committee establishes technological strategies, makes technology investment decisions and manages the implementation process.

We use various controls to manage risk exposure within the Company. Budgeting and planning processes provide for early indication of unplanned results or risk levels. Models are used to estimate market risk and net interest income sensitivity. Segmentation analysis is used to estimate expected and unexpected credit losses. Compliance to regulatory guidelines plays a significant role in risk management as well as corporate culture and the actions of management. Our code of ethics provides the guidelines for all employees to conduct themselves with the highest integrity in the delivery of service to our clients.

Liquidity risk is the inability to meet liability maturities and withdrawals, fund asset growth and otherwise meet contractual obligations at reasonable market rates. Liquidity management involves maintaining ample and diverse funding capacity, liquid assets and other sources of cash to accommodate fluctuations in asset and liability levels due to business shocks or unanticipated events. ALCO is responsible for establishing our liquidity policy and the accounting department is responsible for planning and executing the funding activities and strategies.

Asset liquidity sources consist of the repayments and maturities of loans, selling of loans, short-term money market investments, maturities and sales of securities from the available-for-sale security portfolio.

Increased available-for-sale security balances were responsible for the major use of liquidity, followed by growth in the loan portfolio. The weighted-average life of the available-for-sale security portfolio is 6.3 years.

Liquidity is generated from liabilities through deposit growth and short-term borrowings. We emphasize preserving and maximizing customer deposits and other customer-based funding sources. Deposit marketing strategies are reviewed for consistency with liquidity policy objectives. Internal deposit growth provided approximately $13,092,000 and borrowings provided approximately $17,044,000 of liquidity.

The Company also had available correspondent banking lines of credit through correspondent relationships totaling approximately $10,000,000 and available secured borrowing lines of approximately $16,460,000 with the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco. While these sources are expected to continue to provide significant amounts of liquidity in the future, their mix, as well as the possible use of other sources, will depend on future economic and market conditions. Liquidity is also provided or used through the results of the Company’s operations.

The Company’s liquid assets (cash and due from banks, federal funds sold, and available-for-sale securities) totaled $102.2 million or 25.5% of total assets at December 31, 2003, $66.9 million or 18.2% of total assets at December 31, 2002 and $81.8 million or 25.6% of total assets at December 30, 2001. In 2003, the Holding Company’s primary source of funding was dividends paid by the Bank totaling $1,760,239 and was paid to stockholders. The Holding Company expects to continue to receive dividends from the Bank in 2004. (See note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of the restrictions on the Bank’s ability to pay dividends.)

To accommodate future growth and business needs, the Company develops an annual capital expenditure budget during strategic planning sessions. Capital expenditures for 2003 were approximately $889,000 for replacement of furniture and equipment, technological enhancements and in progress purchases. The Company expects that the earnings of the Company, acquisition of core deposits and wholesale borrowing arrangements are sufficient to support liquidity needs in 2004.

The Company actively uses Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances as a source of wholesale funding to provide liquidity. At December 31, 2003, all of the Company’s FHLB advances were fixed rate, fixed term borrowings without call or put option features. At December 2003, the Company had $30 million in FHLB advances outstanding compared to $18 million at December 31, 2002.

Credit risk arises from the inability of a customer to meet its repayment obligations. Credit risk exists in our outstanding loans, letters of credit and unfunded loan commitments. We manage credit risk based on the risk profile of the borrower, repayment sources and the nature of underlying collateral given current events and conditions.

Commercial credit risk management begins with an assessment of the credit risk profile of the individual borrower based on an analysis of the borrower’s financial position in light of current industry, economic or geopolitical trends. As part of the overall credit risk assessment of a borrower, each commercial credit is assigned a risk grade and is subject to approval based on existing credit approval standards. Risk grading is a factor in determining the allowance for loan losses. Credit decisions are determined by Credit Administration to certain limitations and approvals from the Loan Committee above certain limitations. Credit risk is continuously monitored by Credit Administration for possible adjustment if there has been a change in the borrowers ability to perform under its obligations. Additionally, we manage the size of our credit exposure through loan sales and loan participation agreements.

The primary sources of repayment of the commercial loans of the Company are operating cash flows and the borrowers’ conversion of short-term assets to cash. The net assets of the borrower or guarantor are usually identified as a secondary source of repayment. The principal factors affecting the Bank’s risk of loss from commercial lending include each borrower’s ability to manage its business affairs and cash flows, local and general economic conditions and real estate values in the Company’s service area. The Company manages its commercial loan portfolio by monitoring its borrowers’ payment performance and their respective financial condition and makes periodic adjustments, if necessary, to the risk grade assigned to each loan in the portfolio. The Company’s evaluations of its borrowers’ are facilitated by management’s knowledge of local market conditions and periodic reviews by a consultant of the credit administration policies of the Company.

The principal source of repayment of the real estate construction loans of the Company is the sale of the underlying collateral or the availability of permanent financing from the Company or other lending source. The principal risks associated with real estate construction lending include project cost overruns that absorb the borrower’s equity in the project and deterioration of real estate values as a result of various factors, including competitive pressures and economic downturns.

