Attached files
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
ANNUAL
REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009
Commission
file number 0-50765
VILLAGE
BANK AND TRUST FINANCIAL CORP.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
Virginia 16-1694602
(State
or other jurisdiction
of
(I.R.S.
Employer
incorporation
or
organization)
Identification
No.)
15521 Midlothian Turnpike, Suite 200, Midlothian,
Virginia
23113
(Address
of principal executive
offices)
(Zip Code)
Issuer’s telephone number 804-897-3900
Securities
registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:
Title
of each
class Name
of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $4.00 par
value The
Nasdaq Stock Market
Securities
registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:
None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o No
x
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act
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 o
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 registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in Part III
of
this Form10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller
reporting
company. See the definition of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer”
and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2
of
the Exchange Act.
Large
Accelerated Filer o Accelerated
Filer o
Non-Accelerated
Filer o (Do
not check if smaller reporting
company) Smaller
Reporting Company x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes o No x
The
aggregate market value of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant
as of June 30, 2009 was approximately $19,884,000
The
number of shares of common stock outstanding as of March 5, 2010 was
4,230,628.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE
Portions
of the definitive Proxy Statement to be used in conjunction with the 2010 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated
by
reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.
Village
Bank and Trust Financial Corp.
Form
10-K
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Part
I
Item
1.
|
Business
|
3
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
16
|
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
24
|
Item
2.
|
Properties
|
24
|
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
24
|
Item
4.
|
Reserved
|
24
|
Part
II
Item
5.
|
Market
for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder
Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
25
|
Item
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
27
|
Item
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
And
Results of Operations
|
28
|
Item
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
52
|
Item
9.
|
Changes
In and Disagreements with Accountants
on
Accounting and Financial Disclosure
|
88
|
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
88
|
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information
|
89
|
Part
III
Item
10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance
|
90
|
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
90
|
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management
and Related Stockholder Matters
|
90
|
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions,
and
Director Independence
|
90
|
Item
14.
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services
|
90
|
Part
IV
Item 15. |
Exhibits,
Financial Statement Schedules
|
91
|
Signatures
|
94
|
2
PART
I
ITEM
1. BUSINESS
The
disclosures set forth in this item are qualified by ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS on
pages 17 to 24 and the section captioned “Caution About Forward-Looking
Statements” on page 29 and other cautionary statements set forth elsewhere in
this report.
General
Village
Bank and Trust Financial Corp. (the “Company”) was incorporated in January 2003
and was organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia as a bank
holding company whose activities consist of investment in its wholly-owned
subsidiary, Village Bank (the “Bank”). The Bank opened to the public
on December 13, 1999 as a traditional community bank offering deposit and loan
services to individuals and businesses in the Richmond, Virginia metropolitan
area. During 2003, the Company acquired or formed three wholly owned
subsidiaries of the Bank, Village Bank Mortgage Corporation (“Village Bank
Mortgage”), a full service mortgage banking company, Village Insurance Agency,
Inc. (“Village Insurance”), a full service property and casualty insurance
agency, and Village Financial Services Corporation (“Village Financial
Services”), a financial services company. Currently, Village
Insurance and Village Financial Services have no ongoing
operations.
The
Company is the holding company of and successor to the
Bank. Effective April 30, 2004, the Company acquired all of the
outstanding stock of the Bank in a statutory share exchange
transaction. In the transaction, the shares of the Bank’s common
stock were exchanged for shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $4.00
per share (“Common Stock”), on a one-for-one basis. As a result, the
Bank became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, the Company became the
holding company for the Bank and the shareholders of the Bank became
shareholders of the Company. All references to the Company in this
annual report for dates or periods prior to April 30, 2004 are references to the
Bank.
On
October 14, 2008, Village Bank and Trust Financial Corp. and Village Bank
completed its merger with River City Bank pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of
Reorganization and Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) dated as of March 9, 2008 by
and among the Company, the Bank and River City Bank. The merger had
previously been approved by both companies’ shareholders at their respective
annual meetings on September 30, 2008 as well as the banking
regulators. The Merger Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions
of the Company’s merger with River City Bank through the merger of River City
Bank with and into Village Bank. Under the terms of the Merger
Agreement, Village Bank acquired all of the outstanding shares of River City
Bank. The shareholders of River City Bank received, for each share of
River City Bank common stock that they owned immediately prior to the effective
time of the merger, either $11 per share in cash or one share of common stock of
the Company. Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement,
shareholders of River City Bank elected to receive cash, shares of common stock
of the Company, or a combination of both, subject to allocation and proration
procedures which ensured that 20% of the total merger consideration was in cash
and 80% was in common stock of the Company. In addition, at the
effective time of the merger, each outstanding option to purchase shares of
River City Bank common stock under any stock plans vested pursuant to its terms
and was converted into an option to acquire the number of shares of the
Company’s common stock equal to the number of shares of River City Bank common
stock underlying the option. The Company issued approximately
1,440,000 shares in the Merger.
3
Business
Strategy
Our
current business strategies include the following:
|
●
|
To
be a full service financial services provider enabling us to establish and
maintain relationships with our
customers.
|
|
●
|
To
attract customers by providing the breadth of products offered by larger
banks while maintaining the quick response and personal service of a
community bank. We will continue to look for
opportunities to expand our products and services. In our first
nine years of operation, we have established a diverse product line,
including commercial, mortgage and consumer loans as well as a full array
of deposit products and
services.
|
|
●
|
To
increase net income and return to shareholders through moderate loan
growth, while controlling the cost of our deposits and noninterest
expenses.
|
|
●
|
To
reduce the level of our nonperforming
assets. Nonperforming assets, consisting of nonaccrual
loans and real estate acquired through foreclosure, reached record highs
in 2009 and are having a negative affect on profitability. We
have committed significant resources to reduce the level of nonperforming
assets.
|
|
●
|
To
expand our capacity to generate noninterest
income
through the sale of mortgage loans. In 2009 our mortgage
company hired additional mortgage loan officers which should expand our
ability to originate mortgage
loans.
|
|
●
|
To
continue to emphasize commercial banking products and
services. Small-business commercial customers are a
source of prime-based loans, fee income from cash management services, and
low cost deposits, which we need to fund our growth. We have
been able to build a commercial business base because our staff of
commercial bankers seeks opportunities to network within the local
business community. Significant additional growth in this
banking area will depend on expanding our lending
staff.
|
Our
officers, employees and the directors live and work in our market
area. We believe that the existing and future banking market in our
community represents an opportunity for locally owned and locally managed
community banks. In view of the continuing trend in the financial
services industry toward consolidation into larger, sometimes impersonal,
statewide, regional and national institutions, the market exists for the
personal and customized financial services that an independent, locally owned
bank with local decision making can offer. With the flexibility of
our smaller size and through an emphasis on relationship banking, including
personal attention and service, we can be more responsive to the individual
needs of our customers than our larger competitors. As a community
oriented and locally managed institution, we make most of our loans in our
community and can tailor our services to meet the banking and financial needs of
our customers who live and do business in our market.
We
provide customers with high quality, responsive and technologically advanced
banking services. These services include loans that are priced on a
deposit-based relationship, easy access to our decision makers, and quick and
innovative action necessary to meet a customer’s banking needs.
Location
and Market Area
Our
overall strategy is to become the premier financial institution serving the
Richmond metropolitan area. We recognized early on that to be
successful with this strategy, we needed to grow aggressively, expanding our
branch network to reach the most people possible. Initially, we
focused our operations in Chesterfield County, Virginia, which, despite its
potential for business development and population growth, has been underserved
by community banks. Chesterfield’s resources are very favorable for
businesses seeking a profitable and stable environment. The county
offers superb commercial and industrial sites, an educated work force,
well-designed
and developed infrastructure and a competitive tax
structure. Chesterfield has been awarded the U.S. Senate Gold
Medallion for
4
Productivity
and Quality. The county has the highest bond rating from three rating
agencies -
Standard and Poors,
Moody’s and Fitch.
Once
we established a strong banking presence in the lucrative Chesterfield County
market with eight branches, we continued the implementation of our strategy by
expanding our franchise into other
counties in the Richmond Metropolitan area. In addition to
Chesterfield County,
we have now opened three branches in both Hanover and Henrico Counties and one
in Powhatan County, all three along with Chesterfield have seen strong
population growth in recent years.
At
December 31, 2009, we had fifteen full service banking offices, which were
staffed by 54 full-time employees. Our senior staff averages more
than 25 years of professional or banking experience. Our principal
office, which houses our executive officers and loan department, was opened in
August 2008 and is located at 15521 Midlothian Turnpike, Midlothian, Virginia
23113. Our main telephone number is (804) 897-3900. Our
main office which includes a branch facility and seven of our branch offices are
located in Chesterfield
County,
with three branch offices in Hanover County, three in Henrico County and one in
Powhatan County. Each branch office has been strategically located to
be convenient to business and retail customers in the growth sectors of each
County.
Historically
the Richmond Metropolitan area has been a favorable market for us to provide
banking services. However with the depressed economy that started in
late 2008 and was prevalent throughout 2009, this market area was negatively
impacted by the decline in the housing market, especially in Chesterfield County
where residential housing has been an economic driver in the
past. Because a substantial part of our loan portfolio is
collateralized by residential real estate primarily in Chesterfield County, this
decline in the housing market has had a negative impact on our asset
quality. The result has been a substantial increase in nonperforming
assets, and in turn, a negative impact on profitability. See further
discussion of nonperforming assets under Asset
Quality in Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
following.
Banking
Services
We
receive deposits, make consumer and commercial loans, and provide other services
customarily offered by a commercial banking institution, such as business and
personal checking and savings accounts, drive-up windows, and 24-hour
automated teller machines. We have not applied for permission to
establish a trust department and offer trust services. We are not a
member of the Federal Reserve System. Our deposits are insured under
the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to the limits provided
thereunder.
Our
lending activities are subject to a variety of lending limits imposed by federal
and state law. While differing limits apply in certain circumstances
based on the type of loan or the nature of the borrower (including the
borrower’s relationship to the bank), in general, for loans that are not secured
by readily marketable or other permissible collateral, we are subject to a
loans-to-one
borrower limit of an amount equal to 15% of our capital and
surplus. We may voluntarily choose to impose a policy limit on loans
to a single borrower that is less than the legal lending limit. We
are a member of the Community Bankers’ Bank and may participate out portions of
loans when loan amounts exceed our legal lending limits or internal lending
policies.
Lending
Activities
Our
primary focus is on making loans to small businesses and consumers in our local
market area. In addition, we also provide a select range of real
estate finance services. Our primary lending
5
activities
are principally directed to our market area.
Loan
Portfolio. The net loan
portfolio was $457,047,000 at December 31, 2009, which compares to $464,663,000
at December 31, 2008. The Company saw a decline in loan growth for
the first time in several years. Loans declined by 1.6% in 2009 while
loans grew by 44% in 2008 and 36% in 2007. The decline in loan growth
in 2009 is a direct result of the prolonged economic downturn while the majority
of the loan growth in 2008 came as a result of our merger with River City
Bank. Our loan customers are generally located in the Richmond
metropolitan area. We do not have any subprime loans in our loan
portfolio.
Commercial Real Estate
Lending. We finance commercial real estate for our
clients and commercial real estate loans represent the largest segment of our
loan portfolio. This segment of our loan portfolio has been the
largest segment since 2004 due to the significant real estate opportunities in
our market area. We generally will finance owner-occupied commercial
real estate at an 80% loan-to-value ratio or less. In many cases our
loan-to-value
ratio is less than 80%, which provides us with a higher level of collateral
security. Our underwriting policies and procedures focus on the
borrower’s ability to repay the loan as well as assessment of the underlying
real estate. Risks inherent in managing a commercial real estate loan
portfolio relate to sudden or gradual drops in property values as well as
changes in the economic climate. We attempt to mitigate those risks
by carefully underwriting loans of this type as well as following appropriate
loan-to-value
standards. Commercial real estate loans (generally owner occupied) at
December 31, 2009 were $240,829,000, or 51.5% of the total loan
portfolio.
Residential Mortgage
Lending. We make permanent residential mortgage loans
for inclusion in the loan portfolio. We seek to retain in our
portfolio variable rate loans secured by one-to-four-family
residences. However, the majority of permanent residential loans are
made by the Bank’s subsidiary, Village Bank Mortgage, which sells them to
investors in the secondary mortgage market on a pre-sold basis. Given
the low fixed rate residential loan market in recent years, this allows us to
offer this service to our customers without retaining a significant low rate
residential loan portfolio which would be detrimental to earnings as interest
rates increase. We originate both conforming and non-conforming
single-family loans.
Before
we make a loan we evaluate both the borrower’s ability to make principal and
interest payments and the value of the property that will secure the
loan. We make first mortgage loans in amounts up to 90% of the
appraised value of the underlying real estate. We retain some second
mortgage loans secured by property in our market area, as long as the
loan-to-value ratio combined with the first mortgage does not exceed
90%. For conventional loans in excess of 80% loan-to-value, private
mortgage insurance is required.
Our
current one-to-four-family
residential adjustable rate mortgage loans have interest rates that adjust
annually after a fixed period of 1, 3 and 5 years, generally in accordance with
the rates on comparable U.S. Treasury bills plus a margin. Our
adjustable rate mortgage loans generally limit interest rate increases to 2%
each rate adjustment period and have an established ceiling rate at the time the
loans are made of up to 6% over the original interest rate. There are
risks resulting from increased costs to a borrower as a result of the periodic
repricing mechanisms of these loans. Despite the benefits of
adjustable rate mortgage loans to our asset/liability
management, they pose additional risks, primarily because as interest rates
rise; the underlying payments by the borrowers rise, increasing the potential
for default. At the same time, the marketability of the underlying
property may be adversely affected by higher interest rates. At
December 31, 2009, $93,657,000, or 20.0% of our loan portfolio, consisted of
residential mortgage loans.
Real Estate Construction
Lending. This segment of our loan portfolio is
predominately residential in nature and comprised of loans with short duration,
meaning maturities of twelve months or less. Residential houses under
construction and the underlying land for which the loan was obtained secure the
construction loans. Construction lending entails significant risks
compared with residential mortgage lending. These risks involve
larger loan balances concentrated with single borrowers with funds
advanced upon the security of the land and home under construction, which is
estimated prior to the completion of the home. Thus it is more
difficult to evaluate accurately the
6
total
loan funds required to complete a project and related loan-to-value
ratios. To mitigate these risks we generally limit loan amounts to
80% of appraised values on pre-sold homes and 75% on speculative homes, and
obtain first lien positions on the property taken as
security. Additionally, we offer real estate construction financing
to individuals who have demonstrated the ability to obtain a permanent
loan. At December 31, 2009, construction loans totaled $81,688,000,
or 17.5% of the total loan portfolio.