The Company manages its credit risk associated with real estate construction lending by establishing loan-to-value ratios on projects on an as-completed basis, inspecting project status in advance of disbursements and matching maturities with expected completion dates. Generally, the Company requires a loan-to-value ratio of not more than 80% on single family residential construction loans.

The specific underwriting standards of the Company and methods for each of its principal lines of lending include industry-accepted analysis and modeling and certain proprietary techniques. The underwriting criteria of the Bank are designed to comply with applicable regulatory guidelines, including required loan-to-value ratios. The credit administration policies of the Company contain mandatory lien position and debt service coverage requirements, and the Bank generally requires a guarantee from 20% or more of the owners of the borrowing entity.

Portfolio credit risk is evaluated with the goal that concentrations of credit exposure do not result in unacceptable levels of risk. Concentrations of credit exposure can be measured in various ways including industry, product, geography and customer relationship. We review non-real estate commercial loans by industry and real estate loans by geographic location and property type.

The Company’s practice is to place an asset on nonaccrual status when one of the following events occurs:(i) Any installment of principal or interest is 90 days or more past due (unless in management’s opinion the loan is well-secured and in the process of collection), (ii) management determines the ultimate collection of principal or interest to be unlikely or (iii) the terms of the loan have been renegotiated due to a serious weakening of the borrower’s financial condition. Nonperforming loans may be on nonaccrual, are 90 days past due and still accruing, or have been restructured.

The allowance for loan losses represents management’s best estimate of probable losses in the portfolio. Within the allowance, reserves are allocated to segments of the portfolio based on specific formula components.

We perform periodic and systematic detailed evaluations of our lending portfolio to identify and estimate the inherent risks and assess the overall collectibility. These evaluations include general conditions such as the portfolio composition, size and maturities of various segmented portions of the portfolio such as secured, unsecured, construction, and Small Business Administration (“SBA”). Additional factors include concentrations of borrowers, industries, geographical sectors, loan product, loan classes and collateral types, volume and trends of loan delinquencies and non-accrual; criticized and classified assets and trends in the aggregate in significant credits identified as watch list items.

The Company’s allowance for loan losses is the accumulation of various components that are calculated based upon independent methodologies. All components of the allowance for loan losses represent an estimation performed pursuant to either Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) Statement No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies or SFAS No. 114, Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan. Management’s estimate of each SFAS No. 5 component is based on certain observable data that management believes is the most reflective of the underlying credit losses being estimated. Changes in the amount of each component of the allowance for loan losses are directionally consistent with changes in the observable data, taking into account the interaction of the SFAS No. 5 components over time.

An essential element of the methodology for determining the allowance for loan losses is the Company’s credit risk evaluation process, which includes credit risk grading individual commercial, construction, commercial real estate and most consumer loans. Loans are assigned credit risk grades based on the Company’s assessment of conditions that affect the borrower’s ability to meet its contractual obligations under the loan agreement. That process includes reviewing borrower’s current financial information, historical payment experience, credit documentation, public information, and other information specific to each individual borrower. Loans are reviewed on an annual or rotational basis or as management becomes aware of information affecting the borrower’s ability to fulfill its obligations. Credit risk grades carry a dollar weighted risk percentage.

For individually impaired loans, SFAS No. 114, provides guidance on the acceptable methods to measure impairment. Specifically, SFAS No. 114 states that when a loan is impaired, we measure impairment based on the present value of expected future principal and interest cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, except that as a practical expedient, a creditor may measure impairment based on a loan’s observable market price or the fair value of collateral, if the loan is collateral dependent. When developing the estimate of future cash flows for a loan, we consider all available information reflecting past events and current conditions, including the effect of existing environmental factors. In addition to the ALL, an allowance for unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit is determined using estimates of the probability of funding. This reserve is carried as a liability on the consolidated balance sheet.

We make provisions to the ALL on a regular basis through charges to operations that are reflected in our consolidated statements of income as a provision for loan losses. When a loan is deemed uncollectible, it is charged against the allowance. Any recoveries of previously charged-off loans are credited back to the allowance. There is no precise method of predicting specific losses or amounts that ultimately may be charged-off on particular categories of the loan portfolio.

Various regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review the Company’s ALL. Such agencies may require the Company to provide additions to the allowance based on their judgement of information available to them at the time of their examination. There is uncertainty concerning future economic trends. Accordingly, it is not possible to predict the effect future economic trends may have on the level of the provision for possible loan losses in future periods.

The ALL should not be interpreted as an indication that charge-offs in future periods will occur in the stated amounts or proportions.

The following table summarizes the activity in the ALL reserves for the periods indicated.

The provision for loan losses decreased to $515,000 for 2003 versus $620,000 in 2002. Net charge-offs were $368,884 or 0.13% of total loans during 2003. Actual and future results of the allowance provision and charge-offs may differ materially from trends expressed in the table and are beyond the Company’s ability to predict.