Commercial Business
Lending. Our commercial business lending consists of
lines of credit, revolving credit facilities, term loans, equipment loans,
stand-by letters of credit and unsecured loans. Commercial loans are
written for any business purpose including the financing of plant and equipment,
carrying accounts receivable, general working capital, contract administration
and acquisition activities. Our client base is diverse, and we do not
have a concentration of loans in any specific industry
segment. Commercial
business loans are generally secured by accounts receivable, equipment,
inventory and other collateral such as marketable securities, cash value of life
insurance, and time deposits. Commercial business loans have a higher
degree of risk than residential mortgage loans, but have higher
yields. To manage these risks, we generally obtain appropriate
collateral and personal guarantees from the borrower’s principal owners and
monitor the financial condition of business borrowers. The
availability of funds
for the repayment of commercial business loans may substantially depend on the
success of the business itself. Further, the collateral for
commercial business loans may depreciate over time and cannot be appraised with
as much precision as residential real estate. All commercial loans we
make have recourse under the terms of a promissory note. At December
31, 2009, commercial
loans totaled $39,576,000, or 8.5% of the total loan
portfolio.
Consumer Installment
Lending. We offer various types of secured and
unsecured consumer loans. We make consumer loans primarily for
personal, family or household purposes as a convenience to our customer base
since these loans are not the primary focus of our lending
activities. Our general guideline is that a consumer’s total debt
service should not exceed 40% of the consumer’s gross income. Our
underwriting standards for consumer loans include making a determination of the
applicant’s payment history on other debts and an assessment of his or her
ability to meet existing obligations and payments on the proposed
loan. The stability of an applicant’s monthly income may be
determined by verification of gross monthly income from primary employment and
additionally from any verifiable secondary income. Consumer loans
totaled $11,609,000 at December 31, 2009, which was 2.5% of the total loan
portfolio.
Loan Commitments and Contingent
Liabilities. In the normal course of business, the
Company makes various commitments and incurs certain contingent liabilities
which are disclosed in the footnotes of our annual financial statements,
including commitments to extend credit. At December 31, 2009,
undisbursed
credit lines, standby letters of credit and commitments to extend credit totaled
$72,876,000.
Credit Policies and
Administration. We have adopted a comprehensive lending
policy, which includes stringent underwriting standards for all types of
loans. Our lending staff follows pricing guidelines established
periodically by our management team. In an effort to manage risk, all
credit decisions in excess of the officers’ lending authority must be approved
prior to funding by a management loan committee and/or a board of
directors-level loan committee. Any
loans above $5,000,000 require full board of directors’
approval. Management believes that it employs
experienced lending officers, secures appropriate collateral and carefully
monitors the financial conditions of our borrowers and the concentration of such
loans in the portfolio.
In
addition to the normal repayment risks, all loans in our portfolio are subject
to the state of the economy and the related effects on the borrower and/or the
real estate market. Generally, longer-term loans have periodic
interest rate adjustments and/or call provisions. Our senior
management monitors the loan portfolio closely to ensure that past due loans are
minimized and that potential problem loans are swiftly dealt with. In
addition to the internal business processes employed in the credit
administration area, the Company utilizes
an outside consulting firm to review the loan portfolio. A detailed
annual review is performed, with an interim update occurring at least once a
year. Results of the report are used to validate our internal loan
ratings and to provide independent
7
commentary
on specific loans and loan administration activities.
Lending Limit. As of
December 31, 2009, our legal lending limit for loans to one borrower was
approximately
$8,059,000. However,
we generally will not extend credit to any one individual or entity in excess of
$5,000,000, and, as noted above, any amount over that must be approved by the
full Board of Directors.
Investments
and Funding
We
balance our liquidity needs based on loan and deposit growth via the investment
portfolio, purchased federal funds, and Federal Home Loan Bank
advances. It is our goal to provide adequate liquidity to support our
loan growth. Should we have excess liquidity, investments are used to
generate positive earnings. In the event deposit growth does not
fully support our loan growth, a combination of investment sales, federal funds
and Federal Home Loan Bank advances will be used to augment our funding
position. However, we believe that due to a continued depressed
economy as well as capital limitations, we will not see any significant growth
in our loan portfolio in 2010. Accordingly, any growth in our
deposits will be used to increase our investment portfolio or reduce higher cost
borrowings.
Our
investment portfolio is actively monitored and is classified as “available for
sale.” Under such a classification, investment instruments may be
sold as deemed appropriate by management. On a monthly basis, the
investment portfolio is marked to market via equity as required by generally
accepted accounting principles. Additionally, we use the investment
portfolio to balance our asset and liability position. We will invest
in fixed rate or floating rate instruments as necessary to reduce our interest
rate risk exposure.
For
securities classified as available-for-sale securities, we will evaluate whether
a decline in fair value below the amortized cost basis is other than
temporary. If the decline in fair value is judged to be other than
temporary, the cost basis of the individual security is written down to fair
value as a new cost basis and the amount of the write-down is included in
earnings. There were no securities at December 31, 2009 where a
decline in market value was considered other than temporary.
Competition
We
encounter strong competition from other local commercial banks, savings and loan
associations, credit unions, mortgage banking firms, consumer finance companies,
securities brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market mutual funds and
other financial institutions. A number of these competitors are
well-established. Competition for loans is keen, and pricing is
important. Most of our competitors have substantially greater
resources and higher lending limits than ours and offer certain services, such
as extensive and established branch networks and trust services, which we do not
provide at the present time. Deposit competition also is strong, and
we may have to pay higher interest rates to attract
deposits. Nationwide banking institutions and their branches have
increased competition in our markets, and federal legislation adopted in 1999
allows non-banking companies, such as insurance and investment firms, to
establish or acquire banks.
The
greater Richmond metropolitan market has experienced several significant mergers
or acquisitions involving all four regional banks formerly headquartered in
central Virginia over the past fifteen years. Additionally, other
larger banks from outside Virginia have acquired local banks. We
believe that the Company can capitalize on the recent merger activity and
attract customers from those who are dissatisfied with the recently acquired
banks.
At
June 30, 2009, the latest date such information is available from the FDIC, the
Bank’s deposit market share in Chesterfield County was 7.36% and 0.91% in the
Richmond MSA.
Regulation
We
are subject to regulations of certain federal and state agencies and receive
periodic examinations by those regulatory authorities. As a
consequence of the extensive regulation of
8
commercial
banking activities, our business is susceptible to being affected by state and
federal legislation and regulations.
General. The discussion below is only a
summary of the principal laws and regulations that comprise the regulatory
framework applicable to us. The descriptions of these laws and
regulations, as well as descriptions of laws and regulations contained elsewhere
herein, do not purport to be complete and are qualified in their entirety by
reference to applicable laws and regulations. In recent years,
regulatory compliance by financial institutions such as ours has placed a
significant burden on us both in costs and employee time
commitment.
Bank Holding Company. The
Company is a bank holding company under the Federal Bank Holding Company Act of
1956, as amended, and is subject to supervision and regulation by the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”) and
Virginia State Corporation Commission (“SCC”). As a bank holding
company, the Company is required to furnish to the Federal Reserve Board an
annual report of its operations at the end of each fiscal year and to furnish
such additional information as the Federal Reserve Board may require pursuant to
the Bank Holding Company Act. The Federal Reserve Board, FDIC and SCC
also may conduct examinations of the Company and/or its subsidiary
bank.
Gramm-Leach-Bliley
Act. On
November 12, 1999, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was signed into law.
Gramm-Leach-Bliley permits commercial banks to affiliate with investment
banks. It also permits bank holding companies which elect financial
holding company status to engage in any type of financial activity, including
securities, insurance, merchant banking/equity investment and other activities
that are financial in nature. The merchant banking provisions allow a
bank holding company to make a controlling investment in any kind of company,
financial or commercial. These new powers allow a bank to engage in
virtually every type of activity currently recognized as financial or incidental
or complementary to a financial activity. A commercial bank that
wishes to engage in these activities is required to be well capitalized, well
managed and have a satisfactory or better Community Reinvestment Act
rating. Gramm-Leach-Bliley also allows subsidiaries of banks to
engage in a broad range of financial activities that are not permitted for banks
themselves.
Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 implemented a broad range of corporate
governance, accounting and reporting measures for companies, like the Company,
that have securities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. Specifically, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the various
regulations promulgated under the Act, established, among other things:
(i) new requirements for audit committees, including independence,
expertise, and responsibilities; (ii) additional responsibilities regarding
financial statements for the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
of the reporting company; (iii) new standards for auditors and regulation
of audits, including independence provisions that restrict non-audit services
that accountants may provide to their audit clients; (iv) increased
disclosure and reporting obligations for the reporting company and their
directors and executive officers, including accelerated reporting of stock
transactions and a prohibition on trading during pension blackout periods; and
(v) a range of new and increased civil and criminal penalties for fraud and
other violations of the securities laws. In addition, Sarbanes-Oxley
required stock exchanges, such as NASDAQ, to institute additional requirements
relating to corporate governance in their listing rules.
Section 404
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires the Company to include in its Annual Report
on Form 10-K a report by management. Management’s internal control
report must, among other things, set forth management’s assessment of the
effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
Emergency
Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. In response to unprecedented
market turmoil during the third quarter of 2008, the Emergency Economic
Stabilization Act (“EESA”) of 2008 was enacted on October 3,
2008. EESA authorizes the U.S. Treasury to provide up to $700 billion
to support the financial services industry. Pursuant to the EESA, the
U.S. Treasury was initially authorized to use $350 billion for the Troubled
Asset Relief Program (“TARP”). Of this amount, the U.S. Treasury
allocated $250 billion to the TARP Capital Purchase Program. On
January 15, 2009, the second $350 billion of TARP monies was released to the
U.S. Treasury. The Secretary’s
9
authority
under TARP was to expire on December 31, 2009, unless the Secretary certifies to
Congress that extension is necessary provided that his authority may not extend
beyond October 3, 2010. On December 9, 2009, the Secretary sent such
a letter to the Congress, extending his authority under the TARP through October
3, 2010.
On
May 1, 2009, the Company issued preferred shares and a warrant to purchase its
common shares to the U.S. Treasury as a participant in the TARP Capital Purchase
Program. The amount of capital raised in that transaction was $14.7
million, approximately three percent of the Company’s risk-weighted
assets. Prior to May 1, 2012, unless the parent company has redeemed
all such preferred shares or the U.S. Treasury has transferred all such
preferred shares to a third party, the consent of the U.S. Treasury will be
required for us to, among other things, pay a dividend on
the Company’s common shares or repurchase our common shares or
outstanding preferred shares except in limited circumstances. No
dividends may be paid on common stock unless dividends have been paid on the
senior preferred stock. The senior preferred will not have voting
rights other than the right to vote as a class on the issuance of any preferred
stock ranking senior, any change in its terms or any merger, exchange or similar
transaction that would adversely affect its rights. The senior
preferred will also have the right to elect two directors if dividends have not
been paid for six periods. The Company filed a registration statement
on Form S-3 covering the warrant as required under the terms of the TARP
investment, on May 29, 2009. The registration statement was declared
effective by the SEC on June 16, 2009.
In
addition, until the U.S. Treasury ceases to own any of the Company’s securities
sold under the TARP Capital Purchase Program, the compensation arrangements for
our senior executive officers must comply in all respects with EESA and the
rules and regulations there under. In compliance with such
requirements, each of our senior executive officers agreed in writing to accept
the compensation standards in existence at that time under the TARP Capital
Purchase Program and thereby cap or eliminate some of their contractual or legal
rights.
American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. On February 17, 2009,
President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(“ARRA”) into law. ARRA modified the compensation-related limitations
contained in the TARP Capital Purchase Program (the “CPP”), created additional
compensation-related limitations and directed the Secretary of the Treasury to
establish standards for executive compensation applicable to participants in
TARP. Thus, the newly enacted compensation-related limitations are
applicable to the Company which have been added or modified by ARRA are as
follows, which provisions must be included in standards established by the U.S.
Treasury:
|
●
|
No
Severance Payments. Under ARRA “golden parachutes” were
redefined as any severance payment resulting from involuntary termination
of employment, or from bankruptcy of the employer, except for payments for
services performed or benefits accrued. Consequently under ARRA the
Company is prohibited from making any severance payment to our “senior
executive officers” (defined in ARRA as the five highest paid executive
officers) and our next five most highly compensated employees during the
CPP Covered Period.
|
|
●
|
Recovery
of Incentive Compensation if Based on Certain Material
Inaccuracies. ARRA also contains the “clawback provision”
discussed above but extends its application to any bonus or retention
awards and other incentive compensation paid to any of our senior
executive officers or next 20 most highly compensated employees during the
CPP Covered Period that is later found to have been based on materially
inaccurate financial statements or other materially inaccurate
measurements of performance
|
|
●
|
No
Compensation Arrangements That Encourage Earnings
Manipulation. Under ARRA, during the CPP Covered Period, the
Company is not allowed to enter into compensation arrangements that
encourage manipulation of the reported earnings of the Company to enhance
the compensation of any of our
employees.
|
|
●
|
Limits
on Incentive Compensation. ARRA contains a provision that
prohibits the payment or accrual of any bonus, retention award or
incentive compensation to any of our 5 most highly compensated employees
during the CPP Covered Period other than awards of
long-term
|
|
|
10
restricted
stock that (i) do not fully vest during the CPP Coverage Period, (ii) have a
value not greater than one-third of the total annual compensation of the awardee
and (iii) are subject to such other restrictions as determined by the Secretary
of the Treasury. The prohibition on bonus, incentive compensation and
retention awards does not preclude payments required under written employment
contracts entered into on or prior to February 11, 2009.
|
●
|
Compensation
Committee Functions. ARRA requires that our Compensation
Committee be comprised solely of independent directors and that it meet at
least semiannually to discuss and evaluate our employee compensation plans
in light of an assessment of any risk posed to us from such compensation
plans.
|
|
●
|
Compliance
Certifications. ARRA also requires a written certification by
our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of our compliance
with the provisions of ARRA. These certifications must be
contained in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2009 and any subsequent year during the Capital Purchase Plan
Covered Period the relevant U.S. Treasury regulations are
issued.
|
|
●
|
Treasury
Review of Excessive Bonuses Previously Paid. ARRA directs the
Secretary of the Treasury to review all compensation paid to our senior
executive officers and our next 20 most highly compensated employees to
determine whether any such payments were inconsistent with the purposes of
ARRA or were otherwise contrary to the public interest. If the
Secretary of the Treasury makes such a finding, the Secretary of the
Treasury is directed to negotiate with the TARP Capital Purchase Program
recipient and the subject employee for appropriate reimbursements to the
federal government with respect to the compensation and
bonuses.
|
|
●
|
Say
on Pay. Under ARRA the SEC promulgated rules requiring a
non-binding say on pay vote by the shareholders on executive compensation
at the annual meeting during the CPP Covered
Period.
|
ARRA
also provides that the U.S. Treasury, after consultation with the Company’s
federal regulator, permit the Company at any time to redeem our Series A
Preferred Shares at liquidation value. Upon such redemption, the
warrant to purchase the parent company’s common stock that was issued to the
U.S. Treasury would also be repurchased at its then current fair
value.
On
June 10, 2009, the U.S. Treasury issued guidance on the compensation and
corporate governance standards that apply to TARP recipients, as summarized
below:
|
●
|
Bonuses
accrued or paid before the effective date of the rule adopted by the U.S.
Treasury are not subject to the rule’s bonus payment
limitation. In addition, separation pay for departures that
occurred before receipt of TARP assistance also is not subject to the
limits of the rule (even if payments continue to be made after
effectiveness).
|
|
●
|
The
term “most highly compensated employees” covers all employees, not only
executive officers or other policy makers. The determination of
the most highly compensated employees is based on annual compensation for
the prior year calculated in accordance with SEC disclosure
rules.
|
|
●
|
The
rule permits salary paid in property, including stock, so long as it is
based on a dollar amount (not a number of shares), is fully vested and
accrues as cash salary would. The rule also permits salary paid
in stock units in respect of shares of the TARP recipient, or subsidiaries
or divisions of the TARP recipient (though not below the subsidiary or
division for which the employee directly provides
services). Holding periods also are
permitted.
|
|
●
|
Commission
payments for sales, brokerage and asset management services for unrelated
customers will not be subject to the bonus restrictions, but only if they
are consistent with an existing plan of the TARP recipient in effect
before February 17, 2009.
|
11
●
|
The
rule imposes a restrictive set of “best practices” on TARP recipients: (i)
the five senior executive officers and the next 20 most highly compensated
employees may not receive any tax “gross-up” payment of any kind,
including payments to cover taxes due on company-provided benefits or
separation payments; (ii) the prohibition on separation payments to the
five senior executive officers and the next five most highly compensated
employees is extended to payments in connection with a change in control;
(iii) the compensation committee must review all employee compensation
plans every six months for unnecessary risk and provide an expanded
certification including narrative disclosure of its analysis and
conclusions; (iv) TARP recipients must exercise their clawback rights
unless doing so would be unreasonable; and (v) TARP recipients must adopt
a policy reasonably designed to eliminate excessive or luxury
expenditures.
|
|
●
|
An
institution will not become subject to the compensation standards merely
as a result of acquiring a TARP recipient. In addition, if an acquiror is
not subject to the standards immediately after the transaction, any
employees of the acquiror (including former employees of the TARP
recipient who become acquiror employees as a result of the transaction)
will not be subject to the
standards.
|
|
●
|
The
“TARP period” during which the compensation standards apply ceases when
the obligations arising from financial assistance cease and specifically
excludes any period when the only outstanding obligation of a TARP
recipient consists of U.S. Treasury warrants to purchase common
stock.
|
Comprehensive
Financial Stability Plan of 2009. On February 10, 2009, the
Treasury Secretary announced a new comprehensive financial stability plan (the
“Financial Stability Plan”), which earmarked the second $350 billion of unused
funds originally authorized under the EESA. The major elements
of the Financial Stability Plan included: (i) a capital assistance program that
has invested in convertible preferred stock of certain qualifying institutions,
(ii) a consumer and business lending initiative to fund new consumer loans,
small business loans and commercial mortgage asset-backed securities issuances,
(iii) a public/private investment fund intended to leverage public and private
capital with public financing to purchase up to $500 billion to $1 trillion of
legacy “toxic assets” from financial institutions, and (iv) assistance for
homeowners by providing up to $75 billion to reduce mortgage payments and
interest rates and establishing loan modification guidelines for government and
private programs.
Regulatory
Reform. In June 2009, the Obama administration proposed a wide
range of regulatory reforms that, if enacted, may have significant effects on
the financial services industry in the United States. Significant
aspects of the Obama administration’s proposals included, among other things,
proposals (i) that any financial firm whose combination of size, leverage and
interconnectedness could pose a threat to financial stability be subject to
certain enhanced regulatory requirements, (ii) that federal bank regulators
require loan originators or sponsors to retain part of the credit risk of
securitized exposures, (iii) that there be increased regulation of
broker-dealers and investment advisers, (iv) for the creation of a federal
consumer financial protection agency that would, among other things, be charged
with applying consistent regulations to similar products (such as imposing
certain notice and consent requirements on consumer overdraft lines of credit),
(v) that there be comprehensive regulation of OTC derivatives, (vi) that the
controls on the ability of banking institutions to engage in transactions with
affiliates be tightened, and (vii) that financial holding companies be required
to be “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” on a consolidated
basis.
The
Congress, state lawmaking bodies and federal and state regulatory agencies
continue to consider a number of wide-ranging and comprehensive proposals for
altering the structure, regulation and competitive relationships of the nation’s
financial institutions, including rules and regulations related to the broad
range of reform proposals set forth by the Obama administration described
above. Separate comprehensive financial reform bills intended to
address the proposals set forth by the Obama administration were introduced in
both houses of Congress in the second half of 2009 and remain under review by
both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. In
addition, both the U.S. Treasury Department and the Basel Committee on
Banking
12
Supervision
(the “Basel Committee”) have issued policy statements regarding proposed
significant changes to the regulatory capital framework applicable to banking
organizations.
We
cannot predict whether or in what form further legislation and/or regulations
may be adopted or the extent to which the Company’s business may be affected
thereby.
Incentive
Compensation. On October 22, 2009, the Federal Reserve Board
issued a comprehensive proposal on incentive compensation policies (the
“Incentive Compensation Proposal”) intended to ensure that the incentive
compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and
soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive
risk-taking. The Incentive Compensation Proposal, which covers all
employees that have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an
organization, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key
principles that a banking organization’s incentive compensation arrangements
should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the
organization’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (ii) be
compatible with effective internal controls and risk management, and (iii) be
supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective
oversight by the organization’s board of directors. The Incentive
Compensation Proposal also contemplates a detailed review by the Federal Reserve
Board of the incentive compensation policies and practices of a number of
“large, complex banking organizations”. Any deficiencies in
compensation practices that are identified may be incorporated into the
organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect its ability to make
acquisitions or perform other actions. The Incentive Compensation
Proposal provides that enforcement actions may be taken against a banking
organization if its incentive compensation arrangements or related
risk-management control or governance processes pose a risk to the
organization’s safety and soundness and the organization is not taking prompt
and effective measures to correct the deficiencies. In addition, on
January 12, 2010, the FDIC announced that it would seek public comment on
whether banks with compensation plans that encourage risky behavior should be
charged at higher deposit assessment rates than such banks would otherwise be
charged.
The
scope and content of the U.S. banking regulators’ policies on executive
compensation are continuing to develop and are likely to continue evolving in
the near future. It cannot be determined at this time whether
compliance with such policies will adversely affect the ability of the Company
to hire, retain and motivate its and their key employees
Bank
Regulation. As a Virginia state-chartered FDIC bank that is
not a member of the Federal Reserve System, the Bank is subject to regulation,
supervision and examination by the SCC’s Bureau of Financial Institutions
(“BFI”).
The Bank is also subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the
FDIC. Federal law also governs the activities in which we may engage,
the investments we may make and the aggregate amount of loans that may be
granted to one borrower. Various consumer and compliance laws and
regulations also affect our operations. Earnings are affected by
general economic conditions, management policies and the legislative and
governmental actions of various regulatory authorities, including those referred
to above. The following description summarizes some of the laws to
which we are subject. The BFI
and the FDIC will conduct regular examinations, reviewing such matters as the
overall safety and soundness of the institution, the adequacy of loan loss
reserves, quality of loans and investments, management practices, compliance
with laws, and other aspects of their operations. In addition to
these regular examinations, we must furnish
the FDIC with periodic reports containing a full
and accurate statement of our affairs. Supervision, regulation and examination
of banks by these agencies are intended primarily for the protection of
depositors rather than shareholders.
Insurance of Accounts, Assessments and Regulation by
the FDIC. Our deposits are insured by the FDIC up to
the limits set forth under applicable law, currently
$250,000. Deposits are subject to the deposit insurance assessments
of the Bank Insurance Fund (“BIF”) of
the FDIC. The FDIC is authorized to prohibit any BIF-insured
institution from engaging in any activity that the FDIC determines by regulation
or order to pose a serious threat to the respective insurance
fund. Also, the FDIC may initiate enforcement actions against banks,
after first giving the institution’s primary regulatory authority an opportunity
to take such action. The FDIC may terminate the deposit insurance of
any depository institution if it determines, after a hearing, that the
institution has
13
engaged
or is engaging in unsafe or unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound
condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law,
regulation, order or any condition imposed in writing
by the FDIC. It also may suspend deposit insurance temporarily during
the hearing process for the permanent termination of insurance if the
institution has no tangible capital. If deposit insurance is
terminated, the deposits at the institution at the time of termination, less
subsequent withdrawals, shall continue to be insured for a period from six
months to two years, as determined by the FDIC. We are aware of no
existing circumstances that could result in termination of our deposit
insurance.
Additionally,
on October 14, 2008, after receiving a recommendation from the boards of the
FDIC and the Federal Reserve, and consulting with the President, the Secretary
of the Treasury signed the systemic risk exception to the FDIC Act, enabling the
FDIC to establish its Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (“TLGP”). Under one
component of this program, the Transaction Account Guarantee Program (“TAGP”),
the FDIC temporarily provided a full guarantee on all non-interest bearing
transaction accounts held by any depositor, regardless of dollar amount, through
December 31, 2009. The $250,000 deposit insurance coverage limit was
scheduled to return to $100,000 on January 1, 2010, but was extended by
congressional action until December 31, 2013. The TLGP has been
extended to cover debt of FDIC-insured institutions issued through April 30,
2010, and the TAGP has been extended through June 30, 2010. The TLGP
also guarantees all senior unsecured debt of insured depository institutions or
their qualified holding companies issued between October 14, 2008 and June 30,
2009 with a stated maturity greater than 30 days. All eligible institutions were
permitted to participate in both of the components of the TLGP without cost for
the first 30 days of the program. Following the initial 30 day grace period,
institutions were assessed at the rate of ten basis points for transaction
account balances in excess of $250,000 for the transaction account guarantee
program and at the rate of either 50, 75, or 100 basis points of the amount of
debt issued, depending on the maturity date of the guaranteed debt, for the debt
guarantee program. Institutions were required to opt-out of the TLGP if they did
not wish to participate. The Company and its applicable subsidiaries elected to
participate in both of these programs.
Capital. The FDIC has issued
risk-based and leverage capital guidelines applicable to banking organizations
they supervise. Under the risk-based capital requirements, we are
generally required to maintain a minimum ratio of total capital to risk-weighted
assets (including certain off-balance sheet activities, such as standby letters
of credit), of 8%. At least half of the total capital is to be
composed of common equity, retained earnings and qualifying perpetual preferred
stock, less certain intangibles (“Tier
1 capital”). The remainder may consist of certain subordinated debt,
certain hybrid capital instruments and other qualifying preferred stock and a
limited amount of the loan loss allowance (“Tier 2 capital” and, together with
Tier 1 capital, “total capital”). In addition, each of the Federal
bank regulatory agencies has established minimum leverage capital ratio
requirements for banking organizations. These requirements provide
for a minimum leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to adjusted average quarterly
assets equal to 4% for banks and bank holding companies that meet certain
specified criteria. All other banks and bank holding companies will
generally be required to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 100 to 200 basis
points above the stated minimum. The risk-based capital standards of
the FDIC explicitly
identify concentrations of credit risk and the risk arising from non-traditional
activities, as well as an institution’s ability to manage these risks, as
important factors to be taken into account by the agency in assessing an
institution’s
overall capital adequacy. The capital guidelines also provide that an
institution’s exposure to a decline in the
economic value of its capital due to changes in interest rates be considered by
the agency as a factor in evaluating
a bank’s capital adequacy.
USA
Patriot Act. The
USA Patriot Act became effective on October 26, 2001 and provides for the
facilitation of information sharing among governmental entities and financial
institutions for the purpose of combating terrorism and money laundering. Among
other provisions, the USA Patriot Act permits financial institutions, upon
providing notice to the United States Treasury, to share information with one
another in order to better identify and report to the federal government
concerning activities that may involve money laundering or terrorists’
activities. The USA Patriot Act is considered a significant banking law in terms
of information disclosure regarding certain customer transactions. Certain
provisions of the USA Patriot Act impose the obligation to establish
anti-money
14
laundering
programs, including the development of a customer identification program, and
the screening of all customers against any government lists of known or
suspected terrorists. Although it
does
create a reporting obligation and compliance costs, the USA Patriot Act has not
materially affected the Bank’s products, services or other business
activities.
Reporting
Terrorist Activities. The
Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which is a division of the Department
of the Treasury, is responsible for helping to insure that United States
entities do not engage in transactions with “enemies” of the United States, as
defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress. OFAC has
sent, and will send, our banking regulatory agencies lists of names of persons
and organizations suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts.
If the Bank finds a name on any transaction, account or wire transfer that is on
an OFAC list, it must freeze such account, file a suspicious activity report and
notify the FBI. The Bank has appointed an OFAC compliance officer to oversee the
inspection of its accounts and the filing of any notifications. The Bank
actively checks high-risk OFAC areas such as new accounts, wire transfers and
customer files. The Bank performs these checks utilizing software, which is
updated each time a modification is made to the lists provided by OFAC and other
agencies of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked
Persons.
Other Safety and Soundness
Regulations. There are a number of obligations and
restrictions imposed on depository institutions by federal law and regulatory
policy that are designed to reduce potential loss exposure to the depositors of
such depository institutions and to the FDIC insurance funds in the event the
depository institution becomes in danger of default or is in
default. The Federal banking agencies also have broad powers under
current Federal law to take prompt corrective action to resolve problems of
insured depository institutions. The extent of these powers depends
upon whether the institution in question is well-capitalized, adequately
capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized or critically
undercapitalized, as defined by the law. Federal regulatory
authorities also have broad enforcement powers over us, including the power to
impose fines and other civil and criminal penalties, and to appoint a receiver
in order to conserve the assets of any such institution for the benefit of
depositors and other creditors. Village Bank is currently classified
as well capitalized financial institution.