Market risk is the potential loss due to adverse changes in market prices and yields. Market risk is inherent in the Company’s operating positions and activities including customers’ loans, deposit accounts, securities and long-term debt. Loans and deposits generate income and expense, respectively, and the value of cash flows change based on general economic levels, most importantly, the level of interest rates.

The goal for managing the assets and liabilities of the Company is to maximize stockholder value and earnings while maintaining a high quality balance sheet without exposing the Company to undue interest rate risk. The absolute level and volatility of interest rates can have a significant impact on the Company’s profitability. Market risk arises from exposure to changes in interest rates, exchange rates, commodity prices, and other relevant market rate or price risk. The Company does not operate a trading account, does not hold any financial derivatives and does not hold a position with exposure to foreign currency exchange. The Company faces market risk through interest rate volatility.

Net interest income risk is measured based on rate shocks over different time horizons versus a current stable interest rate environment. Assumptions used in these calculations are similar to those used in the planning and budgeting model.. The overall interest rate risk position and strategies are reviewed on an ongoing basis with ALCO.

The securities portfolio is central to our asset liability management strategies. The decision to purchase or sell securities is based upon the current assessment of economic and financial conditions, including the interest rate environment, liquidity and regulatory requirements. The Company classifies its securities as “available-for-sale” or “held-to-maturity” at the time of purchase. Generally, all securities are purchased with the intent and ability to hold the security for long-term investment, and the Company has both the ability and intent to hold “held-to-maturity” investments to maturity. The Company does not engage in trading activities. Securities held-to-maturity are carried at cost adjusted for the accretion of discounts and amortization of premiums. Securities available-for-sale may be sold to implement the Company’s asset liability management strategies and in response to changes in interest rates, prepayment rates and similar factors. Securities available-for-sale are recorded at market value and unrealized gains or losses, net of income taxes, are reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income(loss), in a separate component of stockholders’ equity. Gain or loss on sale of securities is based on the specific identification method. Securities held-to-maturity at December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001 consisted of mortgage-backed securities with an amortized cost of $1.4, $2.4 and $4.1 million, respectively. At December 31, 2003, $661,000 matures in one through five years with a weighted-average yield of 4.04%, the remaining balances having contractual maturity of over ten years and a weighted-average yield of 7.79%.

Operational risk is the potential for loss resulting from events involving people, processes, technology, legal or regulatory issues, external events, and reputation. In keeping with the corporate governance structure, the senior management team is responsible for operational risk controls. Operational risks are managed through specific policies and procedures, controls and monitoring tools. Examples of these include reconciliation processes, transaction monitoring and analysis and system audits. Operational risks fall into two major categories, business specific and company wide. The senior management team works to ensure consistency in policies, processes and assessments. With respect to company wide risks, the senior management team works directly with Directors to develop policies and procedures for information security, business resumption plans, compliance and legal.

The Company’s significant accounting principles are described in Note 2 of the consolidated financial statements and are essential to understanding Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition. Redding Bancorp’s consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). The financial information contained within our statements is, to a significant extent, financial information that is based on measures of the financial effects of transactions and events that have already occurred. Some of the Company’s accounting principles require significant judgement to estimate values of assets or liabilities. In addition, certain accounting principles require significant judgment in applying the complex accounting principles to transactions to determine the most appropriate treatment. The following is a summary of the more judgmental and complex accounting estimates and principles.

The allowance for loan losses is management’s best estimate of the probable losses that may be sustained in our loan portfolio. The allowance is based on two basic principles of accounting. (1) SFAS No.5 which requires that losses be accrued when they are probable of occurring and estimable and (2) SFAS No. 114, which requires that losses be accrued based on the differences between that value of collateral, present value of future cash flows or values that are observable in the secondary market and the loan balance. The Company performs periodic and systematic detailed evaluations of its lending portfolio to identify and estimate the inherent risks and assess the overall collectibility. These evaluations include general conditions such as the portfolio composition, size and maturities of various segmented portions of the portfolio such as secured, unsecured, construction, and Small Business Administration (“SBA”).

Additional factors include concentrations of borrowers, industries, geographical sectors, loan product, loan classes and collateral types; volume and trends of loan delinquencies and non-accrual; criticized and classified assets and trends in the aggregate in significant credits identified as watch list items. There are several components to the determination of the adequacy of the ALL. Each of these components is determined based upon estimates that can and do change when the actual events occur. The Company estimates the SFAS No. 5 portion of the ALL based on the segmentation of its portfolio. For those segments that require an ALL, the Company estimates loan losses on a monthly basis based upon its ongoing loan review process and analysis of loan performance. The Company follows a systematic and consistently applied approach to select the most appropriate loss measurement methods and support its conclusions and rationale with written documentation. One method of estimating loan losses for groups of loans is through the application of loss rates to the groups’ aggregate loan balances. Such rates typically reflect historical loss experience for each group of loans, adjusted for relevant economic factors over a defined period of time. The Company evaluates and modifies its loss estimation model as needed to ensure that the resulting loss estimate is consistent with GAAP.