Community Reinvestment. The
requirements of the Community Reinvestment
Act (“CRA”)
are applicable to the Company. The CRA
imposes on financial institutions an affirmative and ongoing obligation to meet
the credit needs of their local communities,
including low and moderate income neighborhoods, consistent with the safe and
sound operation of those institutions. A financial institution’s
efforts in meeting community credit needs currently are evaluated as part of the
examination process pursuant to 12 assessment factors. These factors
also are considered in evaluating mergers, acquisitions and applications to open
a branch or facility.
Economic and Monetary
Policies. Our operations are affected not only by
general economic conditions, but also by the economic and monetary policies of
various regulatory authorities. In particular, the Federal Reserve
regulates money, credit and interest rates in order to influence general
economic conditions. These policies have a significant influence on overall
growth and distribution of loans, investments and deposits and affect interest
rates charged on loans or paid for time and savings deposits. Federal
Reserve monetary policies have had a significant effect on the operating results
of commercial banks in the past and are expected to continue to do so in the
future.
15
Employees
As
of December 31, 2009, the Company and its subsidiaries had a total of 194
full-time employees and 13 part-time employees. None of the Company’s
employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement. The
Company considers its relations with its employees to be good.
Control
by Certain Shareholders
The
Company has one shareholder who owns 8.38% of its outstanding Common
Stock. As a group, the Board of Directors and the Company’s Executive
Officers control 16.42% of the outstanding Common Stock of the Company as of
March 1, 2009. Accordingly, such persons, if they were to act in
concert, would not have majority control of the Bank and would not have the
ability to approve certain fundamental corporate transactions or the election of
the Board of Directors.
Additional
Information
The
Company files annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other
information with the Securities and Exchange Commission. You may read
and copy any reports, statements and other information we file at the SEC’s
Public Reference Room at 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. Please
call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for further information on the operations of the
Public Reference Room. Our SEC filings are also available on the SEC’s Internet
site (http://www.sec.gov).
The
Company’s common stock trades under the symbol “VBFC” on the Nasdaq Capital
Market. You may also read reports, proxy statements and other
information we file at the offices of the National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc., 1735 K Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20006.
The
Company’s Internet address is www.villagebank.com. At that address,
we make available, free of charge, 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 filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Exchange Act (see “Investor Relations” section of website), as soon as
reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or
furnish it to, the SEC.
In
addition, we will provide, at no cost, paper or electronic copies of our reports
and other filings made with the SEC (except for exhibits). Requests should be
directed to C. Harril Whitehurst, Jr., Chief Financial Officer, Village Bank and
Trust Financial Corp., PO Box 330, Midlothian, VA 23113.
The
information on the websites listed above is not and should not be considered to
be part of this annual report on Form 10-K and is not incorporated by reference
in this document.
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
An
investment in the parent company’s common stock is subject to risks inherent to
the Company’s business, including the material risks and uncertainties that are
described below. Before making an investment decision, you should
carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all
of the other information included or incorporated by reference in this
report. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only
ones facing the Company. Additional risks and uncertainties that
management is not aware of or focused on, or that management currently deems
immaterial, may also impair the Company’s business operations. This
report is qualified in its entirety by these risk factors. If any of
the following risks adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition
or results of operations, the value of the parent company’s common stock could
decline significantly and you could lose all or part of your
investment.
16
The
Company’s business may be adversely affected by conditions in the financial
markets and economic conditions generally.
Since
December 2007, the United States has experienced a recession and a slowing of
economic activity. Business activity across a wide range of
industries and regions is greatly reduced, and local governments and many
businesses are in serious difficulty, due to the lack of consumer spending and
the lack of liquidity in the credit markets. Unemployment has
increased significantly.
The
financial services industry and the securities markets generally were materially
and adversely affected by significant declines in the values of nearly all asset
classes and by a serious lack of liquidity. This was initially
triggered by declines in home prices and the values of subprime mortgages, but
spread to all mortgage and real estate asset classes, to leveraged bank loans
and to nearly all asset classes, including equities. The global
markets have been characterized by substantially increased volatility and short
selling and an overall loss of investor confidence, initially in financial
institutions, but more recently in companies in a number of other industries and
in the broader markets.
Market
conditions have also led to the failure or merger of a number of prominent
financial institutions. Financial institution failures or
near-failures have resulted in further losses as a consequence of defaults on
securities issued by them and defaults under contracts entered into with such
entities as counterparties. Furthermore, declining asset values,
defaults on mortgages and consumer loans, and the lack of market and investor
confidence, as well as other factors, have all combined to increase credit
default swap spreads, to cause rating agencies to lower credit ratings, and to
otherwise increase the cost of and decrease the availability of liquidity,
despite very significant declines in Federal Reserve borrowing rates and other
government actions. Some banks and other lenders have suffered
significant losses and have become reluctant to lend, even on a secured basis,
due to the increased risk of default and the impact of declining asset values on
the value of collateral. The foregoing has significantly weakened the
strength and liquidity of some financial institutions worldwide. In
2008 and 2009, the U.S. Government, the Federal Reserve and other regulators
took numerous steps to increase liquidity and to restore investor confidence,
including investing approximately $200 billion in the equity of other banking
organizations, but asset values have continued to decline and access to
liquidity continues to be very limited.
Although
the rate of increase in unemployment and the rate of decline in housing prices
have slowed and the consumer spending and liquidity in the credit markets have
been somewhat improved towards the end of 2009, the economic slowdown generally
continues and there can be no assurance such indicia of recovery would herald
any prolonged period of economic recovery and growth in 2010.
The
Company’s financial performance generally, and in particular the ability of
borrowers to pay interest on and repay the principal of outstanding loans and
the value of collateral securing those loans, is highly dependent upon the
business environment in the market where the Company operates, the Richmond
Metropolitan area. A favorable business environment is generally
characterized by, among other factors, economic growth, efficient capital
markets, low inflation, high business and investor confidence, and strong
business earnings. Unfavorable or uncertain economic and market
conditions can be caused by: declines in economic growth, business activity, or
investor or business confidence; limitations on the availability or increases in
the cost of credit and capital; increases in inflation or interest rates;
natural disasters; or a combination of these or other
factors. Overall, during 2009, the business environment was adverse
for many households and businesses in the United States and worldwide. The
business environment in the Richmond Metropolitan area, the United States and
worldwide may continue to deteriorate for the foreseeable
future. There can be no assurance that these conditions will improve
in the near term. Such conditions could adversely affect the credit
quality of the Company’s loans, results of operations and financial
condition.
17
Improvements
in economic indicators disproportionately affecting the financial services
industry may lag improvements in the general economy.
Should
the stabilization of the U.S. economy lead to a general economic recovery, the
improvement of certain economic indicators, such as unemployment and real estate
asset values and rents, may nevertheless continue to lag behind the overall
economy. These economic indicators typically affect certain
industries, such as real estate and financial services, more
significantly. For example, improvements in commercial real estate
fundamentals typically lag broad economic recovery by 12 to 18
months. The Company’s clients include entities active in these
industries. Furthermore, financial services companies with a
substantial lending business are dependent upon the ability of their borrowers
to make debt service payments on loans. Should unemployment or real
estate asset values fail to recover for an extended period of time, the Company
could be adversely affected.
Our
results of operations are significantly affected by the ability of our borrowers
to repay their loans.
A
significant source of risk is the possibility that losses will be sustained
because borrowers, guarantors and related parties may fail to perform in
accordance with the terms of their loan agreements. Most of the
Company’s loans are secured but some loans are unsecured. With
respect to the secured loans, the collateral securing the repayment of these
loans may be insufficient to cover the obligations owed under such
loans. Collateral values may be adversely affected by changes in
economic, environmental and other conditions, including declines in the value of
real estate, changes in interest rates, changes in monetary and fiscal policies
of the federal government, widespread disease, terrorist activity, environmental
contamination and other external events. In addition, collateral
appraisals that are out of date or that do not meet industry recognized
standards may create the impression that a loan is adequately collateralized
when it is not. The Company has adopted underwriting and credit
monitoring procedures and policies, including regular reviews of appraisals and
borrower financial statements, that management believes are appropriate to
mitigate the risk of loss.
As
of December 31, 2009, approximately 77.5% of the Company’s loan portfolio
consisted of commercial and industrial, construction and commercial real estate
loans. These types of loans are generally viewed as having more risk of default
than residential real estate loans or consumer loans. These types of
loans are also typically larger than residential real estate loans and consumer
loans. Because the Company’s loan portfolio contains a significant
number of commercial and industrial, construction and commercial real estate
loans with relatively large balances, the deterioration of one or a few of these
loans could cause a significant increase in non-performing loans. An
increase in nonperforming loans could result in a net loss of earnings from
these loans, an increase in the provision for loan losses and an increase in
loan charge-offs, all of which could have a material adverse effect on the
Company’s financial condition and results of operations. Further, if
repurchase and indemnity demands with respect to the Company’s loan portfolio
increase, its liquidity, results of operations and financial condition will be
adversely affected.
The
Company’s allowance for loan losses may be insufficient.
The
Company maintains an allowance for loan losses, which is a reserve established
through a provision for loan losses charged to expense, that represents
management’s best estimate of probable losses that have been incurred within the
existing portfolio of loans. The allowance, in the judgment of
management, is necessary to reserve for estimated loan losses and risks inherent
in the loan portfolio.
The
level of the allowance reflects management’s continuing evaluation of industry
concentrations; specific credit risks; loan loss experience; current loan
portfolio quality; present economic, political and regulatory conditions and
unidentified losses inherent in the current loan portfolio. The
determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses
inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires the Company to
make significant estimates of current credit risks and future trends, all of
which may undergo material changes. Continuing deterioration of
economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing
loans, identification of additional
18
problem
loans and other factors, both within and outside the Company’s control, may
require an increase in the allowance for loan losses. In addition,
bank regulatory agencies periodically review the Company’s allowance for loan
losses and may require an increase in the provision for loan
losses
or the recognition of further loan charge-offs, based on judgments different
than those of management. Further, if charge-offs in future periods
exceed the allowance for loan losses, the Company will need additional
provisions to increase the allowance for loan losses. Any increases
in the allowance for loan losses will result in a decrease in net income and,
possibly, capital, and may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s
financial condition and results of operations.
Changes
in interest rates may have an adverse effect on the Company’s
profitability.
The
operations of financial institutions such as the Company are dependent to a
large degree on net interest income, which is the difference between interest
income from loans and investments and interest expense on deposits and
borrowings. An institution’s net interest income is significantly
affected by market rates of interest that in turn are affected by prevailing
economic conditions, by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal
government and by the policies of various regulatory agencies. The
Federal Reserve Board (FRB) regulates the national money supply in order to
manage recessionary and inflationary pressures. In doing so, the FRB
may use techniques such as engaging in open market transactions of U.S.
Government securities, changing the discount rate and changing reserve
requirements against bank deposits. The use of these techniques may
also affect interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits. The
interest rate environment, which includes both the level of interest rates and
the shape of the U.S. Treasury yield curve, has a significant impact on net
interest income. Like all financial institutions, the Company’s
balance sheet is affected by fluctuations in interest
rates. Volatility in interest rates can also result in
disintermediation, which is the flow of deposits away from financial
institutions into direct investments, such as US Government and corporate
securities and other investment vehicles, including mutual funds, which, because
of the absence of federal insurance premiums and reserve requirements, generally
pay higher rates of return than bank deposit products. See
“Item 7: Management’s Discussion of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” and “Item 7A: Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about
Market Risk”.
Declines
in value may adversely impact the investment portfolio.
We
have not realized any non-cash, other-than-temporary impairment charges during
2009 as a result of reductions in fair value below original cost of any
investments in our investment portfolio. However, we could be
required to record future impairment charges on our investment securities if
they suffer any declines in value that are considered
other-than-temporary. Considerations used to determine
other-than-temporary impairment status to individual holdings include the length
of time the stock has remained in an unrealized loss position, and the
percentage of unrealized loss compared to the carrying cost of the stock,
dividend reduction or suspension, market analyst reviews and expectations, and
other pertinent news that would affect expectations for recovery or further
decline.
The
Company may not be able to meet the cash flow requirements of its depositors and
borrowers or meet its operating cash needs.
Liquidity
is the ability to meet cash flow needs on a timely basis at a reasonable
cost. The liquidity of the Company is used to service its
debt. The liquidity of the Bank is used to make loans and leases and
to repay deposit liabilities as they become due or are demanded by
customers. Liquidity policies and limits are established by the board
of directors. The overall liquidity position of the Company and the
Bank are regularly monitored to ensure that various alternative strategies exist
to cover unanticipated events that could affect liquidity. Funding
sources include Federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase
agreements and non-core deposits. The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan
Bank of Atlanta, which provides funding through advances to members that are
collateralized with mortgage-related assets.
19
If
the Company is unable to access any of these funding sources when needed, we
might be unable to meet customers’ needs, which could adversely impact our
financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and level of
regulatory-qualifying capital
Negative
perceptions associated with the Company’s continued participation in the U.S.
Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program may adversely affect its ability to retain
customers, attract investors and compete for new business
opportunities.
Several
financial institutions which participated in the TARP Capital Purchase Program
received approval from the U.S. Treasury to exit the program during the second
half of 2009. These institutions have, or are in the process of,
repurchasing the preferred stock and repurchasing or auctioning the warrant
issued to the U.S. Treasury as part of the program. The Company has
not yet requested the U.S. Treasury’s approval to repurchase the preferred stock
and warrant from the U.S. Treasury. In order to repurchase one or
both securities, in whole or in part, the Company must establish that it has
satisfied all of the conditions to repurchase and must obtain the approval of
the U.S. Treasury. There can be no assurance that the Company will be
able to repurchase these securities from the U.S. Treasury. The
Company’s customers, employees and counterparties in its current and future
business relationships may draw negative implications regarding the strength of
the Company as a financial institution based on its continued participation in
the program following the exit of one or more of its competitors or other
financial institutions. Any such negative perceptions may impair the
Company’s ability to effectively compete with other financial institutions for
business or to retain high performing employees. If this were to
occur, the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations may
be adversely affected, perhaps materially.
The
soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect
us.
Our
ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by
the actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions. Financial
services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing,
counterparty or other relationships. We have exposure to many different
industries and counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with
counterparties in the financial industry. As a result, defaults by, or even
rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the
financial services industry generally, have led to market-wide liquidity
problems and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by other institutions.
Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of
our counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when
the collateral held by us cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not
sufficient to recover the full amount of the financial instrument exposure due
us. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and
adversely affect our results of operations.
Changes
in economic conditions and related uncertainties may have an adverse affect on
the Company’s profitability.