For individually impaired loans, SFAS No. 114 provides guidance on the acceptable methods to measure impairment. Specifically, SFAS No. 114 states that when a loan is impaired, the Company should measure impairment based on the present value of expected future principal and interest cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, except that as a practical expedient, a creditor may measure impairment based on a loan’s observable market price or the fair value of collateral, if the loan is collateral dependent. When developing the estimate of future cash flows for a loan, the Company considers all available information reflecting past events and current conditions, including the effect of existing environmental factors.

The Company uses the intrinsic value based method for measuring compensation cost related to stock options. Under the intrinsic value based method, compensation cost is the excess, if any, of the quoted market price of the stock at grant date over the amount an employee must pay to acquire the stock. This cost is amortized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of the options granted. The Company applies Accounting Principles Board Opinion (“APB”) No. 25 Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees and related interpretations in accounting for stock options. The fair value of options granted is determined on the date of the grant using a binomial option-pricing model with the following assumptions: a current volatility rate of 22.75% , a risk-fee interest rate of 3.27% (based upon the five year treasury coupon rate at December 31, 2003), expected dividends of $0.65 per share per year, an annual dividend rate of 3.55%, an assumed forfeiture rate of zero and an expected life of seven years.

The Company’s primary source of revenue is interest income, which is the difference between the interest income it receives on interest-earning assets and the interest expense it pays on interest-bearing liabilities, and (ii) fee income, which includes fees earned on deposit services, income from SBA lending, electronic-based cash management services, mortgage brokerage fee income and merchant credit card processing services. Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements offers an explanation of the process for determining when the accrual of interest income is discontinued on an impaired loan.

Other estimates that the Company uses in its accounting include the expected useful lives of depreciable assets, such as buildings, building improvements, equipment, and furniture. The useful lives of various technological related hardware and software could be subject to change due to advances in technology and the general adoption of new standards for technology or interfaces among computer or telecommunication systems.

The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Under the asset and liability method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using currently enacted tax rates applied to such taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. If future income should prove non-existent or less than the amount of deferred tax assets within the tax years to which they may be applied, the asset may not be realized and our net income will be reduced.

The following discussion and analysis provides a comparison of the results of operations for 2003 and 2002. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes.

The above table represents key financial performance ratios that the Senior Management Team of the Company monitor on a monthly basis in comparison with Uniform Bank Performance Report peer data. Uniform Bank Performance Reports are available on all Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insured financial institutions and are used to measure quality performance to peer groupings and may be obtained online at www.fdic.gov. Executive Management monitors the high-performing sector of the peer group and uses this data to examine strategies of other high-performing financial institutions and to establish the financial performance goals of the Company on an annual basis. These goals are then communicated through budgets, strategies, planning and projections to the Senior Leadership Team for implementation. Results are monitored both to plan and to peer at the Board of Directors level on a monthly basis.

The Company derives its income from two principal sources: (i) net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income it receives on interest-earning assets and the interest expense it pays on interest-bearing liabilities, and (ii) fee income, which includes fees earned on deposit services, income from SBA lending, electronic-based cash management services, mortgage brokerage fee income and merchant credit card processing services. The income of the Company depends to a great extent on net interest income. These interest rate factors are highly sensitive to many factors, which are beyond the Company’s control, including general economic conditions, inflation, recession, and the policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies, in particular, the Federal Reserve Board. Because of the Company’s predisposition to variable rate pricing and non-interest bearing demand deposit accounts, the Company is considered asset sensitive. Consequently, the Company is adversely affected by declining interest rates.

The Company reported net income of $4.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, representing an increase of approximately $486,000 or 13.1%, over net income of $3.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. The primary factors contributing to the increase in net income includes an increase of $2.2 million or 17.4% improvement in the net interest margin, a gain of 55.3% or $89,000 in mortgage service fee income and a gain of 20.4% or $59,000 in service charges over the prior period results.

Increases in the net interest margin are primarily attributed to increases in the volume of earning assets coupled with reductions in the cost of funds. Increases in mortgage service fee income are a result of increased volumes and increases in service charges are related to the core deposit growth of the Company.

The Company’s provision for loan losses decreased to $515,000 in 2003 from $620,000 in 2002. An increased volume of adversely classified loans, including impaired loans, attributed to the current level of provisions while growth in the portfolio was the principal factor for prior period provisions.

Return on average assets (ROA) was 1.10% and return on average common equity (ROE) was 15.20% in 2003 compared with 1.09% and 13.92% respectively in 2002, directly related to the increase in net income. Diluted earnings per share for 2003 and 2002 were $1.51 and $1.29, respectively, an increase of 17.1% in 2003 over 2002. The Company’s average total assets increased to $381.6 million in 2003 or 12.5% from $339.2 million in 2002. As a result of the continuing expansion of the Company’s Roseville Bank of Commerce, deposits grew by $13.1 million or 4.2% primarily in the business demand sector, further enhancing the cost of funds. Liquidity provided by deposit growth was invested in available-for-sale securities while the loan portfolio decreased $2.0 million to $282.0 million over $284.0 million at December 2002.

Average volume processed through the loan portfolio grew by $31.4 million or 12.4% over the prior year. Yields on portfolio loans dropped 43 basis points over the prior year due to the lingering effects of the dramatic rate reductions in 2002 and the timing of repricing opportunities, while federal funds sold dropped 54 basis points over the prior year. Interest-bearing liabilities recognized a drop of 70 basis points, resulting in a net interest margin (spread) of 4.22% compared with 4.06% in 2002 and 4.24% in 2001.

The Company reported net income of $3.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, representing a decrease of approximately $577,000 or 13.5%, over net income of $4.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2001. Primary factors contributing to the decrease in net income include a reduction in the merchant credit card processing service income pursuant to new contract pricing, increases in salaries and benefits and occupancy expenses related to the growth of the Company and new facilities in the Roseville market, the lingering effects of loan portfolio repricing and the drop in investment security yields . The Company’s provision for loan losses increased to $620,000 in 2002 from $255,000 in 2001 resulting primarily from the growth in the loan portfolio.

Return on average assets (ROA) was 1.09% and return on average common equity (ROE) was 13.92% in 2002 compared with 1.49% and 15.43% respectively in 2001. Diluted earnings per share for 2002 and 2001 were $1.29 and $1.44, respectively, a decrease of 10.4% in 2002 over 2001. The Company’s average total assets increased to $339.2 million in 2002 or 18.4% from $286.6 million in 2001. As a result of the continuing expansion of the Company’s Roseville Bank of Commerce at Eureka additional loan demand in the Redding market area, net loans, at December 31, 2002 increased to $280.1 million over $216.7 million in 2001, an increase of $63.4 million or 29.3%.

Yields on portfolio loans dropped 189 basis points over the prior year due to the lingering effects of the dramatic rate reductions in 2001 and the timing of repricing opportunities, while federal funds sold dropped 198 basis points over the prior year. Interest-bearing liabilities recognized a drop of 175 basis points, resulting in a net interest margin (spread) of 4.06% compared with 4.24% in 2001 and 5.16% in 2000.

The primary source of income for the Company is derived from net interest income. Net interest income represents the excess of interest and fees earned on assets (loans, securities and federal funds sold) over the interest paid on deposits and borrowed funds. Net interest margin is net interest income expressed as a percentage of average earning assets.

Net interest income increased to $14.7 million in 2003 versus $12.5 million in 2002 and $11.2 million in 2001, representing a 17.4% increase in 2003 over 2002, and an 11.9% increase in 2002 over 2001. The average balance of total earning assets increased to $348.4 million or 13.0% over 2002.

Average loan balances outstanding increased $31.4 million or 12.4% in 2003 compared with 2002, while average balances of securities and federal funds sold increased $8.4 million or 15.8% in 2003. The average yields on loans decreased by 43 basis points and securities income decreased by 63 basis points. The resulting yield on interest earning assets decreased to 5.53% in 2003 from 6.02% 2002.

Total interest expense decreased to $4.6 million in 2003, from $6.0 million in 2002 and $9.0 million in 2001, representing a 23.3% decrease for 2003 over 2002, and a 33.3% increase in 2002 over 2001. Average balances of interest-bearing liabilities increased to $282.0 million over $259.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, or 8.9%. Yields on deposits decreased 70 basis points, to 1.63% from 2.33% in 2002. The reduction in funding costs reflects the Company’s strategy to grow core deposits and use Federal Home Loan borrowings to support growth while holding higher cost certificate of deposit accounts to a minimum. Demand checking accounts increased 24.5%, Interest-bearing demand instruments increased 17.8%, Savings deposits increased 15.3% while certificate of deposit accounts increased a modest 0.2% over the prior year.

The most significant impact on net interest income between periods is derived from the interaction of changes in the volume of and rate earned or paid on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. The volume of interest-earning assets in loans and securities, compared to the volume of interest-bearing liabilities represented by deposits and borrowings, combined with the spread, produces the changes in net interest income between periods. The Company’s net interest margin was 4.22% in 2003 and 4.06% in 2002. The combined effect of increasing the volume of earning assets and repricing deposit liabilities resulted in an increase of $2.2 million or 17.4% in net interest income for the year ended December 31, 2003 over 2002.

The following table sets forth the Company’s daily average balance sheet, related interest income or expense and yield or rate paid for the periods indicated. The yield on tax-exempt securities has not been adjusted to a tax-equivalent yield basis.

Average Balances, Interest Income/Expense and Yields/Rates Paid
Years Ended December 31,

Interest income on loans includes fee income of approximately $586,000, $272,000 and $285,000 for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2002, and 2001 respectively. The Company’s average total assets increased to $381.6 million in 2003 to $339.2 in 2002 and $286.6 in 2001, representing a 12.5% increase 2003 over 2002, and 18.3% increase in 2002 over 2001.