Commercial
banking is affected, directly and indirectly, by local, domestic, and
international economic and political conditions, and by governmental monetary
and fiscal policies. Conditions such as inflation, recession,
unemployment, volatile interest rates, tight money supply, real estate values,
international conflicts and other factors beyond the Company’s control may
adversely affect the potential profitability of the Company. Any
future rises in interest rates, while increasing the income yield on the
Company’s earnings assets, may adversely affect loan demand and the cost of
funds and, consequently, the profitability of the Company. Any future
decreases in interest rates may adversely affect the Company’s profitability
because such decreases may reduce the amounts that the Company may earn on its
assets. A continued recessionary climate could result in the
delinquency of outstanding loans. Management does not expect any one particular
factor to have a material effect on the Company’s results of
operations. However, downtrends in several areas, including real
estate, construction and consumer spending, could have a material adverse impact
on the Company’s profitability.
20
The
supervision and regulation to which the Company is subject can be a competitive
disadvantage.
The
operations of the Company and the Bank are heavily regulated and will be
affected by present
and
future legislation and by the policies established from time to time by various
federal and state regulatory authorities. In particular, the monetary
policies of the Federal Reserve have had a significant effect on the operating
results of banks in the past, and are expected to continue to do so in the
future. Among the instruments of monetary policy used by the Federal
Reserve to implement its objectives are changes in the discount rate charged on
bank borrowings and changes in the reserve requirements on bank
deposits. It is not possible to predict what changes, if any, will be
made to the monetary polices of the Federal Reserve or to existing federal and
state legislation or the effect that such changes may have on the future
business and earnings prospects of the Company.
The
Company is subject to changes in federal and state tax laws as well as changes
in banking and credit regulations, accounting principles and governmental
economic and monetary policies.
During
the past several years, significant legislative attention has been focused on
the regulation and deregulation of the financial services
industry. Non-bank financial institutions, such as securities
brokerage firms, insurance companies and money market funds, have been permitted
to engage in activities that compete directly with traditional bank
business.
Regulation
of the financial services industry is undergoing major changes, and future
legislation could increase our cost of doing business or harm our competitive
position.
In
2009, many emergency government programs enacted in 2008 in response to the
financial crisis and the recession slowed or wound down, and global regulatory
and legislative focus has generally moved to a second phase of broader reform
and a restructuring of financial institution regulation. Legislators and
regulators in the United States are currently considering a wide range of
proposals that, if enacted, could result in major changes to the way banking
operations are regulated. Some of these major changes may take effect as early
as 2010, and could materially impact the profitability of our business, the
value of assets we hold or the collateral available for our loans, require
changes to business practices or force us to discontinue businesses and expose
us to additional costs, taxes, liabilities, enforcement actions and reputational
risk.
Certain
reform proposals under consideration could result in our becoming subject to
stricter capital requirements and leverage limits, and could also affect the
scope, coverage, or calculation of capital, all of which could require us to
reduce business levels or to raise capital, including in ways that may adversely
impact our shareholders or creditors. In addition, we anticipate the enactment
of certain reform proposals under consideration that would introduce stricter
substantive standards, oversight and enforcement of rules governing consumer
financial products and services, with particular emphasis on retail extensions
of credit and other consumer-directed financial products or services. We cannot
predict whether new legislation will be enacted and, if enacted, the effect that
it, or any regulations, would have on our business, financial condition, or
results of operations.
The
competition the Company faces is increasing and may reduce our customer base and
negatively impact the Company’s results of
operations.
There
is significant competition among banks in the market areas served by the
Company. In addition, as a result of deregulation of the financial
industry, the Bank also competes with other providers of financial services such
as savings and loan associations, credit unions, consumer finance companies,
securities firms, insurance companies, the mutual funds industry, full service
brokerage firms and discount brokerage firms, some of which are subject to less
extensive regulations than the Company with respect to the products and services
they provide. Some of the Company’s competitors have greater
resources than the Corporation and, as a result, may have higher lending limits
and may offer other services not offered by our Company. See
“Item 1: Business — Competition.”
21
Our
deposit insurance premium could be substantially higher in the future which
would have an adverse effect on our future
earnings.
The
FDIC insures deposits at FDIC-insured financial institutions, including Village
Bank. The FDIC
charges
the insured financial institutions premiums to maintain the Deposit Insurance
Fund at a certain level. Current economic conditions have increased
bank failures and expectations for further failures, which may result in the
FDIC making more payments from the Deposit Insurance Fund and, in connection
therewith, raising deposit premiums. In addition, the FDIC instituted
two temporary programs to further insure customer deposits at FDIC insured
banks: deposit accounts are currently insured up to $250,000 per customer (up
from $100,000) and non-interest bearing transactional accounts at institutions
participating in the Transaction Account Guarantee Program are currently fully
insured (unlimited coverage). These programs have placed additional
stress on the Deposit Insurance Fund.
In
February 2009, the FDIC finalized a rule that increases premiums paid by
insured institutions and makes other changes to the assessment
system. Due to mounting losses from failed banking institutions in
2009, the FDIC adopted an interim rule that imposed an emergency special
assessment in the second quarter of 2009 and further gave the FDIC authority to
impose additional emergency special assessments of up to 10 basis points in
subsequent quarters. In addition, on November 12, 2009, the FDIC
adopted a rule requiring banks to prepay three years’ worth of premiums to
replenish the depleted fund. The Company is generally unable to
control the amount of premiums that it is required to pay for FDIC
insurance. If there are additional bank or financial institution
failures the Company may be required to pay even higher FDIC premiums than the
recently increased levels. Further, on January 12, 2010, the FDIC
requested comments on a proposed rule tying assessment rates of FDIC-insured
institutions to the institution’s employee compensation programs. The
exact requirements of such a rule are not yet known, but such a rule could
increase the amount of premiums the Company must pay for FDIC
insurance. These announced increases and any future increases or
required prepayments of FDIC insurance premiums may adversely impact its
earnings.
Concern
of customers over deposit insurance may cause a decrease in
deposits.
With
the continuing news about bank failures, customers are increasingly concerned
about the extent to which their deposits are insured by the
FDIC. Customers may withdraw deposits in an effort to ensure that the
amount they have on deposit with us is fully insured. Decreases in
deposits may adversely affect our funding costs and net income.
Fluctuations
in the stock market could negatively affect the value of the Company’s common
stock.
The
Company’s common stock trades under the symbol “VBFC” on the Nasdaq Capital
Market. There can be no assurance that a regular and active market for the
Common Stock will develop in the foreseeable future. See
“Item 5: Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder
Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.” Investors in the
shares of common stock may, therefore, be required to assume the risk of their
investment for an indefinite period of time. Current lack of investor
confidence in large banks may keep investors away from the banking sector as a
whole, causing unjustified deterioration in the trading prices of
well-capitalized community banks such as the Company.
If
the Company fails to maintain an effective system of internal controls, it may
not be able to accurately report its financial results or prevent
fraud. As a result, current and potential shareholders could lose
confidence in the Company’s financial reporting, which could harm its business
and the trading price of its common stock.
The
Company has established a process to document and evaluate its internal controls
over financial reporting in order to satisfy the requirements of
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the related regulations,
which require annual management assessments of the effectiveness of the
Company’s internal controls over financial reporting. In this
regard,
22
management
has dedicated internal resources, engaged outside consultants and adopted a
detailed work plan to (i) assess and document the adequacy of internal
controls over financial reporting, (ii) take steps to improve control
processes, where appropriate, (iii) validate through testing that controls
are functioning as documented and (iv) implement a continuous reporting and
improvement process
for internal control over financial reporting. The Company’s efforts
to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the
related regulations regarding the Company’s assessment of its internal controls
over financial reporting. The Company’s management and audit
committee have given the Company’s compliance with Section 404 a high
priority. The Company cannot be certain that these measures will
ensure that the Company implements and maintains adequate controls over its
financial processes and reporting in the future. Any failure to
implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in
their implementation, could harm the Company’s operating results or cause the
Company to fail to meet its reporting obligations. If the Company
fails to correct any issues in the design or operating effectiveness of internal
controls over financial reporting or fails to prevent fraud, current and
potential shareholders could lose confidence in the Company’s financial
reporting, which could harm its business and the trading price of its common
stock.
The
Company is subject to a variety of operational risks, including reputational
risk, legal and compliance risk, and the risk of fraud or theft by employees or
outsiders.
The
Company is exposed to many types of operational risks, including reputational
risk, legal and compliance risk, the risk of fraud or theft by employees or
outsiders, and unauthorized transactions by employees or operational errors,
including clerical or record-keeping errors or those resulting from faulty or
disabled computer or telecommunications systems. Negative public
opinion can result from its actual or alleged conduct in any number of
activities, including lending practices, corporate governance and acquisitions
and from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in
response to those activities. Negative public opinion can adversely
affect its ability to attract and keep customers and can expose the Company to
litigation and regulatory action.
Because
the nature of the financial services business involves a high volume of
transactions, certain errors may be repeated or compounded before they are
discovered and successfully rectified. The Company’s necessary
dependence upon automated systems to record and process its transaction volume
may further increase the risk that technical flaws or employee tampering or
manipulation of those systems will result in losses that are difficult to
detect. The Company also may be subject to disruptions of its
operating systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond its
control (for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications
outages), which may give rise to disruption of service to customers and to
financial loss or liability. The Company is further exposed to the
risk that its external vendors may be unable to fulfill their contractual
obligations (or will be subject to the same risk of fraud or operational errors
by their respective employees as the Company is) and to the risk that its (or
its vendors’) business continuity and data security systems prove to be
inadequate. The occurrence of any of these risks could result in a
diminished ability of the Company to operate its business, potential liability
to clients, reputational damage and regulatory intervention, which could
adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations,
perhaps materially.
The
Company relies on other companies to provide key components of its business
infrastructure.
Third
parties provide key components of the Company’s business infrastructure, for
example, system support, and Internet connections and network
access. While the Company has selected these third party vendors
carefully, it does not control their actions. Any problems caused by
these third parties, including those resulting from their failure to provide
services for any reason or their poor performance of services, could adversely
affect its ability to deliver products and services to its customers and
otherwise conduct its business. Replacing these third party vendors
could also entail significant delay and expense.
23
The
Company may have to rely on dividends from the Bank.
The
Company is a separate and distinct legal entity from its subsidiary
bank. Although the Company has never received any dividends from the
Bank, it is entitled to receive dividends in accordance
with
federal and state regulations. These federal and state regulations
limit the amount of dividends that the Bank may pay to the
Company. In the event the Bank is unable to pay dividends to the
Company, the Company may not be able to service debt, pay obligations or pay
dividends on the Company’s common stock. The inability of the Company
to receive dividends from the Bank could have a material adverse effect on the
Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.
The
Bank may not be able to remain well capitalized
Federal
regulatory agencies are required by law to adopt regulations defining five
capital tiers: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, under capitalized,
significantly under capitalized, and critically under
capitalized. The Bank meets the criteria to be categorized as a “well
capitalized” institution as of December 31, 2009 and 2008. However,
the Bank may not be able to remain well capitalized for various reasons
including a change in the mix of assets or a lack of
profitability. When capital falls below the “well capitalized”
requirement, consequences can include: new branch approval could be withheld;
more frequent examinations by the FDIC; brokered deposits cannot be renewed
without a waiver from the FDIC; and other potential limitations as described in
FDIC Rules and Regulations sections 337.6 and 303, and FDIC Act section
29. In addition, the FDIC insurance assessment increases when an
institution falls below the “well capitalized” classification.
ITEM
1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
Our
executive and administrative offices are owned by the Company and are located at
15521 Midlothian Turnpike, Midlothian, Virginia 23113 in Chesterfield County
where an 80,000 square foot corporate headquarters and operations center was
opened in August 2008. The Company and the Bank currently occupy
approximately forty percent of the space, which includes a full service branch
location leased by the Bank. The Company leases the other portions to
unrelated parties. In addition to leasing the branch to the Bank, the
Bank’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Village Bank Mortgage Corporation, also leases
space in the building from the Company.
In
addition to the branch in the corporate headquarters and operations center, the
Bank owns 9 full service branch buildings including the land on those buildings
and leases an additional five full service branch buildings. Eight of
our branch offices are located in Chesterfield County, with three branch offices
in Hanover County, three in Henrico County and one in Powhatan
County.
Our
properties are maintained in good operating condition and are suitable and
adequate for our operational needs.
ITEM
3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In
the course of its operations, the Company may become a party to legal
proceedings. There are no material pending legal proceedings to which
the Company is a party or of which the property of the Company is
subject.
ITEM
4. RESERVED
24
PART
II
ITEM
5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Market
Information
Shares
of the Company’s Common Stock trade on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the
symbol “VBFC”. The high and low prices of shares of the Company’s
Common Stock for the periods indicated were as follows:
High
|
Low
|
|||||
2008
|
||||||
1st
quarter
|
$
|
11.47
|
$
|
9.25
|
||
2nd
quarter
|
10.99
|
8.08
|
||||
3rd
quarter
|
9.58
|
6.11
|
||||
4th
quarter
|
8.43
|
3.38
|
||||
2009
|
||||||
1st
quarter
|
$
|
5.00
|
$
|
3.77
|
||
2nd
quarter
|
4.95
|
4.12
|
||||
3rd
quarter
|
5.98
|
3.85
|
||||
4th
quarter
|
4.43
|
2.01
|
Dividends
The
Company has not paid any dividends on its Common Stock. We intend to
retain all of our earnings to finance the Company’s operations and we do not
anticipate paying cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any
decision made by the Board of Directors to declare dividends in the future will
depend on the Company’s future earnings, capital requirements, financial
condition and other factors deemed relevant by the Board. Banking
regulations limit the amount of cash dividends that may be paid without prior
approval of the Bank’s regulatory agencies. Such dividends are
limited to the lesser of the Bank’s retained earnings or the net income of the
previous two years combined with the current year net income. In
addition, for as long as the U.S. Treasury holds shares of our preferred stock,
the consent of the U.S. Treasury will be required prior to the payment of any
dividends on our common stock.
Holders
At
March 3, 2010, there were approximately 1,634 holders of record of Common
Stock.
For
information concerning the Company’s Equity Compensation Plans, see
“Item 12: Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
and Related Stockholder Matters”.
Recent
Sales of Unregistered Securities
None
Purchases
of Equity Securities
The
Company did not repurchase any of its Common Stock during the fourth quarter of
2009.
25
Performance
Graph
The
following graph shows the yearly percentage change in the Company’s cumulative
total shareholder return on its common stock from December 31, 2004 to
December 31, 2009 compared with the NASDAQ Composite Index and peer group
indexes based on asset size.