The following tables set forth changes in interest income and expense for each major category of interest earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, and the amount of change attributable to volume and rate changes for the periods indicated. Changes not solely attributable to rate or volume has been allocated to volume. The yield on tax-exempt securities has not been adjusted to a tax-equivalent yield basis.

The following table sets forth a summary of noninterest income for the periods indicated.

The Company’s noninterest income consists of payroll and benefit processing fees, processing fees for merchants who accept credit card payments for goods and services, service charge on deposit accounts, mortgage servicing fees and other service fees. For the year ended December 31, 2003, non-interest income represented 10.0% of the Company’s revenues (interest income plus noninterest income) versus 10.1% in 2002 and 12.3% in 2001.

Service charges on deposit accounts increased $59,000 or 20.4% over 2002 reflective of the $13.1 million growth in core deposits over the prior period. Total noninterest income in 2003 was $2.2 million compared to $2.1 million in 2002 an down from $2.8 million in 2001. The decrease of $733,000 or 25.9% in 2002 is related to the decrease in merchant credit card processing fees and gains on sale of securities.

The following table sets forth a summary of noninterest expense for the periods indicated.

Noninterest expense consists of salaries and related employee benefits, occupancy and equipment expenses, data processing fees, professional fees, directors’ fees and other operating expenses. The increase in operating expenses in 2003 over 2002 are primarily due to salaries and benefits and occupancy expenses reflective of the growth in assets in both the Redding and Sacramento markets. Noninterest expense for 2003 increased to $9.7 million compared to $8.3 million for 2002 and $7.1 million in 2001, representing an increase of $1,394,000 or 16.9% in 2003, and $1,124,000 or 15.7% in 2002.

The Company’s provision for income taxes includes both federal and state income taxes and reflects the application of federal and state statutory rates to the Company’s income before income taxes. The principal difference between statutory tax rates and the Company’s effective tax rate is the benefit derived from investing in tax-exempt securities and preferential state tax treatment for qualified enterprise zone loans. Increases and decreases in the provision for taxes reflect changes in the Company’s income before income taxes.

The following table reflects the Company’s tax provision and the related effective tax rate for the periods indicated.

The Company concentrates its lending activities primarily within El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento and Shasta counties, California, and the location of the Bank’s four full services branches, specifically identified as Upstate California. The Company manages its credit risk through diversification of its loan portfolio and the application of underwriting policies and procedures and credit monitoring practices. Although The Company has a diversified loan portfolio, a significant portion of its borrowers’ ability to repay the loans is dependent upon the professional services and residential real estate development industry sectors. Generally, the loans are secured by real estate or other assets located in California and are expected to be repaid from cash flows of the borrower or proceeds from the sale of collateral.

The following table sets forth the amounts of loans outstanding by category as of the dates indicated:

Net portfolio loans decreased $2.2 million or 0.80%, to $278.2 million at December 31, 2003 over $280.4 million at December 31, 2002 primarily due to refinance activity in the commercial real estate sector. During 2003, commercial and financial loans increased $5.4 million or 5.5% while the real estate related portfolio decreased $7.2 million or 3.9%. The portfolio mix shifted towards commercial lending in comparison to 2002, with commercial and financial loans of approximately 37.6%, real estate construction of 24.0% and commercial real estate at 37.0%.

The following table sets forth a summary of the Company’s nonperforming loans and other assets as of the dates indicated:

Management believes that the Company’s loan portfolio is sound and performing well, however there are indications of deterioration during the year. Impairment reviews were completed on loans with two borrowers that indicated impairment existed. Management reviewed the credits and determined that the impaired amounts were fully funded in the allowance for loan losses. Although the loans are paid current, they were placed into nonaccrual status. The Company’s nonaccrual loans increased to $3.9 million during 2003 while OREO decreased to $0 during 2003, resulting from a sale of other real estate owned.

The following table sets forth the maturity distribution of the Company’s commercial and real estate construction loans outstanding as of December 31, 2003, which, based on remaining scheduled repayments of principal, were due within the periods indicated.

The following table summarizes the contractual maturities of the Company’s securities held as available-for-sale at their amortized cost basis and their weighted-average yields at December 31, 2003. The yield on tax-exempt securities has not been adjusted to a tax-equivalent yield basis.

The Company primarily obtains deposits from local businesses and professionals as well as through certificates of deposits, savings and checking accounts. The following table sets forth the distribution of the Company’s average daily deposits for the periods indicated.

The following table sets forth the remaining maturities of certificates of deposit in amounts of $100,000 or more as of December 31, 2003:

The Company uses capital to fund organic growth, pay dividends and repurchase its shares. The objective of effective capital management is to produce above market long-term returns by using capital when returns are perceived to be high and issuing capital when costs are perceived to be low. The Company’s potential sources of capital include retained earnings, common and preferred stock issuance, and issuance of subordinated debt and trust preferred securities.

Overall capital adequacy is monitored on a day-to-day basis by the Company’s management and reported to the Company’s Board of Directors on a monthly basis. The regulators of the Bank measure capital adequacy by using a risk-based capital framework and by monitoring compliance with minimum leverage ratio guidelines. Under the risk-based capital standard, assets reported on the Company’s balance sheet and certain off-balance sheet items are assigned to risk categories, each of which is assigned a risk weight.

This standard characterizes an institution’s capital as being “Tier 1” capital (defined as principally comprising stockholders’ equity) and “Tier 2” capital (defined as principally comprising the qualifying portion of the ALL). The minimum ratio of total risk-based capital to risk-adjusted assets, including certain off-balance sheet items, is 8%. At least one-half (4%) of the total risk-based capital is to be comprised of common equity; the balance may consist of debt securities and a limited portion of the ALL.

Quantitative measures established by regulation to ensure capital adequacy require the Company and the Bank to maintain minimum amounts and ratios (set forth in the following table) of total and Tier 1 capital (as defined in the regulations) to risk-weighted assets and of Tier 1 capital to average assets. Management believes as of December 31,

2003 and 2002, that the Company and the Bank met all capital adequacy requirements to which they are subject.

As of December 31, 2003, the most recent notification from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation categorized the Bank as well capitalized under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. To be categorized as well capitalized, an institution must maintain minimum total risk-based, Tier 1 risk-based and Tier 1 leverage ratios as set forth in the following table. There are no conditions or events since the notification that management believes have changed the Bank’s category. The Company’s and the Bank’s actual capital amounts and ratios as of December 31, 2003 are presented in the table.

The Company paid a cash dividend of $0.65 cents per share on the Company’s common stock paid to shareholders of record as of October 1, 2003.

During the first quarter 2003, Redding Bancorp formed a wholly-owned Delaware statutory business trust, Redding Bancorp Trust (the “grantor trust”), which issued $5.0 million of guaranteed preferred beneficial interests in Redding Bancorp’s junior subordinated debentures (the “Trust Notes”). These trust notes qualify as Tier 1 capital under Federal Reserve Board guidelines. The proceeds from the issuance of the Trust Notes were loaned from the grantor trust to the Holding Company and from the Holding Company to the Bank as surplus capital.

The Trust Notes accrue and pay distributions on a quarterly basis at 3 month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 3.30%. The rate at December 31, 2003 was 4.45%. The rate increase is capped at 2.75% annually and the lifetime cap is 12.5%. The final maturity on the Trust Notes is March 18, 2033, and the debt allows for prepayment after five years on the quarterly payment date

The Company’s conduct of business with Director’s, Officers, significant stockholders and other related parties (collectively, “Related Parties”) is restricted and governed by various laws and regulations, including Regulation O as promulgated and enforced by the Federal Reserve. Furthermore, it is the Company’s policy to conduct business with Related Parties on an arm’s length basis at current market prices with terms and conditions no more favorable than the Company provides in its normal course of business.

Some of the directors, officers and principal stockholders of the Company and their associates were customers of and had banking transactions with the Bank in the ordinary course of the Bank’s business during 2003 and the Bank expects to have such transactions in the future. All loans and commitments to loans included in such transactions were made in compliance with the applicable laws on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with other persons of similar creditworthiness, and in the opinion of the Company, did not involve more than a normal risk of collectibility or present other unfavorable features.

Inflation affects the Company’s financial position as well as its operating results. It is management’s opinion that the effects of inflation for the three years ended December 31, 2003 on the financial statements have not been material.

			Off-Balance Sheet Financial Instruments - In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters various types of transactions, which involve financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk. These instruments include commitments to extend credit and stand-by letters of credit, which are not reflected in the consolidated balance sheets. These transactions may involve, to varying degrees, credit and interest rate risk more than the amount, if any recognized in the consolidated balance sheets.

			The off-balance sheet credit risk exposure of the Company is the contractual amount of commitments to extend credit and stand-by letters of credit. The Company applies the same credit standards to these contracts as it uses for loans recorded on the balance sheet.

			Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to customers. These commitments have specified interest rates and generally have fixed expiration dates but may be terminated by the Company if certain conditions of the contract are violated.

			Although currently subject to draw down, many of the commitments do not necessarily represent future cash requirements. Collateral held relating to these commitments varies, but generally includes real estate, securities and cash.

			Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by the Company to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party.

			Credit risk arises in these transactions from the possibility that a customer may not be able to repay the Company upon default of performance. Collateral held for standby letters of credit is based on an individual evaluation of each customer’s creditworthiness, but may include cash and securities.

			Commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit bear similar credit risk characteristics as outstanding loans.