Period Ending | ||||||
Index
|
12/31/04
|
12/31/05
|
12/31/06
|
12/31/07
|
12/31/08
|
12/31/09
|
Village
Bank and Trust Financial Corp.
|
100.00
|
110.78
|
122.41
|
92.24
|
38.79
|
20.11
|
NASDAQ
Composite
|
100.00
|
101.37
|
111.03
|
121.92
|
72.49
|
104.31
|
SNL
Bank $250M-$500M
|
100.00
|
106.17
|
110.93
|
90.16
|
51.49
|
47.66
|
SNL
Bank $500M-$1B
|
100.00
|
104.29
|
118.61
|
95.04
|
60.90
|
58.00
|
26
ITEM
6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||||||
Balance
Sheet Data
|
|||||||||||||||
At
year-end
|
|||||||||||||||
Assets
|
$
602,962,943
|
$ 572,407,993
|
$
393,263,999
|
$ 291,217,760
|
$214,974,952
|
||||||||||
Loans,
net of unearned income
|
467,568,547
|
470,722,286
|
327,343,013
|
241,051,025
|
172,378,272
|
||||||||||
Investment
securities
|
54,857,211
|
24,300,962
|
13,711,399
|
12,787,644
|
2,981,903
|
||||||||||
Goodwill
|
-
|
7,422,141
|
689,108
|
689,108
|
689,108
|
||||||||||
Deposits
|
498,285,124
|
466,232,043
|
339,297,258
|
253,309,881
|
186,752,807
|
||||||||||
Borrowings
|
52,593,521
|
57,726,898
|
24,736,569
|
9,859,265
|
9,641,810
|
||||||||||
Stockholders'
equity
|
48,941,989
|
46,162,574
|
26,893,299
|
25,644,115
|
17,151,893
|
||||||||||
Number
of shares outstanding
|
4,230,628
|
4,229,372
|
2,575,985
|
2,562,088
|
1,854,618
|
||||||||||
Average
for the year
|
|||||||||||||||
Assets
|
600,034,107
|
442,604,327
|
337,750,179
|
246,562,178
|
184,498,899
|
||||||||||
Stockholders'
equity
|
56,089,455
|
31,067,165
|
27,798,307
|
22,278,897
|
16,410,583
|
||||||||||
Weighted
average shares outstanding
|
4,230,462
|
3,013,175
|
2,569,529
|
2,269,092
|
1,800,061
|
||||||||||
Income
Statement Data
|
|||||||||||||||
Interest
income
|
$ 33,195,973
|
$
29,072,146
|
$
25,665,235
|
$
19,019,111
|
$
11,925,133
|
||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
16,407,679
|
15,969,783
|
13,806,715
|
8,786,600
|
4,877,376
|
||||||||||
Net
interest income
|
16,788,294
|
13,102,363
|
|
11,858,520
|
10,232,511
|
7,047,757
|
|||||||||
Provision
for loan losses
|
13,220,000
|
2,005,633
|
1,187,482
|
796,006
|
460,861
|
||||||||||
Noninterest
income
|
8,285,100
|
4,184,727
|
2,666,956
|
2,482,793
|
2,890,316
|
||||||||||
Goodwill
impairment
|
7,422,141
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||
Noninterest
expense
|
20,915,737
|
14,572,271
|
11,821,232
|
9,817,089
|
7,778,004
|
||||||||||
Income
tax expense (benefit)
|
(4,973,116)
|
241,097
|
515,699
|
702,990
|
468,025
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
(11,511,368)
|
$
468,089
|
$
1,001,063
|
$
1,399,219
|
$
1,231,183
|
||||||||||
Per
Share Data
|
|||||||||||||||
Earnings
(loss) per share - basic
|
$ (2.84)
|
$ 0.16
|
$
0.39
|
$ 0.62
|
$ 0.68
|
||||||||||
Earnings
(loss) per share - diluted
|
$
(2.84)
|
$
0.16
|
$
0.37
|
$
0.59
|
$
0.61
|
||||||||||
Book
value at year-end
|
$
8.07
|
$
10.91
|
$
10.44
|
$
10.01
|
$
9.25
|
||||||||||
Performance
Ratios
|
|||||||||||||||
Return
on average assets
|
(1.92)%
|
0.11%
|
0.30%
|
0.57%
|
0.67%
|
||||||||||
Return
on average equity
|
(20.52)%
|
1.51%
|
3.60%
|
6.28%
|
7.50%
|
||||||||||
Net
interest margin
|
3.13%
|
3.25%
|
3.80%
|
4.48%
|
4.15%
|
||||||||||
Efficiency
(1)
|
83.42%
|
84.30%
|
81.38%
|
77.21%
|
78.26%
|
||||||||||
Loans
to deposits
|
93.84%
|
100.96%
|
96.48%
|
95.16%
|
92.30%
|
||||||||||
Equity
to assets
|
8.12%
|
8.06%
|
6.84%
|
8.81%
|
7.98%
|
||||||||||
Asset
Quality Ratios
|
|||||||||||||||
ALLL
to loans at year-end
|
2.25%
|
1.29%
|
1.06%
|
1.06%
|
1.12%
|
||||||||||
ALLL
to nonaccrual loans
|
49.37%
|
71.05%
|
134.20%
|
91.12%
|
105.28%
|
||||||||||
Nonperforming
assets to year-end loans
|
7.95%
|
2.43%
|
0.87%
|
1.16%
|
1.06%
|
||||||||||
Net
charge-offs to average loans
|
1.84%
|
0.60%
|
0.10%
|
0.12%
|
0.03%
|
||||||||||
(1) Efficiency
ratio is computed by dividing noninterest expense by the sum of net interest
income and noninterest income.
The
goodwill impairment write-off is excluded in 2009 from noninterest
expense.
27
ITEM
7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The
following discussion is intended to assist readers in understanding and
evaluating the financial condition, changes in financial condition and the
results of operations of the Company, consisting of the parent company and its
wholly-owned subsidiary, the Bank. This discussion should be read in conjunction
with the consolidated financial statements and other financial information
contained elsewhere in this report.
Caution
About Forward-Looking Statements
In
addition to historical information, this report may contain forward-looking
statements. For this purpose, any statement, that is not a statement
of historical fact may be deemed to be a forward-looking
statement. These forward-looking statements may include statements
regarding profitability, liquidity, allowance for loan losses, interest rate
sensitivity, market risk, growth strategy and financial and other
goals. Forward-looking statements often use words such as “believes,”
“expects,” “plans,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “projects,” “contemplates,”
“anticipates,” “forecasts,” “intends” or other words of similar
meaning. You can also identify them by the fact that they do not
relate strictly to historical or current facts. Forward-looking
statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties, and
actual results could differ materially from historical results or those
anticipated by such statements.
There
are many factors that could have a material adverse effect on the operations and
future prospects of the Company including, but not limited to, changes in
interest rates, general economic conditions, the quality or composition of the
loan or investment portfolios, the level of nonperforming assets and
charge-offs, the local real estate market, volatility and disruption in national
and international financial markets, government intervention in the U.S.
financial system, demand for loan products, deposit flows, competition, and
accounting principles, policies and guidelines. Monetary and fiscal policies of
the U.S. Government could also adversely effect the Company; such policies
include the impact of any regulations or programs implemented pursuant to the
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA), the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) and other policies of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve
Board.
The
Company experienced significant losses during the year related to the current
economic climate. A continuation of the turbulence in significant
portions of the global financial markets, particularly if it worsens, could
further impact the Company’s performance, both directly by affecting revenues
and the value of the Company’s assets and liabilities, and indirectly by
affecting the Company’s counterparties and the economy
generally. Dramatic declines in the housing market in the past year
have resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial
institutions in the United States. Concerns about the stability of
the U.S. financial markets generally have reduced the availability of funding to
certain financial institutions, leading to a tightening of credit, reduction of
business activity, and increased market volatility. It is not clear
at this time what impact liquidity and funding initiatives of the Treasury and
other bank regulatory agencies that have been announced or any additional
programs that may be initiated in the future will have on the financial markets
and the financial services industry. The extreme levels of volatility
and limited credit availability currently being experienced could continue to
affect the U.S. banking industry and the broader U.S. and global economies,
which would have an effect on all financial institutions, including the
Company.
These
risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating the forward-looking
statements contained herein, and readers are cautioned not to place undue
reliance on such statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks
only as of the date on which it is made, and the Company undertakes no
obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or
circumstances after the date on which it is made. In addition, past
results of operations are not necessarily indicative of future
results.
28
Recent
Market Developments
In
response to the financial crises affecting the banking system and financial
markets and going concern threats to investment banks and other financial
institutions, on October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of
2008 (the “EESA”) was signed into law. Pursuant to EESA, the United
States Department of the Treasury (the “U.S. Treasury”) was given the authority
to, among other things, purchase up to $700 billion of mortgages,
mortgage-backed securities and certain other financial instruments from
financial institutions for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to
the U.S. financial markets.
On
October 14, 2008, the Secretary of the Department of the Treasury announced that
the U.S. Treasury will purchase equity stakes in a wide variety of banks and
thrifts. Under the program, known as the Troubled Asset Relief
Program (“TARP”) Capital Purchase Program, from the $700 billion authorized by
EESA, the U.S. Treasury made $250 billion of capital available to U.S. financial
institutions in the form of preferred stock. In conjunction with the
purchase of preferred stock, the U.S. Treasury received, from participating
financial institutions, warrants to purchase common stock with an aggregate
market price equal to 15% of the preferred investment. Participating financial
institutions were required to adopt the U.S. Treasury’s standards for
executive compensation and corporate governance for the period during which the
U.S. Treasury holds equity issued under the TARP Capital Purchase
Program. On May 1, 2009, the Company elected to participate in the
TARP Capital Purchase Program, under which the Company issued preferred shares
and a warrant to purchase common shares to the U.S. Treasury. As of
the date of this report, the Company has not yet repurchased the preferred stock
or the warrant to purchase common stock.
On
November 21, 2008, the Board of Directors of the FDIC adopted a final rule
relating to the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (“TLG
Program”). The TLG Program was announced by the FDIC on October 14,
2008, preceded by the determination of systemic risk by the Secretary of the
Department of Treasury (after consultation with the President), as an initiative
to counter the system-wide crisis in the nation’s financial
sector. Under the TLG Program (as amended from time to time
thereafter) the FDIC would (i) guarantee, through the earlier of maturity or
June 30, 2012, certain newly issued senior unsecured debt issued by
participating institutions and (ii) provide full FDIC deposit insurance coverage
for noninterest bearing transaction deposit accounts, Negotiable Order of
Withdrawal (“NOW”) accounts paying less than 0.5% interest per annum and
Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts (“IOLA”) accounts held at participating
FDIC-insured institutions. The transaction account guarantee program
described in clause (ii) will expire on June 30, 2010. Coverage under the TLG
Program was available for the first 30 days without charge. The fee
assessment for coverage of senior unsecured debt ranges from 50 basis points to
100 basis points per annum, depending on the initial maturity of the
debt. The fee assessment for deposit insurance coverage is 10 basis
points per quarter on amounts in covered accounts exceeding
$250,000.
On
February 10, 2009, the Treasury Secretary announced a new comprehensive
financial stability plan which included: (i) a capital assistance program that
has invested in convertible preferred stock of certain qualifying institutions,
(ii) a consumer and business lending initiative to fund new consumer loans,
small business loans and commercial mortgage asset-backed securities issuances,
(iii) a public-private investment fund intended to leverage public and private
capital with public financing to purchase legacy “toxic assets” from financial
institutions, and (iv) assistance for homeowners to reduce mortgage payments and
interest rates and establishing loan modification guidelines for government and
private programs.
In
response to concerns relating to capital adequacy of large financial
institutions, the Federal Reserve Board implemented Supervisory Capital
Assessment Program (“SCAP”) under which all banking institutions with assets
over $100 billion were required to undergo a comprehensive “stress test” to
determine if they had sufficient capital to continue lending and to absorb
losses that could result from a more severe decline in the economy than
projected. The results of the stress test were announced on May 7,
2009. In addition, on September 3, 2009, the U.S. Treasury issued a
policy statement relating to bank capital requirements, which calls for higher
and stronger capital requirements for bank and non-bank financial firms that are
deemed to pose a risk to financial stability due to their combination of size,
leverage, interconnectedness and liquidity risk. Also,
on
29
December
17, 2009, the Basel Committee issued a set of proposals relating to the capital
adequacy and liquidity risk exposures of financial institutions.
In
order to restore the depleted Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) and maintain a
sound reserve ratio, the FDIC imposed higher base assessment rates and special
one-time assessments and required prepayment of deposit insurance
premium. The FDIC stated that, after its semi-annual reviews, it may
further increase assessment rates or take other actions to bring the DIF’s
reserve ratio back to a desirable level.
In
June of 2009, the Obama administration proposed a wide range of regulatory
reforms that included, among other things, proposals (i) that any financial firm
whose combination of size, leverage and interconnectedness could pose a threat
to financial stability be subject to certain enhanced regulatory requirements,
(ii) that federal bank regulators require loan originators or sponsors to retain
part of the credit risk of securitized exposures, (iii) that there be increased
regulation of broker-dealers and investment advisers, (iv) for the creation of a
federal consumer financial protection agency that would, among other things, be
charged with applying consistent regulations to similar products (such as
imposing certain notice and consent requirements on consumer overdraft lines of
credit), (v) that there be comprehensive regulation of OTC derivatives, (vi)
that the controls on the ability of banking institutions to engage in
transactions with affiliates be tightened, and (vii) that financial holding
companies be required to be “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” on a
consolidated basis.
On
October 22, 2009, the Federal Reserve Board issued a comprehensive proposal on
incentive compensation policies intended to ensure that the incentive
compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and
soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking. The
proposal covers all employees that have the ability to materially affect the
risk profile of an organization, either individually or as part of a
group.
General
The
Company was organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia to engage
in commercial and retail banking. The Bank opened to the public on
December 13, 1999 as a traditional community bank offering deposit and loan
services to individuals and businesses in the Richmond, Virginia metropolitan
area. During 2003, the Company acquired or formed three wholly owned
subsidiaries of the Bank, Village Bank Mortgage Corporation (“Village Bank
Mortgage”), a full service mortgage banking company, Village Insurance Agency,
Inc. (“Village Insurance”), a full service property and casualty insurance
agency, and Village Financial Services Corporation (“Village Financial
Services”), a financial services company. On October 14, 2008, the
Company completed its merger with River City Bank pursuant to an Agreement and
Plan of Reorganization and Merger, dated as of March 9, 2008, by and among the
Company, the Bank and River City Bank. The merger had previously been
approved by both companies’ shareholders at their respective annual meetings on
September 30, 2008 as well as the banking regulators.
We
offer a wide range of banking and related financial services, including
checking, savings, certificates of deposit and other depository services, and
commercial, real estate and consumer loans. We are a
community-oriented and locally managed financial institution focusing on
providing a high level of responsive and personalized services to our customers,
delivered in the context of a strong direct relationship with our
customers. We conduct our operations from our main office/corporate
headquarters location and fourteen branch offices.
The
Company’s primary source of earnings is net interest income, and its principal
market risk exposure is interest rate risk. The Company is not able
to predict market interest rate fluctuations and its asset/liability management
strategy may not prevent interest rate changes from having a material adverse
effect on the Company’s results of operations and financial
condition.
Although
management endeavors to minimize the credit risk inherent in the Company’s loan
portfolio, it must necessarily make various assumptions and judgments about the
collectibility of the loan portfolio based on its experience and evaluation of
economic conditions. If such assumptions
30
or
judgments prove to be incorrect, the current allowance for loan losses may not
be sufficient to cover loan losses and additions to the allowance may be
necessary, which would have a negative impact on net income.
There
is intense competition in all areas in which the Company conducts its business.
The Company competes with banks and other financial institutions, including
savings and loan associations, savings banks, finance companies, and credit
unions. Many of these competitors have substantially greater
resources and lending limits and provide a wider array of banking
services. To a limited extent, the Company also competes with other
providers of financial services, such as money market mutual funds, brokerage
firms, consumer finance companies and insurance
companies. Competition is based on a number of factors, including
prices, interest rates, services, availability of products and geographic
location.
The
Company had a net loss of $11,511,000 in 2009 as compared to net income of
$468,000 in 2008 and of $1,001,000 in 2007. The single most
significant factor in our declining earnings the last two years has been the
recessionary economy.
Total
assets increased to $602,963,000 at December 31, 2009 from $572,408,000 at
December 31, 2008 and $393,264,000 at December 31, 2007, representing increases
of 5% in 2009 and 46% in 2008. The growth in total assets in 2008 is
attributable to our merger with River City Bank, which added approximately
$157.7 million in assets at the time of merger. The growth in 2009
was primarily a result of an increase in investment securities of $30,556,000,
funded by an increase in deposits of $32,053,000.
Much
of our internal growth has been driven by lending on real estate. As
a result, the material decline in real estate values experienced in 2009 had a
significant adverse effect on the growth and profitability of the
Company. At December 31, 2009, 89.0% of our loan portfolio was
collateralized by real estate. Declines in real estate values can
reduce projected cash flows from commercial properties and the ability of
borrowers to use home equity to support borrowings and increase the
loan-to-value ratios of loans previously made by us, thereby weakening
collateral coverage and increasing the possibility of a loss in the event of
default. In addition, delinquencies, foreclosures and losses
generally increase during economic slowdowns or recessions.
The
following presents management’s discussion and analysis of the financial
condition of the Company at December 31, 2009 and 2008, and results of
operations for the Company for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the
Company’s audited Financial Statements and the notes thereto appearing elsewhere
in this Annual Report.
Income
Statement Analysis
Net
interest income, which represents the difference between interest earned on
interest-earning assets and interest incurred on interest-bearing liabilities,
is the Company’s primary source of earnings. Net interest income can
be affected by changes in market interest rates as well as the level and
composition of assets, liabilities and shareholders’ equity. Net
interest spread is the difference between the average rate earned on
interest-earning assets and the average rate paid on interest-bearing
liabilities. The net yield on interest-earning assets (“net interest
margin”) is calculated by dividing tax equivalent net interest income by average
interest-earning assets. Generally, the net interest margin will
exceed the net interest spread because a portion of interest-earning assets are
funded by various noninterest-bearing sources, principally noninterest-bearing
deposits and shareholders’ equity.
We
recorded a net loss of $11,511,000, or $2.84 per fully diluted share, in 2009,
compared to net income of $468,000, or $0.16 per fully diluted share, in 2008,
and $1,001,000, or $0.37 per fully diluted share, in 2007. The
decline in our profitability in 2009 was attributable to four significant
increases in expenses from 2008 to 2009 as follows:
31
2009
|
2008
|
Increase
|
||||
Provision
for loan losses
|
$13,220,000
|
$2,005,633
|
$11,214,367
|
|||
Goodwill
impairment
|
7,422,141
|
-
|
7,422,141
|
|||
Expenses
related to
|
||||||
foreclosed
real estate
|
1,475,338
|
165,455
|
1,309,883
|
|||
FDIC
insurance premium
|
1,366,612
|
400,394
|
966,218
|
|||
$20,912,609
|
All
of these increases in expenses are attributable primarily to the recessionary
economy that dominated 2009. The increases in the provision for loan
losses and in expenses related to foreclosed real estate reflect the
difficulties that many of our borrowers experienced with their ability to repay
our loans to them. The write-off of goodwill was based on our annual
evaluation of the value of goodwill which was performed by an independent third
party. Goodwill was considered fully impaired at December 31, 2009
primarily because the value of the Company’s stock, and thus its overall value,
declined significantly in 2009 as did many other banks’ stock. The
increase in the FDIC insurance premium was related to the losses the FDIC
incurred in 2009 in closing 140 banks as it sought to restore the DIF to a
desirable level. Total assets of failed banks in 2009 totaled $170.9
billion with the loss to the DIF of $4.6 billion.
The
decline in earnings from $1,001,000 in 2007 to $468,000 in 2008 was attributable
to a decline in our net interest margin from 3.80% for 2007 to 3.27% for 2008,
as well as an increase in the provision for loan losses of $818,000, from
$1,187,000 in 2007 to $2,005,000 in 2008. The decline in our net
interest margin is attributable to declining interest rates and our acquisition
of River City Bank which had a lower net interest margin. The
increase in the provision for loan losses was a result of deteriorating asset
quality.
Net
interest income
Net
interest income is our primary source of earnings and represents the difference
between interest and fees earned on interest-earning assets and the interest
paid on interest-bearing liabilities. The level of net interest
income is affected primarily by variations in the volume and mix of those assets
and liabilities, as well as changes in interest rates when compared to previous
periods of operation.
Growth
in loans and deposits has resulted in net interest income increasing from
$11,859,000 in 2007, to $13,102,000 in 2008 and to $16,788,000 in
2009. However, net interest income as a percentage of average assets
has steadily declined the last two years, from 3.5% in 2007 to 3.0% in 2008 and
to 2.8% in 2009. The growth in net interest income has not kept pace
with the growth of the Company. This is attributable to a declining
net interest margin, from 3.80% in 2007 to 3.27% in 2008 and to 3.13% in
2009. This declining interest margin resulted from declines in
short-term interest rates that started in 2007 and continued into
2008. A significant portion of our loan portfolio, the primary source
of revenue to Village Bank, has interest rates that adjust according to the
direction of short-term interest rates. Accordingly, as short-term
rates were reduced by the Federal Reserve, the income from our loan portfolio
was reduced. While the reduction of short-term interest rates also
reduced the rates we pay on deposits, our largest expense, the reduction in
interest rates paid on deposits was slower than the reduction of interest rates
on our loan portfolio as our deposits generally do not reprice as quickly as our
loans. Consequently, our net interest income, the primary source of
our earnings, was negatively impacted as short-term interest rates were reduced
by the Federal Reserve.
Although
the year to year comparison reflects a declining net interest margin, we are
starting to experience a turnaround in this decline. During 2009, the
average interest rate we paid on deposits declined by 1.42%. This
decline outpaced the decline in the average interest rate earned on loans of
.67%, which had a positive impact on our net interest margin. While
the net interest margin of 3.13% for the full year of 2009 was lower than the
net interest margin of 3.27% for 2008, it increasedfrom 3.29% for the month of
December 2008 to 3.38% for the month of December 2009. If short-term
interest rates remain stable in 2010, we expect further declines in the average
rate paid on
32
deposits
and an improving net interest margin.
Average
interest-earning assets increased by $135,350,000, or 34%, in 2009 and by
$88,383,000, or 28%, in 2008. These increases in interest-earning
assets were due primarily to the growth of our loan
portfolio. However, the average yield on interest-earning assets
decreased to 6.19% in 2009 from 7.26% in 2008 and 8.22% in 2007. Many
of our loans are indexed to short-term rates affected by the Federal Reserve's
decisions about short-term interest rates, and, accordingly, as the Federal
Reserve increases or decreases short-term rates, the yield on interest-earning
assets is affected. As the Federal Reserve decreased interest rates
starting in 2007 and continuing through 2008, decreasing short-term interest
rates by 5% over twelve months, the average yield on our interest-earning assets
decreased.
Our
average interest-bearing liabilities increased by $120,065,000, or 31%, in 2009
and by $96,873,000, or 34%, in 2008. These increases in average
interest-bearing liabilities were due to strong growth in average deposits of
$111,034,000 in 2009 and $70,321,000 in 2008 as well as borrowings of
$19,990,000 in 2008. The average cost of interest-bearing liabilities decreased
to 3.27% in 2009, from 4.18% in 2008 and 4.84% in 2007. The
significant decrease in our cost of funds in 2009 and 2008 was a result of
decreases in short-term interest rates by the Federal Reserve in 2007 and
2008. As with our interest-earning assets, the declines in the
short-term interest rates by the Federal Reserve also reduced the interest rates
we pay on interest-bearing liabilities in 2008, however, the reduction in
interest rates on our interest-bearing liabilities has been slower than the
reduction of interest rates on our interest-earning assets as the liabilities
generally do not reprice as quickly as the assets. Consequently, our
net interest income, the primary source of our earnings, is negatively impacted
as long as short-term interest rates continue to be reduced by the Federal
Reserve. See “Interest rate sensitivity” on page 48 for further
discussion of the repricing of assets and liabilities.
The
following table illustrates average balances of total interest-earning assets
and total interest-bearing liabilities for the periods indicated, showing the
average distribution of assets, liabilities, shareholders' equity and related
income, expense and corresponding weighted-average yields and
rates. The average balances used in these tables and other
statistical data were calculated using daily average balances. We
have no tax exempt assets for the periods presented.
33
Average
Balance Sheets
|
||||||||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||||
Year
Ended December 31, 2009
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2008
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2007
|
||||||||||||||||
Interest
|
Annualized
|
Interest
|
Annualized
|
Interest
|
Annualized
|
|||||||||||||
Average
|
Income/
|
Yield
|
Average
|
Income/
|
Yield
|
Average
|
Income/
|
Yield
|
||||||||||
Balance
|
Expense
|
Rate
|
Balance
|
Expense
|
Rate
|
Balance
|
Expense
|
Rate
|
||||||||||
Loans
|
||||||||||||||||||
Commercial
|
$47,607
|
$2,959
|
6.22%
|
$39,275
|
$2,034
|
5.18%
|
$21,791
|
$1,795
|
8.24%
|
|||||||||
Real
estate - residential
|
89,386
|
5,802
|
6.49%
|
61,416
|
5,291
|
8.62%
|
42,461
|
3,418
|
8.05%
|
|||||||||
Real
estate - commercial
|
230,621
|
15,591
|
6.76%
|
160,019
|
10,968
|
6.85%
|
120,797
|
9,722
|
8.05%
|
|||||||||
Real
estate - construction
|
99,103
|
6,038
|
6.09%
|
105,732
|
8,965
|
8.48%
|
92,886
|
8,707
|
9.37%
|
|||||||||
Consumer
|
10,642
|
788
|
7.40%
|
7,779
|
657
|
8.45%
|
6,488
|
582
|
8.97%
|
|||||||||
Gross
loans
|
477,359
|
31,178
|
6.53%
|
374,221
|
27,915
|
7.46%
|
284,423
|
24,224
|
8.52%
|
|||||||||
Investment
securities
|
33,174
|
1,458
|
4.40%
|
12,125
|
699
|
5.76%
|
16,471
|
847
|
5.14%
|
|||||||||
Loans
held for sale
|
10,305
|
533
|
5.17%
|
3,721
|
225
|
6.05%
|
2,368
|
155
|
6.55%
|
|||||||||
Federal
funds and other
|
15,034
|
27
|
0.18%
|
10,455
|
233
|
2.23%
|
8,877
|
439
|
4.95%
|
|||||||||
Total
interest earning assets
|
535,872
|
33,196
|
6.19%
|
400,522
|
29,072
|
7.26%
|
312,139
|
25,665
|
8.22%
|
|||||||||
Allowance
for loan losses
|
(8,367)
|
(4,309)
|
(2,956)
|
|||||||||||||||
Cash
and due from banks
|
15,998
|
8,179
|
5,169
|
|||||||||||||||
Premises
and equipment, net
|
27,880
|
23,951
|
13,901
|
|||||||||||||||
Other
assets
|
28,651
|
14,261
|
9,497
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
assets
|
$600,034
|
$442,604
|
$337,750
|
|||||||||||||||
Interest
bearing deposits
|
||||||||||||||||||
Interest
checking
|
26,530
|
443
|
1.67%
|
$12,735
|
$159
|
1.25%
|
$10,454
|
$104
|
0.99%
|
|||||||||
Money
market
|
69,267
|
1,242
|
1.79%
|
28,215
|
561
|
1.99%
|
21,618
|
726
|
3.36%
|
|||||||||
Savings
|
7,009
|
85
|
1.21%
|
6,891
|
193
|
2.80%
|
3,669
|
42
|
1.14%
|
|||||||||
Certificates
|
347,698
|
12,664
|
3.64%
|
291,629
|
13,435
|
4.61%
|
233,408
|
12,078
|
5.17%
|
|||||||||
Total
deposits
|
450,504
|
14,434
|
3.20%
|
339,470
|
14,348
|
4.23%
|
269,149
|
12,950
|
4.81%
|
|||||||||
Borrowings
|
||||||||||||||||||
Long-tern
debt - trust
|
||||||||||||||||||
preferred
securities
|
8,764
|
392
|
4.47%
|
8,764
|
508
|
5.80%
|
6,173
|
447
|
7.24%
|
|||||||||
FHLB
advances
|
26,348
|
970
|
4.22%
|
20,620
|
834
|
4.22%
|
7,945
|
340
|
4.22%
|
|||||||||
Other
borrowings
|
16,337
|
612
|
1.77%
|
13,034
|
280
|
1.77%
|
1,748
|
70
|
1.77%
|
|||||||||
Total
interest bearing liabilities
|
501,953
|
16,408
|
3.27%
|
381,888
|
15,970
|
4.18%
|
285,015
|
13,807
|
4.84%
|
|||||||||
Noninterest
bearing deposits
|
39,626
|
27,657
|
22,686
|
|||||||||||||||
Other
liabilities
|
2,366
|
1,992
|
2,251
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
liabilities
|
543,945
|
411,537
|
309,952
|
|||||||||||||||
Equity
capital
|
56,089
|
31,067
|
27,798
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
liabilities and capital
|
$600,034
|
$442,604
|
$337,750
|
|||||||||||||||
Net
interest income before
|
||||||||||||||||||
provision
for loan losses
|
$16,788
|
$13,102
|
$11,858
|
|||||||||||||||
Interest
spread - average yield
|
||||||||||||||||||
on
interest earning assets,
|
||||||||||||||||||
less
average rate on
|
||||||||||||||||||
interest
bearing liabilities
|
2.93%
|
3.08%
|
3.38%
|
|||||||||||||||
Net
interest margin
|
||||||||||||||||||
(net
interest income
|
||||||||||||||||||
expressed
as a percentage
|
||||||||||||||||||
of
average earning assets)
|
3.13%
|
3.27%
|
3.80%
|
Interest
income and interest expense are affected by changes in both average interest
rates and average volumes of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing
liabilities. The following table analyzes changes in net interest
income attributable to changes in the volume of interest-sensitive assets and
liabilities compared to changes in interest rates. Nonaccrual loans
are included in average loans outstanding. The changes in interest due to both
rate and volume have been allocated to changes due to volume and changes due to
rate in proportion to the relationship of the absolute dollar amounts of the
changes in each.