			Commitments and contingent liabilities

			Lease Commitments - The Company leases certain facilities at which it conducts its operations. Future minimum lease commitments under all non-cancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2003 are below:

The goal for managing the assets and liabilities of the Company is to maximize stockholder value and earnings while maintaining a high quality balance sheet without exposing the Company to undue interest rate risk. The absolute level and volatility of interest rates can have a significant impact on the Company’s profitability. Market risk arises from exposure to changes in interest rates, exchange rates, commodity prices, and other relevant market rate or price risk. The Company does not operate a trading account, does not hold any financial derivatives and does not hold a position with exposure to foreign currency exchange or commodities. The Company faces market risk through interest rate volatility.

The Board of Directors has overall responsibility for the Company’s interest rate risk management policies. The Company has an Asset/Liability Management Committee (“ALCO”) which establishes and monitors guidelines to control the sensitivity of earnings to changes in interest rates. Based on economic conditions, asset quality and other considerations, the ALCO establishes tolerance ranges for interest rate sensitivity. Simulation of net interest margin, net income and market value of equity under various interest rate scenarios is the primary tool used to measure interest rate risk.

The simulation model used includes measures of the expected repricing characteristics of administered rate (NOW, savings and money market accounts) and non-related products (demand deposit accounts, other assets and other liabilities). These measures recognize the relative sensitivity of these accounts to changes in market interest rates, as demonstrated through current and historical experience, recognizing the timing differences of rate changes. In simulation of net interest margin and net income the forecast balance sheet is processed against five rate scenarios. These five rate scenarios include a flat rate environment, which assumes interest rates are unchanged in the future and four additional rate ramp scenarios ranging for + 200 to - 200 basis points in 100 basis point increments, unless the rate environment cannot move in these basis point increments before reaching zero.

The formal policies and practices adopted by the Company to monitor and manage interest rate risk exposure measure risk in two ways: (i) repricing opportunities for earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and (ii) changes in net interest income for declining interest rate shocks of 100 to 200 basis points. Because of the Company’s predisposition to variable rate, pricing and noninterest bearing demand deposit accounts the Company is asset sensitive.

As a result, management anticipates that, in a declining interest rate environment, the Company’s net interest income and margin would be expected to decline, and, in an increasing interest rate environment, the Company’s net interest income and margin would be expected to increase. However, no assurance can be given that under such circumstances the Company would experience the described relationships to declining or increasing interest rates. Because the Company is asset sensitive, the Company is adversely affected by declining rates rather than rising rates.

To estimate the effect of interest rate shocks on the Company’s net interest income, management uses a model to prepare an analysis of interest rate risk exposure. Such analysis calculates the change in net interest income given a change in the federal funds rate of 100 or 200 basis points up or down. All changes are measured in dollars and are compared to projected net interest income. At December 31, 2003, the estimated annualized reduction in net interest income attributable to a 100 or 200 basis point decline in the federal funds rate was $575,000 and $1,149,000, respectively, with a similar and opposite result attributable to a 100 or 200 basis point increase in the federal fund rate. The ALCO has established a policy limitation to interest rate risk of -14% of net interest margin.

The following table sets forth, as of December 31, 2003, the distribution of repricing opportunities for the Company’s earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. It also reports the GAP (different volumes of rate sensitive assets and liabilities) repricing interest earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities at different time intervals, the cumulative GAP, the ratio of rate sensitive assets to rate sensitive liabilities for each repricing interval, and the cumulative GAP to total assets.

The model utilized by management to create the analysis described in the preceding paragraph uses balance sheet simulation to estimate the impact of changing rates on the annual net interest income of the Company. The model considers a number of factors, including (i) change in customer and management behavior in response to the assumed rate shock, (ii) the ratio of the amount of rate change for each interest-bearing asset or liability to assumed changes in the federal funds rate based on local market conditions for loans and core deposits and national market conditions for other assets and liabilities and (iii) timing factors related to the lag between the rate shock and its effect on other interest-bearing assets and liabilities. Actual results will differ from simulated results due to timing, magnitude, and frequency of interest rate changes as well as changes in market conditions and management strategies. Management believes that the short duration of its rate-sensitive assets and liabilities contributes to its ability to reprice a significant amount of its rate-sensitive assets and liabilities and mitigate the impact of rate changes in excess of 100 or 200 basis points. The model’s primary benefit to management is its assistance in evaluating the impact that future strategies with respect to the Company’s mix and level of rate-sensitive assets and liabilities will have on the Company’s net interest income.

(DELOITTE AND TOUCHE LETTERHEAD)

(DELOITTE AND TOUCHE LOGO)

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT

To the Stockholders and
Directors of Redding Bancorp:

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Redding Bancorp and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2003. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Redding Bancorp and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2003, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

(DELOITTE AND TOUCHE SIGNATURE)

San Francisco, California
February 24, 2004

(DELOITTE AND TOUCHE LETTERHEAD)

REDDING BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2003 and 2002

REDDING BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 ,2002 AND 2001

REDDING BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 ,2002 AND 2001

REDDING BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003, 2002 AND 2001 (Continued)

REDDING BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003, 2002 AND 2001

REDDING BANKCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003, 2002 AND 2001 (Continued)