34
Rate/Volume
Analysis
|
||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||||||
2009
vs. 2008
|
2008
vs. 2007
|
|||||||||||
Increase
(Decrease)
|
Increase
(Decrease)
|
|||||||||||
Due
to Changes in
|
Due
to Changes in
|
|||||||||||
Volume
|
Rate
|
Total
|
Volume
|
Rate
|
Total
|
|||||||
Interest
income
|
||||||||||||
Loans
|
$6,333
|
$(2,762)
|
$3,571
|
$5,297
|
$(1,606)
|
$3,691
|
||||||
Investment
securities
|
879
|
(120)
|
759
|
(273)
|
125
|
(148)
|
||||||
Fed
funds sold and other
|
187
|
(393)
|
(206)
|
169
|
(305)
|
(136)
|
||||||
Total
interest income
|
7,399
|
(3,275)
|
4,124
|
5,193
|
(1,786)
|
3,407
|
||||||
Interest
expense
|
||||||||||||
Deposits
|
||||||||||||
Interest
checking
|
217
|
66
|
283
|
24
|
31
|
55
|
||||||
Money
market accounts
|
731
|
(48)
|
683
|
489
|
(654)
|
(165)
|
||||||
Savings
accounts
|
3
|
(110)
|
(107)
|
57
|
94
|
151
|
||||||
Certificates
of deposit
|
8,613
|
(9,386)
|
(773)
|
2,423
|
(1,066)
|
1,357
|
||||||
Total
deposits
|
9,564
|
(9,478)
|
86
|
2,993
|
(1,595)
|
1,398
|
||||||
Borrowings
|
||||||||||||
Long-term
debt
|
-
|
(116)
|
(116)
|
18
|
43
|
61
|
||||||
FHLB
Advances
|
201
|
(65)
|
136
|
512
|
(18)
|
494
|
||||||
Other
borrowings
|
332
|
-
|
332
|
210
|
-
|
210
|
||||||
Total
interest expense
|
10,097
|
(9,659)
|
438
|
3,733
|
(1,570)
|
2,163
|
||||||
Net
interest income
|
$(2,698)
|
$6,384
|
$3,686
|
$1,460
|
$(216)
|
$1,244
|
||||||
Note:
the combined effect on interest due to changes in both volume and rate,
which cannot be
|
||||||||||||
separately
identified, has been allocated proportionately to the change due to volume
and the
|
||||||||||||
change
due to rate.
|
Provision
for loan losses
The
amount of the loan loss provision is determined by an evaluation of the level of
loans outstanding, the level of non-performing loans, historical loan loss
experience, delinquency trends, underlying collateral values, the amount of
actual losses charged to the reserve in a given period and assessment of present
and anticipated economic conditions.
The
level of the allowance reflects changes in the size of the portfolio or in any
of its components as well as management’s continuing evaluation of industry
concentrations, specific credit risks, loan loss experience, current loan
portfolio quality, present economic, and political and regulatory
conditions. Portions of the allowance may be allocated for specific
credits; however, the entire allowance is available for any credit that, in
management’s judgment, should be charged off. While management
utilizes its best judgment and information available, the ultimate adequacy of
the allowance is dependent upon a variety of factors beyond the Company’s
control, including the performance of the Company’s loan portfolio, the economy,
changes in interest rates and the view of the regulatory authorities toward loan
classifications.
Profitability
has been negatively impacted the last two years by increasing provisions for
loan losses. The provision for loan losses increased from $1,187,000
in 2007 to $2,006,000 in 2008 and to $13,220,000 in 2009. These
increases in the provision for loan losses are attributable to the growth in our
loan portfolio and a deterioration in asset quality as the depressed economy has
negatively impacted the ability of our borrowers to repay us. The
deterioration in asset quality has occurred primarily in loans secured by real
estate. Loans secured by real estate represent 89% of our total loan
portfolio at December 31, 2009.
35
We
believe that the level of the provision for loan losses experienced in 2009 will
not be repeated in 2010, as the economy is showing some signs of recovery which
should help the ability of borrowers to repay loans. However, no
assurances can be given that the provision for loan losses in 2010 will not
equal or exceed that in 2009.
Noninterest
income
Noninterest
income includes service charges and fees on deposit accounts, fee income related
to loan origination, and gains and losses on sale of mortgage loans and
securities held for sale. Over the last three years the most significant
noninterest income item has been gain on loan sales generated by Village Bank
Mortgage, representing 57% in both 2007 and 2008 and 70% in 2009 of total
noninterest income. Noninterest income amounted to $2,667,000 in
2007, $4,185,000 in 2008 and $8,285,000 in 2009.
The
increase in noninterest income in 2009 of $4,100,000 is primarily attributable
to an increase in gain on sale of loans of $3,447,000 and increased service
charges and fees on transactional deposit accounts of $452,000. The
gain on sale of loans resulted from an increase in loan production by our
mortgage company, from $100 million in loan closings in 2008 to $252 million in
2009. Despite the depressed economic conditions in 2009, the mortgage
company was able to increase loan production due to the addition of new loan
officers. Management expects the mortgage company to further increase
loan production in 2010 due to declining mortgage loan interest rates that will
allow more borrowers to qualify for loans and provide refinance opportunities
for existing home owners. Service charges and fees increased because
transactional deposits grew by $108,215,000, or 132%, in 2009 as a result of
maturing time deposits moving to money market accounts.
The
increase in noninterest income in 2008 of $1,518,000 is primarily attributable
to increased service charges and fees on transactional deposit accounts of
$412,000 and an increase in gain on sale of loans of
$868,000. Transactional deposits grew by $26,112,000, or 47%, in 2008
as a result of the maturing of our branch network coupled with the addition of
the deposits of River City Bank, resulting in the increase in service charges
and fees. The gain on sale of loans resulted from an increase in loan
production by our mortgage company, from $67 million in loan closings in 2007 to
$100 million in 2008.
Noninterest
expense
Noninterest
expense includes all expenses of the Company with the exception of interest
expense on deposits and borrowings, provision for loan losses and income
taxes. Some of the primary components of noninterest expense are
salaries and benefits, and occupancy and equipment costs. Over the
last three years, the most significant noninterest expense item has been
salaries and benefits, representing 58%, 55% and 50% of noninterest expense
(excluding the write-off of goodwill in 2009) in 2007, 2008 and 2009,
respectively. Noninterest expense increased from $11,821,000 in 2007,
to $14,572,000 in 2008 and to $28,338,000 in 2009. In 2009 the
write-off of all goodwill of $7,422,141 was included in noninterest
expense. This was a one time expense as we no longer have any
goodwill.
The
increase in noninterest expense of $13,766,000 in 2009 resulted from the
goodwill write-off of $7,422,000 as well as increases in expenses related to
foreclosed assets of $1,310,000 and the FDIC insurance premium of
$966,000. Other growth related increases in noninterest expense in
2009 were increases in salaries and benefits of $2,500,000, occupancy of
$493,000, loan underwriting expense of $430,000, data processing of $159,000 and
equipment of $126,000.
The
increases in noninterest expense of $2,751,000 in 2008 resulted from the
addition of new branches and the growth in the Company overall as well as the
merger with River City Bank. Growth related increases in noninterest
expense in 2008 were increases in salaries and benefits of $1,133,000,
professional and outside services of $372,000, occupancy of $364,000, loan
underwriting expense of $271,000 and the FDIC insurance premium of
$225,000.
36
Income
taxes
Tax
expense (benefit) amounted to $(4,973,000), $241,000 and $516,000 in 2009, 2008
and 2007, respectively. The $5,241,000 decline in income tax expense
in 2009 is related to the loss of $(16,484,000) and $275,000 decline in 2008
were attributable to the lower taxable income.
Commercial
banking organizations conducting business in Virginia are not subject to
Virginia income taxes. Instead, they are subject to a franchise tax
based on bank capital. The Bank recorded a franchise tax expense of
$355,000, $180,000 and $210,000 for 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
Balance
Sheet Analysis
Investment
securities
At
December 31, 2009 and 2008, all of our investment securities were classified as
available-for-sale. Investment securities classified as available for
sale may be sold in the future, prior to maturity. These securities are carried
at fair value. Net aggregate unrealized gains or losses on these
securities are included, net of taxes, as a component of shareholders’
equity. Given the generally high credit quality of the portfolio,
management expects to realize all of its investment upon market recovery or, the
maturity of such instruments and thus believes that any impairment in value is
interest rate related and therefore temporary. Available for sale
securities included net unrealized gains of $97,000 at December 31, 2009 and net
unrealized losses of $26,000 at December 31, 2008. As of December 31,
2009, management does not have the intent to sell any of the securities
classified as available for sale and management believes that it is more likely
than not that the Company will not have to sell any such securities before a
recovery of cost.
The
following table presents the composition of our investment portfolio at the
dates indicated.
37
Investment
Securities Available-for-Sale
|
||||||||||
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
||||||||||
Unrealized
|
Estimated
|
|||||||||
Par
|
Amortized
|
Gain
|
Fair
|
Average
|
||||||
Value
|
Cost
|
(Loss)
|
Value
|
Yield
|
||||||
December
31, 2009
|
||||||||||
US
Government Agencies
|
||||||||||
One
to five years
|
$
9,000
|
$
9,315
|
$
(66)
|
$
9,249
|
2.32%
|
|||||
Five
to ten years
|
3,000
|
3,029
|
32
|
3,061
|
4.50%
|
|||||
More
than ten years
|
34,250
|
35,284
|
75
|
35,359
|
5.22%
|
|||||
Total
|
46,250
|
47,628
|
41
|
47,669
|
4.61%
|
|||||
Mortgage-backed
securities
|
||||||||||
One
to five years
|
389
|
435
|
(37)
|
398
|
4.40%
|
|||||
Five
to ten years
|
471
|
471
|
29
|
500
|
5.24%
|
|||||
More
than ten years
|
3,141
|
3,227
|
53
|
3,280
|
5.53%
|
|||||
Total
|
4,001
|
4,133
|
45
|
4,178
|
5.39%
|
|||||
Municipals
|
||||||||||
More
than ten years
|
1,000
|
1,026
|
1
|
1,027
|
5.28%
|
|||||
Other
investments
|
||||||||||
More
than five years
|
2,000
|
1,973
|
10
|
1,983
|
5.65%
|
|||||
Total
investment securities
|
$53,251
|
$
54,760
|
$
97
|
$
54,857
|
4.72%
|
|||||
December
31, 2008
|
||||||||||
US
Government Agencies
|
||||||||||
Within
one year
|
$
360
|
$
360
|
$
(4)
|
$
356
|
4.50%
|
|||||
More
than five years
|
16,546
|
16,095
|
564
|
16,659
|
5.73%
|
|||||
Total
|
16,906
|
16,455
|
560
|
17,015
|
5.70%
|
|||||
Mortgage-backed
securities
|
||||||||||
One
to five years
|
874
|
905
|
(23)
|
$882
|
4.47%
|
|||||
More
than five years
|
4,603
|
4,694
|
(76)
|
4,618
|
5.42%
|
|||||
5,477
|
5,599
|
(99)
|
5,500
|
5.27%
|
||||||
Other
investments
|
||||||||||
More
than five years
|
2,000
|
1,970
|
(184)
|
1,786
|
5.65%
|
|||||
Total
investment securities
|
$
24,383
|
$
24,024
|
$
277
|
$
24,301
|
5.60%
|
Loans
A
management objective is to maintain the quality of the loan
portfolio. The Company seeks to achieve this objective by maintaining
rigorous underwriting standards coupled with regular evaluation of the
creditworthiness of and the designation of lending limits for each
borrower. The portfolio strategies include seeking industry and loan
size diversification in order to minimize credit exposure and originating loans
in markets with which the Company is familiar.
The
Company’s real estate loan portfolios, which represent approximately 89% of all
loans, are secured by mortgages on real property located principally in the
Commonwealth of Virginia. Sources of repayment are from the
borrower’s operating profits,
cash flows and liquidation of pledged collateral. The Company’s
commercial loan portfolio represents approximately 8.5% of all
loans. Loans in this category are typically made to individuals,
small and medium-sized businesses and range between $250,000 and $2.5
million. Based on underwriting standards, commercial
and
38
industrial
loans may be secured in whole or in part by collateral such as liquid assets,
accounts receivable, equipment, inventory, and real property. The
collateral securing any loan may depend on the type of loan and may vary in
value based on market conditions. The remainder of our loan portfolio
is in consumer loans which represent 2.5% of the total.
The
following tables present the composition of our loan portfolio at the dates
indicated and maturities of selected loans at December 31, 2009.
Loan
Portfolio, Net
|
|||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
|||||||||
December
31,
|
|||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||
Commercial
|
$
39,576
|
$
52,438
|
$
23,152
|
$
17,889
|
$
14,121
|
||||
Real
estate - residential
|
93,657
|
84,612
|
51,281
|
36,408
|
30,043
|
||||
Real
estate - commercial
|
240,830
|
220,400
|
140,176
|
100,039
|
66,274
|
||||
Real
estate - construction
|
81,688
|
103,161
|
106,556
|
80,324
|
56,146
|
||||
Consumer
|
11,609
|
10,307
|
6,611
|
6,730
|
6,161
|
||||
Total
loans
|
467,360
|
470,918
|
327,776
|
241,390
|
172,745
|
||||
Less: unearned
income, net
|
209
|
(196)
|
(433)
|
(339)
|
(367)
|
||||
Less: Allowance
for loan losses
|
(10,522)
|
(6,059)
|
(3,469)
|
(2,553)
|
(1,931)
|
||||
Total
loans, net
|
$
457,047
|
$
464,663
|
$ 323,874
|
$
238,498
|
$
170,447
|
December
31, 2009
|
||||||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||